Chicago Women trying to become Deacon

[Mickey]

I suppose that is why my question about if they were accepted by the Pope remains unanswered.

I cannot answer for your Church. Do you know if Rome rejects the Apostolic Constitution?

I know that the Apostolic Constitutions were accepted as canonical by St John of Damascus.

 

[jwinch2]

The same argument about needing a ‘legitimate’ reason to have deaconesses can apply to having deacons and full time priests since the vast majority of their work has nothing to do with the sacraments. The real importance of deacons in the Church is that they are a tool that can be directly shaped and used by a diocese. Deacons are trained significantly more than the average ‘lay minister’ (not just in the sacraments) and are responsible directly to the Bishop. Female deacons would be just as effective in that role as male.

In the end, though, having female deacons will make as much difference as having altar girls, either way.

As has been noted, the role of Deacon has changed significantly since the time of the early Church. Deacons receive the sacrament of Holy Orders, which women cannot receive. Yes, women are capable of helping the Church in many ways, and thank God, they do so with regularity. It doesn’t matter one bit how much of the time a deacon or priest spends is not related to the sacraments. It still comes down to the purpose of the priest (to give sacrifice) and the deacon (to image Christ the servant). Women cannot do this, and will never be able to.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

jwinch2

Agreed. It is the main reason that women cannot be priests or bishops. However, that in and of itself would not prevent them from being deacons.

Deacons receive the sacrament of Holy Orders, because they usually become priest, as transitional deacons do. However, even permanent deacons can become priest, and many have after they were widowed.

I would suggest that the Apostles did not choose St. Paul to be a bishop, Christ chose him to be an Apostle.

Agreed, but my post was in response to the previous post where the poster claimed that the 12 Apostles were above the Bishops and priest who came after them. St. Paul was not one of the 12, but was treated as one.

Jim

 

[jwinch2]

Agreed, but my post was in response to the previous post where the poster claimed that the 12 Apostles were above the Bishops and priest who came after them. St. Paul was not one of the 12, but was treated as one.

Jim

I did not see that context, sorry.

 

[ringil]

I believe the documents discussing the ordination of women state that the Church has no authority to ordain females. I understand where you are coming from but we have to remember that the Church herself, to include the Pope, does not have the authority to overturn what Christ insituted.

Someone can correct me if I am way off here, but my understanding of Sacramental Theology is that the Pope can no more allow for the ordaining of women than he can allow for the consecration of a hotdog and a diet coke into the body and blood of Christ. The sacrament of the Eucharist requires valid matter, and so does the sacrament of Holy Orders. Even if the Holy Father were to give permission for such a thing, when the Bishop attempted to perform the sacrament, nothing would happen. Women, as wonderful and dignified as they are, are not valid matter for the sacrament.

If the Holy Father were inclined to bring back Deaconesses as in the life of the Early Church that would be something else entirely of course, and then I would agree with both of you.

This thread however, is about a woman trying to be ordained to the Diaconate, which is not possible regardless of who is in support of it.

I would personally be against the naming of women to the Diaconate, but as a layman such is not my authority.

I thought, still maybe think, in the same way as you have written above- that women simply cannot be ordained to the diaconate in how the documents have been written and in what the Pope has written on the subject.

But perhaps our reading is not correct, and perhaps it is.

That being said- again- I don’t see a snowballs chance in Hell of the ordination of women Deacons.

 

[Mickey]

Women cannot do this, and will never be able to.

Cannot do what? We are all in the image of Christ.

 

[jwinch2]

Cannot do what? We are all in the image of Christ.

Men who have a true vocation to the diaconate or priesthood can image Christ in a manner in which females cannot, due to their ability to receive the sacrament of Holy Orders.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=9686568&postcount=19

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=9687273&postcount=35

 

[Mickey]

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=9686568&postcount=19

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=9687273&postcount=35

So when you say…“women cannot do this”…you mean that they cannot participate in the Sacrament of Holy Orders as the deacons and priests. If that is what you mean…then of course. But women can serve the Church as an image of Christ. Furthermore, as has already been shown…deaconesses in the early Church were blessed with a unique type of “ordinaton” that involved the laying on of hands.

 

[jwinch2]

I guess you know more Catechism then this Bishop.

I think perhaps a way you could look at this is to consider that the opinion of one bishop, however well meaning or learned, does not equal magesterial teaching. I am suggesting that one dismisses the opinions of the bishops out of hand, particularly your own bishop. However, it is important for Catholics to know their faith and, in a situation such as this, if a bishop makes a statement which appears to be in contradiction with the position of the Church, to inform their consciences accordingly. The overwhelming majority of our bishops are wonderful and faithful men who are trying to do the best they can to lead their flock. However, they are not infallible by themselves and can, and do, make mistakes. When that happens, we have to be honest about it.

What is about this topic that is so threatening?

In my view, the topic is no more threatening than any other issue of Church teaching which is attacked in that the Church cannot afford to give, even an inch, on her teaching. Once the slide is started, it does not stop. See the Anglican Church from 75 years ago to today’s version for an example.

One might also consider that there have been dozens of threads on this and women priests here on CAF and many people have heard all of the arguments for and against and instead of deciding to get in a great debate, simply shut down the discussion by strong statements and pointing to Church documents. It may not be the most charitable method of handling the situation, but when there are this many threads on the subject over the course of several years, it is a relatively predictable response.

At the end of the day, all of this can pretty much be summed up by looking at Blessed John Paul II’s writings on women and the idea that while men and women are equal in dignity, we are different in design and thus, purpose. Men can receive the sacrament of Holy Orders and women cannot. Women can participate along with God in the process of creation in a manner than no man ever could.

vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/apost_letters/documents/hf_jp-ii_apl_15081988_mulieris-dignitatem_en.html

vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/letters/documents/hf_jp-ii_let_29061995_women_en.html

Peace, and God Bless.

 

[jwinch2]

So when you say…“women cannot do this”…you mean that they cannot participate in the Sacrament of Holy Orders as the deacons and priests. If that is what you mean…then of course. But women can serve the Church as an image of Christ. Furthermore, as has already been shown…deaconesses in the early Church were blessed with a unique type of “ordinaton” that involved the laying on of hands.

As I have already noted, if the Catholic Church wishes to consider the ancient role of deaconesses, I would be open to hearing about it and even if I disagreed, would bow to the decision of the Church.

As it stands however, today’s role of deacon has changed dramatically over the two thousand year history of the Church. Today’s role of deacon is one which includes the sacrament of Holy Orders which configures them to Christ in a special way and creates an indelible mark on the person receiving it. As such, this is not a role that women can fulfill.

 

[Semper_Zelare]

The Greeks might.
Did I say I want Deaconesses in the Catholic Church? No. I am merely pointing out that the early Church had Deaconesses…and to re-introduce them would not be opposed to Tradition or heretical in any sense.
I am wondering why it is such a sore spot with so many Catholics here?

Did you say you wanted Deaconesses in the Catholic Church? This is what you said:

Mickey:

Re-introducing the deaconess to the Catholic Church has nothing to do with liberlism. I think it would be a great benefit.

You think it would be a GREAT BENEFIT. Doesn’t that mean you are in favor of it?

There’s a difference between: “it wouldn’t be opposed to tradition or heretical” and “it would be a great benefit”.

But you didn’t answer my question. You are Orthodox. Does the Orthodox Church allow women Deacons? Because if the Orthodox Church doesn’t allow women Deacons (which I’m pretty sure is the case… though I’m not Orthodox, I could be wrong)… why would you want the Catholic Church to do something which your own Church does not do???

That just seems weird to me.

 

[Dirt]

But these are “value” judgements, whether anyone likes it or not. One cannot look at the disentergration of obiedience to Church Teachings and not realize that what is needed are more “Value” judgements. Otherwise, we may as well join our seperated bretheren who readjust truth to fit whatever social agenda is in vogue. Can we not see what the last fifty years of novelty has achieved and not regret that someone, anyone in authority had made more “Value” judgements regarding what is and is not in compliance with Church Teaching?

 

[edwest2]

But these are “value” judgements, whether anyone likes it or not. One cannot look at the disentergration of obiedience to Church Teachings and not realize that what is needed are more “Value” judgements. Otherwise, we may as well join our seperated bretheren who readjust truth to fit whatever social agenda is in vogue. Can we not see what the last fifty years of novelty has achieved and not regret that someone, anyone in authority had made more “Value” judgements regarding what is and is not in compliance with Church Teaching?

That appears to be the case here. Altar girls. Women priests. Church documents and statements from credible sources need to be repeated every time threads like this appear.

The truth matters, not trying to push the “brand new thing” or the “Church has to change.”

Note: The date on the calendar means nothing. Times don’t change, only people who sit around and look for a reason - any reason - to push what they want agitate for change and try to make Orthodox Catholics think it’s OK.

Peace,
Ed

 

[Mickey]

You think it would be a GREAT BENEFIT. Doesn’t that mean you are in favor of it?

I did not say there should be deaconesses in the Catholic Church…I said that I think it would be a great benefit.

There’s a difference between: “it wouldn’t be opposed to tradition or heretical” and “it would be a great benefit”.

Huh? It is not opposed to tradition and it is not heretical. And I think it would be a great benefit. What’s the big deal?

But you didn’t answer my question. You are Orthodox. Does the Orthodox Church allow women Deacons? Because if the Orthodox Church doesn’t allow women Deacons (which I’m pretty sure is the case… though I’m not Orthodox, I could be wrong)… why would you want the Catholic Church to do something which your own Church does not do???

The deaconess is not a woman deacon. Have you been reading this thread?

That just seems weird to me.

Me too.

 

[Michelle9]

Your (highly sophistical) posting history and the uncharitable way you handle any criticism of your agenda would suggest that the Church will be better off if you take a lesser role. We need fewer liberal activists trying to change and obfuscate Catholic Tradition, and you are clearly (based, again, on your history at CAF) an activist with a severely limited scope of concerns.

(Don’t you just love when people rhetorically undermine your opinions by a critical appeal to character or a manipulative twist of fashionable sentiment? If not, maybe you ought to stop doing that yourself.)

And you highly judgemental you think that’s living as Christ? If you think that you are, you are highly deluded.

 

[Michelle9]

In my local Franciscan fraternity, all of the offices are held by women. My Formation Director is the one that shows newbies how to live as Francis lived.

There are all kinds of options out there without indirectly slandering the Pope.

Where is the slander? I say a prefer a different one and that is slander?

 

[Michelle9]

I think perhaps a way you could look at this is to consider that the opinion of one bishop, however well meaning or learned, does not equal magesterial teaching. I am suggesting that one dismisses the opinions of the bishops out of hand, particularly your own bishop. However, it is important for Catholics to know their faith and, in a situation such as this, if a bishop makes a statement which appears to be in contradiction with the position of the Church, to inform their consciences accordingly. The overwhelming majority of our bishops are wonderful and faithful men who are trying to do the best they can to lead their flock. However, they are not infallible by themselves and can, and do, make mistakes. When that happens, we have to be honest about it.

In my view, the topic is no more threatening than any other issue of Church teaching which is attacked in that the Church cannot afford to give, even an inch, on her teaching. Once the slide is started, it does not stop. See the Anglican Church from 75 years ago to today’s version for an example.

One might also consider that there have been dozens of threads on this and women priests here on CAF and many people have heard all of the arguments for and against and instead of deciding to get in a great debate, simply shut down the discussion by strong statements and pointing to Church documents. It may not be the most charitable method of handling the situation, but when there are this many threads on the subject over the course of several years, it is a relatively predictable response.

At the end of the day, all of this can pretty much be summed up by looking at Blessed John Paul II’s writings on women and the idea that while men and women are equal in dignity, we are different in design and thus, purpose. Men can receive the sacrament of Holy Orders and women cannot. Women can participate along with God in the process of creation in a manner than no man ever could.

vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/apost_letters/documents/hf_jp-ii_apl_15081988_mulieris-dignitatem_en.html

vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/letters/documents/hf_jp-ii_let_29061995_women_en.html

Peace, and God Bless.

Have a little faith in the Church. It wil not allow what happened in the Anglican Church to happen in ours. The women deacon position could include a clause never to allow them to be priests for example. I don’t understand all the fuss really. Don’t sweat it.

 

[jwinch2]

Have a little faith in the Church. It wil not allow what happened in the Anglican Church to happen in ours. The women deacon position could include a clause never to allow them to be priests for example. I don’t understand all the fuss really. Don’t sweat it.

You don’t seem to wish to understand the fact that women cannot and will never receive the sacrament of Holy Orders. That is what the fuss is about.

So yes, when people are advocating for what the Church cannot do, I think I will go ahead and sweat it.

 

[Michelle9]

You don’t seem to wish to understand the fact that women cannot and will never receive the sacrament of Holy Orders. That is what the fuss is about.

So yes, when people are advocating for what the Church cannot do, I think I will go ahead and sweat it.

A Bishop brought up the question about female deacons not I. One would expect a Bishop to know more than a lay person don’t you think or he would look pretty stupid.

But it seems people here should work in the Vatican. A lot of people here are like the Vatican police.

 

[jwinch2]

A Bishop brought up the question about female deacons not I.

And yet, you have been provided with multiple authoritative sources which demonstrate that this cannot happen, and you continue to advocate for it.

One would expect a Bishop to know more than a lay person don’t you think or he would look pretty stupid.

More than a few bishops throughout the time of the Church have held positions which were not in line with Sacred Tradition, Sacred Scripture, or Magesterial teaching. This bishop is not the first, and I highly doubt he will be the last. In recent months, the Holy Father has removed a few of them from their positions and replaced them with orthodox bishops who will shepherd their flocks more faithfully. God is good.

But it seems people here should work in the Vatican.

Silly us, reading our Catechisms, all those Papal documents, and listening to what the Church teaches.