catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=22618
You’re right. I missed it when I was searching for similar story.
Deaconesses - yes
That would (also) be the wife of the deacon, in the early church, that is.
That is correct. They did not have any sacramental function. They did not enter the sanctuary or distribute the Eucharist etc.
While the USA and some other places embraced the restoration of the permanent diaconate in the years following Vatican II, this was not universally the case. In many parts of the world the permanent diaconate remains unknown. Vatican II allowed the permanent diaconate to be restored, but it is still ultimately up to the local bishop. The Archdiocese of Vancouver, where I lived for several years, has nearly 500 000 Catholics, but it was only a few years ago that the Archbishop implemented a formation program for married men discerning the diaconate. Permanent deacons were previously unknown in the region.According to Wikipedia, the diocese was founded in 1111.
Considering the diocese reportedly has over 100,000 Catholics, I am puzzled as to why the diaconate wasn’t introduced a few decades ago.
In any event, this shows how little some of the pressure groups are concerned with the pastoral and social well being of the people. It is sad if these groups are granted “status” with the diocese, so that their “concerns” are given so much weight. I always take reports from the media with caution, but that website is credible. The scary thing is I wonder what other decisions by this bishop they now control.
Maybe some men who live near the borders of other dioceses could enroll in their diaconal training programs. They might have to join the neighboring diocese temporarily, in the hope that by the time they are ordained they could serve in this diocese.
This is the kind of situation the Metropolitan, and the papal nuncio, need to start discussing with the bishop. Bishops have rights within their dioceses, but eligible candidates also have rights, as do the poor, who are the primary focus of deacons.
The same goes for the dioceses in the Atlantic Provinces. Halifax Archdiocese has most of the deacons. There are a scattered few in the other dioceses but most PIPs wouldn’t recognize a permanent deacon if one came up and bit them.
Ok fine, nobody says otherwise, however, questions arise when the reason is backing down due to some fabulously misinformed people who–for some reason–believe the permanent diaconate could ever be open to women. What?!? I think you completely miss the point in your post. What does it being up to the local bishop have to do with anything? He was going to do it but didn’t because of a few uppity people who would have freaked out “cuz women.” No one said he has to do it, he was going to of his own accord, but then didn’t because… because of that.
That could be seen as an implication, yes.
This was nearly the unstated, but effective policy of Archbishop Weakland in Milwaukee for quite some time. Whole years went by for a period of time in which there were NO ordinations at all in that large and heavily catholic diocese. I had a relative study for an M. Div in their seminary during that time period who can pretty much affirm that any young man discerning the priesthood there who had a faith that would at all be recognizable as catholic by St. John Vianney was fairly shortly encouraged to leave the seminary. Essentially the “Goodbye, Good Men” story…