Francis to create commission to study female deacons in Catholic church

[ComplineSanFran]

You shall know them by their fruits.

I think it’s a great metric.

And do you know what the fastest growing religions in the US are (beside the ‘nones’)? Mormons and Muslims.Perhaps we need to learn something from them because of the fruits of their faith.

 

[clem456]

What’s so important about Christ being a man? Would it have been impossible for God to have become incarnate as a woman?

The fact that God -can- do anything, but -chose- a specific thing, should tell you something.

Before you start feeling bad for women remember that God chose a woman to bear the living word and revealed him to humanity through her, in a completely unique way.
God -could have- hatched Jesus from an egg, but he chose the virgin.

 

[gracepoole]

I disagree.

As do I. It’s utterly strange to claim that a female diaconate and any comments by Pope Francis about it are “meritless to consider.” Might as well as have closed all discussions regarding the synods before Pope Francis’ report was released. Silencing discussion is rarely if ever a good thing – for the Church or her people.

 

[Padres1969]

I disagree.

You shall know them by their fruits.

I think it’s a great metric. A bunch of people have recently used it when comparing the vocations in Lincoln versus LA.

Then you won’t mind my pointing out Catholicism’s sharp decline in membership in the US as being indicative of something wrong with the RCC.

 

[gracepoole]

When and by whom was this infallibly declared? Was it an ex-cathedra declaration of a pope? I have a difficult time sometimes figuring out which statements by the Church are infallible and which ones aren’t.

Yes…well, the Church has struggled with the same thing from time to time.

 

[Thorolfr]

God also, through His Revelation, refers to Himself in male pronouns. Never in female pronouns.

Not all languages have gendered pronouns so I’m not convinced that this is important. How would God have described himself in Malay, for example:

The third-person singular pronoun dia can mean ‘she’, ‘he’ or sometimes ‘it’, and the object/possessive suffix -nya can mean ‘her/her’, ‘him/his’ or ‘it/its’. For example, dia mencintainya means ‘she/he loves her/him/it’.

In Estonian the word ta (or tema) is gender-neutral and means both “she” and “he”.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_neutrality_in_genderless_languages

And many languages give gender to nouns and people which have nothing to do with whether those things or people are biologically or ontologically masculine or feminine. So in German, Bleistift (pencil) is masculine but Tafel (blackboard) is feminine and Mädchen (girl) is neuter. So do you suppose that there is something very masculine about pencils, feminine about blackboards and genderless about girls?

 

[Redd_Jackal]

We actually had female pastoral administrators and pastoral associates preaching homilies and even officiating at Mass (in one instance). That was over a decade ago. Not kosher at all.

 

[Little_Sheep]

The Church/Pope has infallibly declared that women cannot be ordained to the Priesthood. Infallible statements are–well, they are infallible and therefore, are impossible to change.

It makes no difference what people think, and it makes no difference what new arguments are crafted–it is impossible for the Roman Catholic Church to ordain women to the Priesthood.

Period

End of story

The Catholic Church has evolved in the past; it’s certainly not difficult to imagine it evolving in the future.

 

[irishpatrick]

As do I. It’s utterly strange to claim that a female diaconate and any comments by Pope Francis about it are “meritless to consider.” Might as well as have closed all discussions regarding the synods before Pope Francis’ report was released. Silencing discussion is rarely if ever a good thing – for the Church or her people.

I agree–you said much better.

 

[irishpatrick]

The Catholic Church has evolved in the past; it’s certainly not difficult to imagine it evolving in the future.

Please, it cannot evolve beyond infallible teachings. Do you not understand what infallibility means?

Many disciplines can change (things like celibacy in the Priesthood), but infallible teachings can never change–not in a million years, not ever.

Infallible teachings can never be wrong and they can never evolve into something else.

 

[ShrodingersCat]

Let’s change that sentence around.

'Men have roles in the church community and if their presence is what is driving women away from wanting to help out, well then maybe those women weren’t in it for the right reasons."

Would anybody ever say that? No, it we had dropping numbers of women in church roles and in the pews we’d have hordes of committees and studies trying to figure out how to get them back.

Your argument is lousy, and undermines the critical need of men in the church. Studies have been done showing that if a Father goes to church, his kids do as well. If only the mother does, those kids typically leave the faith. Having men in the pews is far more important than your “Eh, if they’re not here on my term then to heck with them” attitude shows.

Actually, I agree with your rephrasing of my sentence. If a man doesn’t go to church because the parish office is run by women and there are girl altar servers, he has issues. Likewise, a woman has issues if she doesn’t go to mass because of priests being all male. Neither the man nor the woman in this situation were serious about their faith, as those are very weak reasons for leaving the faith.

Also, my comment was about men not helping out in the parish, not men leaving the faith.

 

[irishpatrick]

Because there aren’t any men who want to be nuns, but there are indeed women who want to be deacons and priests.
Besides…men already have the equivalent of a male nun: a monk.

I recall Mary Magdalene being a “fellow worker” and following the group and even supporting Jesus’ ministry financially and then going off to preach just like the other disciples did after the crucifixion.
That sounds very much like carrying on the mission.

The church has taken new ideas and canceled old ones many times before. For example…do you feel priests should be married? Or was it liberalism and an attempt to “improve” on God that inspired that amendment several centuries ago, after priests had been married men for centuries.

Me too! So exciting!

Are you saying the men take on the flesh of Jesus? I don’t think so. It is a spiritual being and representation, is it not? The eucharist is to be his blood, flesh…not the priest.
And I don’t think the specific male anatomy is used in any way during the tasks of a priest that cannot be physically done with a female body, yes?
Let us not forget:

So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them.

Female bodies are the image of God, too.

.

The question regarding female deaconesses will be studied. The issue of female Priests is forever closed–it has been infallibly proclaimed and affirmed that the Church has no authority to ordain women. Some do not want to believe that, but it is a fact of the faith.

From the Catechism :

1548 In the ecclesial service of the ordained minister, it is Christ himself who is present to his Church as Head of his Body, Shepherd of his flock, high priest of the redemptive sacrifice, Teacher of Truth. This is what the Church means by saying that the priest, by virtue of the sacrament of Holy Orders, acts in persona Christi Capitis:23

It is the same priest, Christ Jesus, whose sacred person his minister truly represents. Now the minister, by reason of the sacerdotal consecration which he has received, is truly made like to the high priest and possesses the authority to act in the power and place of the person of Christ himself (virtute ac persona ipsius Christi).24
Christ is the source of all priesthood: the priest of the old law was a figure of Christ, and the priest of the new law acts in the person of Christ.25

 

[Thorolfr]

Yes…well, the Church has struggled with the same thing from time to time.

In the article linked above by irishpatrick:

In a statement approved by Pope John Paul II, the Vatican announced yesterday that Roman Catholics must consider their church’s doctrine that only men can be priests to be “infallibly” taught.

Invoking the word “infallible,” which in Catholic theology is reserved for teaching considered irreversible, free from error and requiring full assent from the faithful, indicates the Pope’s desire to rule out unequivocally the possibility of ordaining women.

But yesterday’s statement, although carrying papal approval, came from the Vatican Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, which oversees church teaching, and not directly from the Pope. And that is likely to spur a new round of disputes among theologians about the statement’s degree of authority.

nytimes.com/1995/11/19/world/vatican-says-the-ban-on-women-as-priests-is-infallible-doctrine.html

Further on in the same article:

Few theological concepts are subject to more confusion than infallibility. It is usually associated with papal infallibility. The exercise of papal infallibility, which requires solemn declarations by the Pope under carefully specified circumstances, is in fact very rare: In 1854 Pope Pius IX promulgated the dogma of Mary’s Immaculate Conception; in 1950 Pius XII promulated the dogma of Mary’s Assumption into heaven.

Because of controversies over papal infallibility in modern times, many Catholics have come to think that only teachings declared in this fashion are considered infallible. But a more general teaching – an infallibility of the church rather than of the Pope – holds that basic doctrines stemming from Jesus and Scripture and taught universally by the church’s bishops are to be considered infallible.

The congregation’s statement puts the restriction of priesthood to men in this latter category. The Rev. J. Augustine DiNoia, a theological adviser to the American Catholic bishops, compared the teaching to the church’s teaching that bread and wine are necessary for a priest to celebrate a Mass validly.

But other theologians found the congregation’s statement puzzling.

Other theologians puzzled over the phrase in the congregation’s statement that the Pope’s position was “founded on the written Word of God.” They said a commission appointed by Pope Paul VI concluded in 1976 that nothing in Scripture prohibited ordaining women.

 

[deaconjohnO]

I recall Mary Magdalene being a “fellow worker” and following the group and even supporting Jesus’ ministry financially and then going off to preach just like the other disciples did after the crucifixion.
That sounds very much like carrying on the mission.

.

The infallible document Ordinatio Sacerdotalis, penned by Saint John Paul II quotes the scripture passage Timothy 3:1-13 in support the infallible teaching of male only holy orders. The scripture passage, among others mentioned in the infallible document, is utilized along with examples of sacred tradition. Key to this passage is that it is discussing deacons. Mary Magdalene is nowhere to be found in the Epistle of Timothy. Additionally you are implying publicly here on this forum that Mary Magdalene was a deacon. I encourage you provide some documentation and scripture quotations to back up this public claim.

 

[gracepoole]

In the article linked above by irishpatrick:

nytimes.com/1995/11/19/world/vatican-says-the-ban-on-women-as-priests-is-infallible-doctrine.html

Further on in the same article:

Indeed. I could be taken out back and shot for saying this on CAF, but matters are closed until a future pope reopens them. And if that should happen, the Church will proclaim, “As it has always been taught…” when teaching something new. It’s an old Catholic joke – but one that perhaps originated in truth…

I have no dog in this fight as it doesn’t bother me that women can’t be priests. So bear that in mind, fellow Catholics, when you think to yell at me for this post.

 

[deaconjohnO]

The question regarding female deaconesses will be studied. The issue of female Priests is forever closed–it has been infallibly proclaimed and affirmed that the Church has no authority to ordain women. Some do not want to believe that, but it is a fact of the faith.

t.25

Deacons in the Catholic Church have received the sacrament of Holy Orders. They are ordained. Therefore based on your statement the Church has no authority to ordain women as deacons. For female deacons to be possible the title would have to mean something completely from the order of deacon. Deacons are the SACRAMENTAL sign of Christ the servant. ( I have heard some say in the person of Christ the servant) . Creating a title deaconess or female deacon would be very confusing and problematic for all parties involved.

 

[JimG]

Perhaps women cannot be ordained to the priesthood, but they can be ordained to the deacon-hood?

Ordain-- as in, to establish, to induct.

So are you saying that men are in the clergy-deaconite, but women in the past were in a lay ministry-deaconate?

.

From what I’ve read it seems that deaconesses in the early church were lay minstries, but it’s not a settled issue. Hypothetically, a commission might conclude that women could be ordained to the diaconate, but I think the possibility is highly unlikely, since it is already established that women cannot be ordained to the priesthood or episcopate.

 

[JimG]

What’s so important about Christ being a man? Would it have been impossible for God to have become incarnate as a woman?

That’s a pure speculation, but one thing is sure: if the Second Person of the Trinity had become incarnate as a woman, there could be no male priests.

 

[Thorolfr]

That’s a pure speculation, but one thing is sure: if the Second Person of the Trinity had become incarnate as a woman, there could be no male priests.

That would only be true if God had decreed that the gender of priests must be the same as the gender of the Second Person of the Trinity. But I’m not aware of any such proclamation on this subject in Scripture. In real life among us humans, there are many cases were a woman can act in the place of another person who happens to be a man as his deputy, representative, spokesperson, etc.

 

[JimG]

That would only be true if God had decreed that the gender of priests must be the same as the gender of the Second Person of the Trinity. But I’m not aware of any such proclamation on this subject in Scripture. In real life among us humans, there are many cases were a woman can act in the place of another person who happens to be a man as his deputy, representative, etc.

The nature of the priesthood is that the priest acts ‘in the person of Christ,’ most particularly in confecting the Eucharist. He uses Jesus’ exact words ‘this is my body,’ ‘this is my blood.’ He doesn’t speak in the third person. If Christ were female, a man could not act in persona Christi. Since he is male, a woman cannot act in persona Christi. The theology on that is not going to change.