The scandal of a woman-priest-promoter in the Vatican

By Thomas V. Mirus ( bio - articles - email ) | Oct 23, 2026

Sister Mary Teresa Barron, newly appointed by the Pope as the new president of the Pontifical Mission Societies and adjunct secretary of the Dicastery for Evangelization, is on the record saying that “women today may hear the call to priesthood” and that despite the Church’s repeated teaching that the priesthood is inherently reserved to men, the Holy Spirit may reopen the question.

Catholics need not be anxious that the Church will ever ordain women. That is impossible. What is truly troubling is that someone who openly professes a grave doctrinal error has been given a high office in the Vatican. (See also a number of the new appointees to the International Theological Commission.)

What troubles me most is not so much the specific issue in question, but that it has always been seen as a serious sin to bestow ecclesiastical office on a person grossly unsuitable due to heterodoxy or immorality. It must be understood that those responsible for Sister Barron’s appointment are, insofar as they know of her views, guilty of mortal sin.

There is little consolation in speculating that Pope Leo may not be aware of her dissent; even were that the case, it would be a dereliction of duty not to know these things. While we cannot conclude that the pope agrees with Sister Barron, the message sent is that denying infallible doctrine is not such a big deal.

Instances like this remind us forcefully that however likeable a pope may be, and whatever touching gestures and speeches he might make, his risk of damnation for neglecting the basic duties of his office is very great. We must pray for Pope Leo, and lest we be found hypocritical, we must beg God for the grace to carry out blamelessly any spiritual responsibilities we ourselves may have over others.

Meanwhile, even Catholics with no ecclesial authority are bound to defend the doctrine of Christ. But when it comes to this particular teaching, it seems to me that even Catholics who rightly uphold it could be stronger in elucidating it. For instance, it might be useful to ask oneself the following questions:

Even if Pope St. John Paul II had never made his infallible declaration against women priests in Ordinatio Sacerdotalis, would I still hold the same position? That is, would it be good enough for me that the Church has never ordained women in 2000 years (indeed, that for almost 2000 years she forbade women any liturgical role in the sanctuary)? Do I need an ex cathedra definition of each individual doctrine of the Church to know that it is certain and unchangeable? Or do I have such regard for Scripture, for the tradition passed down from the Apostles, and for the infallibility of the ordinary and universal magisterium, that these by themselves would suffice to settle many questions?

The questions above are important in understanding that an ex cathedra declaration does not come out of nowhere, and also that the claim of infallibility in this case (and often) does not rest on whether or not a single statement was ex cathedra.

Catholics who incline toward egalitarianism might also ask themselves:

Had St. John Paul II not made his ex cathedra declaration, would I be tempted to say that women should be priests, given that I think women should otherwise do basically all the same things as men? Do I see the male-only priesthood as a fideistic mystery or an arbitrary decision by Christ which we just have to obey, or are there discernable underlying reasons for it based on the differences between the sexes? Is it an isolated dictate that has nothing to do with anything else, or is it a sign of contradiction provoking the question of where else modern society might be mistaken in treating the sexes interchangeably?