Other references:
During a Mass (From the sign of the Cross at the beginning until the Dismissal) only Clerics (Priests and Deacons) are permitted to preach. This is both in Canon Law and “Redemptionis Sacramentum”. One reason for this is that it Preaching is part of the Clerical Ministry. this is also partly shared by religious though they only preach outside of Mass. Anytime you see a woman speaking at Mass (not reading) that is an abuse. Excluding Rituals that take place at Mass, for example marriage or Religious Profession
I didn’t know that women couldn’t preach to a Protestant.
yep, any one of us women can preach to Protestants and have…lol:doh2:Someone should then inform every Jesuit retreat house I have been to. In all, spiritual directors took turns delivering the homily.
In my experience retreats seem to bring out the “creative” even to the extent of violating liturgical norms. Homilies are only to be given by priests or deacons. Lay people, including spiritual directors, are often excellent choices to preach retreats but outside the context of the Mass.
Religious Orders have some autonomy when conducting Mass for their own members. But, if members of the general laity (who are under the local Bishop) are present, all liturgical norms must be adhered to. At a retreat house, it should be the norm that Masses are attended by non-Religious.
Exceptions have been given quite frequently. For example, in my diocese, masses are said in multiple languages. Sometimes a priest rotated here may not be able to say mass in a certain language. Lay persons, nuns etc have been permitted to deliver the homily. If not for the solemnity of the Mass, it may almost appear comical to an outsider. The priest intones in one language and the congregation respond in another. Yes, we have shortages of priests who are multilingual.
I would be cautious about reading too much into what may or may not have been “left out”` of a teaching designed to respond to one question. I suppose if the pope (saint) had failed to reaffirm celibacy in a particular document, some would say THAT is significant. Or if the pope failed to reaffirm X, Y, and Z, I suppose people would say “His silence on those other issues means the Church is considering a change in her teaching” on X, Y and Z. I bet he “failed” to reaffirm indissolubility of marriage in the document you refer to. Hmm…
I’m just saying the door to female deacons has not been infallibly shut, as it has been with priestly Orders.
No matter what the Church teaches, no matter how the Magisterium communicates teaching, there will always those who say “well, this door was not exactly shut” or “that is still an open question” or “I guess the Church isn’t quite ready to do this YET” (but will be in the future). All of this pretends the Catechism of the Catholic Church did not exist. But it does exist, written after Vatican II, promulgated by a pope who was there. The same is true for the Code of Canon Law.
Only possible if it were a non-ordained deacon. But this wouldn’t satisfy any of the ones who want female ordination anyway. And what role would we need this for that nuns are not already doing? It would be pointless.
If you agree that the “door was not exactly shut,” are you suggesting it WAS actually shut? And you say this BECAUSE it was NOT shut? You leave yourself in the uncomfortable position of arguing that Humane Vite did not shut the door on artificial birth control, because the door was not shut.