Pope Francis reiterates a strong 'no' to women priests

[irenaeus1]

No, the “deacon stuff” will not “have to wait a few years.”

The Church has already decided this.

Do you realize that the Catechism is the official teaching document of the Church?

Do you consider the Catechism of the Catholic Church to be merely “adamant and premature opinions” ??

Catechism of the Catholic Church
vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p2s2c3a6.htm

1577 "Only a baptized man (vir) validly receives sacred ordination."66 The Lord Jesus chose men (viri) to form the college of the twelve apostles, and the apostles did the same when they chose collaborators to succeed them in their ministry.67 The college of bishops, with whom the priests are united in the priesthood, makes the college of the twelve an ever-present and ever-active reality until Christ’s return. The Church recognizes herself to be bound by this choice made by the Lord himself. For this reason the ordination of women is not possible.68

66 CIC, can. 1024.
67 Cf. Mk 3:14-19; Lk 6:12-16; 1 Tim 3:1-13; 2 Tim 1:6; Titus 1:5-9; St. Clement of Rome, Ad Cor. 42,4; 44,3G 1,292-293; 300.
68 Cf. John Paul II, MD 26-27; CDF, declaration, Inter insigniores: AAS 69 (1977) 98-116.

While I tend to agree with you, I think the point is that even the Catechism seems to be discussing priestly ordination, since the portion of the Catechism that you cited speaks specifically of bishops and priests. So the question is, what is the nature of the Sacrament of Holy Orders if the deaconate is an ordination to ministry and service while ordination to the priesthood is sacerdotal (with the bishop having the fullness of the priesthood). Can the sacrament be divided? It doesn’t seem so unless we are prepared to say there are really two sacraments to Holy Orders.

I think that we will have to carefully define our terms as well so that the Church is clear on what is meant by ‘ordination.’

 

[pnewton]

Actually you should read what St. JPII wrote about it since Pope Francis referred to him.

I read it again just this week!

I know that several claims were made, and some bishops still believe, that it is doctrine that a person who is remarried may not receive communion. That is why I am slow to jump when the Church is exploring an issue. Who would have anticipated Amoris Laetitia when the the synod was first convened?

I will tell you what. The next time I get a chance, I think I will ask my priest about this.

 

[FrDavid96]

While I tend to agree with you, I think the point is that even the Catechism seems to be discussing priestly ordination, since the portion of the Catechism that you cited speaks specifically of bishops and priests.

The only reason it might “seem” to be that way is because certain people have created that false impression and have convinced people to repeat it.

The Catechism itself is quite clear. In fact, it doesn’t get any more clear than the 2 sentences that begin and end 1577

1577 “Only a baptized man (vir) validly receives sacred ordination.”… For this reason the ordination of women is not possible.

Even though the paragraph speaks mostly about bishops and priests, that fact doesn’t change the clear sentences at either end.

And remember that the Catechism did not simply appear out of nowhere in the late 20th century. Par. 1577 has been the constant teaching of the Church.

It did take a while for the concept of “ordination” to solidify. The word (in Greek, chirotony) was used quite loosely, at least by our standards, in the early centuries; and even today is used loosely in the East compared to the West. In early times, anyone who assumed any kind of public office in the Church was said to be “ordained” (again, chirotony) yet the Church has been consistent in that bishops, priests, and deacons must be male.

So the question is, what is the nature of the Sacrament of Holy Orders if the deaconate is an ordination to ministry and service while ordination to the priesthood is sacerdotal (with the bishop having the fullness of the priesthood).

For purposes of this topic, it makes no difference. Understanding the diaconate as a ministry of service in no way leads to changing what has been the constant understanding of the Church.

Can the sacrament be divided?

No.

It is one single sacrament.

We do not have 8 sacraments, the 7 as we already see them, and then diaconal ordination as #8.

Aside: there is no real significance to the number 7. It’s not about the number but the fact that the number just happens to be 7. Just a little aside caution that I’m not advocating some kind of sacramental numerology.

It doesn’t seem so unless we are prepared to say there are really two sacraments to Holy Orders.

Exactly.

I think that we will have to carefully define our terms as well so that the Church is clear on what is meant by ‘ordination.’

It has been made clear. Again, read the catechism, which re-states the constant teaching of the Church.

The technique used by advocates of women’s ordination is the same whether the documents are ancient or modern: they distort the texts, they create hidden meanings, they invent ways to make the texts seem to say something they do not say–all while completely ignoring the plain and obvious meaning of the words.

Really, think about it. Which sentence has more clarity?

a—“Only a baptized man (vir) validly receives sacred ordination.” Interpret that to mean exactly what it says.

b–“The college of bishops, with whom the priests are united in the priesthood, makes the college of the twelve an ever-present and ever-active reality until Christ’s return.” Interpret that to mean that since the diaconate is ordered toward service, then women can be ordained deacons.

Which interpretation makes more sense?

 

[dochawk]

I’ve seen the history hashed out more thoroughly in eastern fora–and long before His Holiness’ comments.

I believe that there are at least one each of EC and EO with deaconesses to this day, and several more of each that have had them in the past.

There has been a variety of practice across Churches in their installation. In at least one, there is laying of hands, as with higher clergy. In some, deaconesses enter the Holy Place to receive the Eucharist along with the ordained clergy. And so forth.

What has been consistent in those discussions, however, and across those histories, is that a deaconess isnot a female deacon; it is its own office.

(I will, though, grant that nothing in those discussions and histories directly addresses the issues of whether female deacons are possible.)

hawk

 

[Paganus]

Aboard the papal plane, Nov 1, 2016 / 10:36 am (CNA/EWTN News).- During a press conference Tuesday aboard the papal plane from Sweden to Rome, Pope Francis said the issue of women priests has been clearly decided, while also clarifying the essential role of women in the Catholic Churchcatholicnewsagency.com/news/pope-francis-reiterates-a-strong-no-to-women-priests-71133/

And yet the issue of men priestesses has been cleverly avoided. Tricky!