On Women's Ordination - CDF Decree of May 29, 2008

[japhy]

Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith
General Decree
On the delict of attempted sacred ordination of a woman

The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, in virtue of the special faculty granted to it by the Supreme Authority of the Church (cf. Can. 30, Code of Canon Law), in order to safeguard the nature and validity of the sacrament of Holy Orders, decreed, on the Ordinary Session of December 19, 2007:

In accordance with what is disposed by Can. 1378 of the Code of Canon Law, he who shall have attempted to confer holy orders on a woman, as well as the woman who may have attempted to receive Holy Orders, incurs in a latae sententiae excommunication, reserved to the Apostolic See.

If he who shall have attempted to confer Holy Orders on a woman or if the woman who shall have attempted to received Holy Orders is a faithful bound to the Code of Canons of the Oriental Churches, he is to be punished with the major excommunication, whose remission remains reserved to the Apostolic See, in accordance with can. 1443 of the same Code (cf. can. 1423, Code of Canons of the Oriental Churches).

The present decree enters in force immediately after its publication in L’Osservatore Romano.

William Cardinal Levada
Prefect
Angelo Amato, s.d.b.
Titular Archbishop of Sila
Secretary​

(Published in L’Osservatore Romano of May 29, 2008)

(Latin version available in HTML format at Rorate Caeli.)

 

[dandn5000]

There’s something to declare? I was under the impression that the issue of women’s ordination was settled a long, long, long time ago. I’m talking millennia here.

 

[Karl_M]

It was settled a long, long time ago.

But, so many have refused to accept it, that the Vatican (for the second time in fourteen years) has had to say it again.

I’m always amused by the people who say Jesus didn’t ordain women because it went against the social norm of the time.

And when we think of someone who followed the social norm, Jesus jumps right to the top of the list. I mean it’s perfectly normal to be born by a virgn, declare yourself the Messiah and God’s son and God, not to mention dying and coming back to life-all while performing a handful of miracles along the way.

Yes, yes, yes, all those are perfectly normal things that any good citizen would do. But women in leadership roles-oh, that would be unthinkable!

 

[LittleDeb]

YES!! Gone are the days of people saying, “Well they’ll change that practice soon.” The Church just ain’t changin’ that “practice” ever!

Excommunication! And a document to hand to people. You made my night. Once again, “Rome has spoken. The matter is closed.”

Thank you Holy Mother Church.

 

[THurifer2]

This is fairly important because it uses the term Holy Orders.

Pretty much settles the Deaconess Argument.

 

[Adonis33]

It looks as if this addresses Bishops that attempt to give Holy Orders to women.

 

[Just_Lurking]

This is fairly important because it uses the term Holy Orders.

Pretty much settles the Deaconess Argument.

Everyone should already be very clear that canon law prohibits the ordination of women to any level or grade of Holy Orders. The “deaconess question” is whether this prohibition is from divine law, and therefore unchangeable, or from church law, and therefore potentially changeable. This question still remains unsettled by the Church.

The CDF document addresses violations of the canon law. Previously, the CDF had to declare a ferendae sententiae excommunication each and every time the canon law was violated. However, with the number of attempted ordinations of women on the rise, they obviously decided to save themselves some work by making this a latae senteniae penalty.

 

[Flopfoot]

Is it really that hard to excommunicate them individually? How many bishops can there be? I only know about four. Not that I disagree with the latae sententiae excommunication though. (I’ll figure out how to spell that one day).

 

[ProVobis]

Yes, yes, yes, all those are perfectly normal things that any good citizen would do. But women in leadership roles-oh, that would be unthinkable!

You ignore the influence of the nuns, especially those of pre-Vatican II. They pretty much ran the grade schools, hospitals, and some of the parishes. Too bad many of them wanted to rid the Church of all its men. Undermining Christ’s masculinity would be an understatement.

 

[rpp]

With the rash of fake ordinations of pseudo-priestesses recently, I think some type of response is required. In some diocese, the bishops said and nothing, in others, such as St. Louis, MO, the Bishop addressed the fake ordinations directly.

What I thought was interesting was the slant CNN put on this. See the story here. They did not even try to interview anyone at the vatican or any bishop. Just some faker priestess. Even the title of the article is pejorative.

 

[Hlafdige]

The reason why some of these simulated ordinations were done on ships was because excommunicating these offenders was ordinarily the bishops’ job, so in order to muddle up the question of jurisdiction, the offense was committed on the border between two dioceses or in transit from one to another.

Because of this problem, (then) Cardinal Ratzinger warned and then excommunicated the first bunch, “ordained” on the Danube River. Some people drew from this the conclusion that Rome had the obligation to decree excommunication in every such case, even when the offense was clearly committed in a known diocese. Last year when this was the case in St. Louis, we heard comments like “Rome won’t do it, but Archbishop Burke will” forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=197138&highlight=ordination

The current decree specifies once and for all that the offenders in these cases are excommunicated by ROME and that the lifting of the excommunication is reserved to the Apostolic See – that is, the bishop can no longer reinstate the offenders to good standing with the Church after public repentance, now they have to petition the Holy Father.

 

[LRThunder]

With the rash of fake ordinations of pseudo-priestesses recently, I think some type of response is required. In some diocese, the bishops said and nothing, in others, such as St. Louis, MO, the Bishop addressed the fake ordinations directly.

What I thought was interesting was the slant CNN put on this. See the story here. They did not even try to interview anyone at the vatican or any bishop. Just some faker priestess. Even the title of the article is pejorative.

What else do you expect from CNN?