Francis to create commission to study female deacons in Catholic church

  • Thread starter Thread starter gilliam
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Perhaps instead of looking at women deacons, a better step would be for the Church to look at reopening the office of Acolyte.

Acolyte’s do not receive Holy Orders, but are ordained to assist more closely in Mass.

Two Bishop’s ago in my dioceses, there was a misunderstanding in the US that the office of Acolyte had been reopened and the Bishop ordained a group of men as Acolyte’s.

One of the men use to belong to my parish.

This didn’t last even a year before the Vatican shut down the office, but allowed those who were ordained, to remain.

Jim
The ministry of Instituted Acolyte has not been suppressed, in fact it was only created in 1972 when Pope Paul VI rationalized the minor orders in Ministeria Quaedam. Most dioceses only institute candidates for the priesthood/diaconate, but the ministry is still given to laymen in some areas. The Archdiocese of Galveston-Houston is a good example of the latter. archgh.org/worship/instituted-acolytes/
 
The ministry of Instituted Acolyte has not been suppressed, in fact it was only created in 1972 when Pope Paul VI rationalized the minor orders in Ministeria Quaedam. Most dioceses only institute candidates for the priesthood/diaconate, but the ministry is still given to laymen in some areas. The Archdiocese of Galveston-Houston is a good example of the latter. archgh.org/worship/instituted-acolytes/
OK. thanks for the update. I was misinformed when I inquired about it two years ago. I was told the Vatican had stopped it.

Jim
 
“Why must we continually revisit matters that have been addressed in detail and are, in many ways, already set to rest in terms of magisterial teaching? Why not recognize that even if the Church revived a female deaconate today, it would cause far more confusion and dissent than it would anything else?”

–Carl Olson, in CWR
 
In that case…if gender is so important…it seems wrong for females to eat the actual flesh and drink the blood of Christ during communion because it is a female body and spirit ingesting a male body and spirit and they should not intermingle or be exchanged or exchangeable in any way.

.
Gender as a concept is not a concern of the Church. The CCC does not mention the word one time as far as I know.

The key thing is that human persons are a unity of body and soul. Human beings have unique observable physical traits.
Male/female is one of those.
These traits have meaning.
Christ himself has a body.
The incarnation has profound meaning and significance. It is not accidental.
Also our own physical nature and being has deep meaning and significance. Our bodies are not accidental to who we are, they are integral and inseparable.
 
In that case…if gender is so important…it seems wrong for females to eat the actual flesh and drink the blood of Christ during communion because it is a female body and spirit ingesting a male body and spirit and they should not intermingle or be exchanged or exchangeable in any way.
Given that there were women in the Cenaculum, you are really grasping at straws.

God Bless and ICXC NIKA.
 
VATICAN CITY (CNS) – Pope Francis “did not say he intends to introduce a diaconal ordination for women,” and he certainly did not speak about the ordination of women priests, the Vatican spokesman said.
Pope Francis met members of the International Union of Superiors General, the leadership group for superiors of women’s orders, May 12 and accepted a proposal that he establish a commission to study the role of New Testament deaconesses and the possibility of women serving as deacons today.
After some news outlets reported the pope was considering ordaining women deacons and comments were made about women deacons leading to women priests, Jesuit Father Federico Lombardi issued a clarification May 13.
catholicnews.com/services/englishnews/2016/pope-did-not-say-hed-ordain-women-deacons-spokesman-says.cfm
 
In that case…if gender is so important…it seems wrong for females to eat the actual flesh and drink the blood of Christ during communion because it is a female body and spirit ingesting a male body and spirit and they should not intermingle or be exchanged or exchangeable in any way.

.
Except that Christ instituted the Holy Eucharist for both males and females.

Also, the accident’s remain bread and wine, not human flesh and human blood, so your analogy is wrong.

Jim
 
I was very confused on the Deacon/Deaconesses situation in the early Church until some years ago when I read the book by Aime Georges Martimort ; " DEACONESSES" Ignatius Press, San Francisco 1986.

Martimort is one of the foremost French authorities on the Liturgy. It is an exhaustive and thoroughly researched work on Deaconesses in the Church. I encourage all who are interested in this topic to read it. He not only gives us the texts available that attest to the existence of Deaconesses but in each instance helps us to understand who and what these Deaconesses and their functions were.

I am now convinced that Deaconesses were never ordained as Deacons under the liturgy of Holy Orders at any time in the Church.
 
Quite correct.

And hence the problem.

The Pope made a spur of the moment comment suggesting he’d welcome study on the topic. Hardly an indication he was going to start ordaining female Deacons, and not predicting what the results of such a study would be.

Or even that there will actually be a study.

The press took his comment and indicated that a commission was going to be formed, which is not what the Pope said.

This was kicked around for 24 hours until the Vatican felt it necessary to clarify the whole matter.

So, we have an off the cuff remark blown out of proportion by an ignorant press.

However, if this was one incident, it would be one thing, but that this keeps happening, i.e., that the Pope keeps making statements that are easy to take out of context and create their own news, is another. The Holy Father needs to be more careful about off the cuff remarks.
 
Can you please explain why the ordination of women is forbidden? I honestly don’t know why.
 
Can you please explain why the ordination of women is forbidden? I honestly don’t know why.
Visit this search here on Catholic Answers: catholic.com/search/content/women%20ordination

The reasoning is complex, but simple answer is the Church does not have the authorization to do so.

Jesus only ordained men. Jesus, being God, knew that people would question this. If Jesus wanted female Priests, he would have ordained them himself. But He didn’t.

There are many theological reasons too… One being that the Church is the Bride of Christ, and that the Priests (in persona christi) are also married to the Church. The Church is a “she” and if priests are married to the Church, female priests would be an issue.

The idea that the Church is the Bride of Christ and the Priests are married to the Church is more than just a metaphor.

That’s just one or two reasons out of numerous reasons. Also, let’s also keep in mind that all of the Eastern, apostolic Churches which were are in schism with do not allow female priests either.

Women clergy are only allowed in protestant groups and some heretical, independent “catholic” groups which are really have far more in common with the Anglicans than they do with real Catholics.

I pray this is helpful.

God Bless
 
An underlying question is whether the Spirit reveals an unfolding revelation, that is, that God only gives us as much as we can culturally handle,
The Catholic Church teaches that public revelation closed with the death of the last Apostle. The Teaching of Jesus is contained in two strands of Divine Revelation, Scripture and Sacred Tradition.

Though your point has historical validity. From the beginning of the interaction of God with humankind, His revelation of himself (that reached it’s fullness in Christ) did only give as much as could be culturally managed at the time.
Code:
 or the deposit of revelation does not become more clear over time, all the clarity necessary can be gleaned from words written long ago, that the Spirit is actually alive and present in unchanging cultural mores.
I think you have set up a false dichotomy. The fact that the public revelation was completed does not equate to having more clarity over time. What is different about your methods, and the methods of the Catholic Church, is that the CC does not start/end in the human imagination. Nothing that we can “glean” from history can be separated in any way from what we understand now. This is because God has led the church throughout history into how His revelation is applied in every generation. Ignoring all this history of the Holy Spirit active in the Church, and replacing it with modernism pulls us off track from the Holy Spirit’s movement.
Code:
In other words, the culture of 2000 years ago predictably pressured the Church to remain fairly stubborn about giving women higher-ranking roles.  Were they closed to the Spirit or did the Spirit find such giving of women higher-ranking roles a step too difficult for followers to incorporate, that their faith was not ready for such a suggestion or discussion?
The questions are based on a false premise. Serving as a priest or a deacon is not “higher ranking role”. It is a specific ministry that embodies the sacramental work of Christ to His flock. Thinking of the priesthood or diaconate as a form of “rank” is a fundamental and very serious error.
Or, is the Spirit absolutely saying-for-all-eternity that women will never rightfully serve the same sacramental roles that men do?
The Church is the sojourn of God’s people on earth. It will not need to persist into eternity, because when He comes again, there will be no need for the Church. 👍

Your question seems to imply that you support idea that Traditional teachings of appropriate form and matter do not apply in the “modern culture”.
Code:
To me, the roles designated in Biblical times were a matter of survival.  The social and cultural pressures were purposeful.
So you think that Jesus’ teaching on the role of the priesthood is not Divine, but bound by social and cultural norms?
Today what is appropriate? God only knows. 🙂
Catholics believe that Jesus has revealed to the Church what is appropriate for His One Body, the church. Those Christians who have rejected this have already ordained women to “high ranking” positions. It is a form of protestanism. Have you given any more thought to changing your affiliation label above your post ?
One interesting theological angle to this: Does God wait for the Church to decide that Catholic women can be deacons before He calls them to do so, or is a woman called to be a deacon also called to belong to another denomination?
You are saying that the holy spirit leads on opposite directions. This is not a Catholic frame of mind.

:hmmm:
 
Thank you for your fully and comprehensive answer, which I hope to understand.

My biggest issue is understanding the apparent sexism in the church. I find it difficult to understand the masculine hierarchy when most of the influential role models in my Catholic faith have been women.
 
My biggest issue is understanding the apparent sexism in the church. I find it difficult to understand the masculine hierarchy when most of the influential role models in my Catholic faith have been women.
There is no sexism in the Church unless your worldview is…well…that of the world.

If you do one thing…just one thing! In the next 6 months read John Paul II’s collection of Wednesday audiences titled “Theology of the body”. I can guarantee you that it will explain the eternal understanding of sex, gender,relationship and sacrifice for another. It will smash your feeble understanding of the false dogma of sexism.

Just do it!
 
Thank you for your recommendation.

I will read it, but hope it does not denigrate the feminine Catholic, as that has proved to be, in my isolated experience, to be the most powerful and pure.
 
So many foolish men perpetuating the sexist divide.

When will you realise that this is utter nonsense?
 
Quite correct.

And hence the problem.

The Pope made a spur of the moment comment suggesting he’d welcome study on the topic. Hardly an indication he was going to start ordaining female Deacons, and not predicting what the results of such a study would be.

Or even that there will actually be a study.

The press took his comment and indicated that a commission was going to be formed, which is not what the Pope said.

This was kicked around for 24 hours until the Vatican felt it necessary to clarify the whole matter.

So, we have an off the cuff remark blown out of proportion by an ignorant press.

However, if this was one incident, it would be one thing, but that this keeps happening, i.e., that the Pope keeps making statements that are easy to take out of context and create their own news, is another. The Holy Father needs to be more careful about off the cuff remarks.
I agree he often says things that are easily misconstrued, but this time I don’t think he was at fault. To me, it looked like he was actually doing the opposite of an off the cuff remark. He knew he didn’t have a thorough understanding of the issue, and rather than give an uneducated or half thought out reply, he said he wanted to study it more. It felt like one of those “Good question, I’ll get back to you on it once I know more” type of answers that politicians usually give. And people still ran with it.

I’m honestly not sure what else he could have said in response to the question that wouldn’t have been twisted. I sure don’t envy his position. It’s really a “damned if you do, damned if you don’t” situation when it comes to the press.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top