J
JimG
Guest
Fr. Longenecker summarizes the current situation.
Has the report been made available?The Pope’s discussion group on women deacons has met and made some sort of report […]
Not to the public.Has the report been made available?
I think I speak for many when I say that I was both surprised and disappointed that the two panelists who served on the papal commission announced from the start they could say nothing about the commission’s report except that they made it and it was on the pope’s desk.
There were deaconesses in the early Church. Of course, their role was not liturgical, although some were responsible for the choir, and in our Byzantine Churches that is a liturgical duty. There is some writings of the early Church were we see they, in some places, may have presided over the Eucharist, but of course that was seen to be invalid.If you ordain women to be deacons you are opening a backdoor for them to enter the priesthood.
I guess this is where questions arise for me. What would be the modern role of these deaconesses? It seems their ancient roles are obsolete today.Their role in the early Church was one of ministry. Instruction of female catechumens, helping with the baptism of females, etc.
I have to say the arguments for women deacons seem more firmly rooted in history, Scripture and theology than the arguments I’ve read against them. (And I was initially opposed to them)
I don’t think the fact some people will see it as an opening for women priests is a good enough reason to deny half the church an opportunity to serve, if there really are no other barriers to women serving as deacons. (But I guess that’s the main question)
Of course, I will accept whatever the church decides.
Someone correct me if I’m wrong, but aren’t there still deaconesses in some of the eastern churches?