Pope institutes commission to study the diaconate of women

  • Thread starter Thread starter _Abyssinia
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Padres1969 said:
It’ll be interesting to see the conclusion they come to this time. I can imagine there will be quite the uproar if they conclude non-ordained deaconesses can be allowed. Probably exponentially larger uproar than the altar girl backlash 20 years ago.
Click to expand...
They are not looking into that and will not be making any such recommendation. See my previous post.
 
_Abyssinia said:
I’m curious why a study would be commissioned to look at the diaconate, when a study has already been done on the diaconate, with the document released in 2002:

vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/cti_documents/rc_con_cfaith_pro_05072004_diaconate_en.html
Click to expand...
Presumably, somebody didn’t much care for the previous study’s conclusions, or lack thereof.

That’s how the Progressive game works; “just have a conversation” until you’ve muddled the issue enough to gain a foothold. Keep the “conversation” going so as to grow your voice. Courting the world and its press helps. Then build a self-referential consensus. Call it the “current consciousnesses of the church” or some such nonsense --whatever’s required to downplay the traditional and historical theological positions-- but promise those who disagree that they will always have a place within the church and their conscience will be respected. “Moderates” will flock to you (by now you ought to be clearly dividing “Traditionalists” from “Moderates.” Everyone wants to be a “Moderate” peacemaker; no one should want to be a divisive “Traditionalist.”). When sufficient momentum is gained, steamroll the hateful, paternalistic Traditionalists with false accusations of bigotry and mean-spiritedness. Hounding human “rights” will be particularly effective in the West. Then, vote. And just like that, you’ve begun a corrosion that will continue for generations.

We’ve seen this pattern in the Anglican Communion, the ELCA, the Southern Baptists (although, remarkably, they recovered) and now the Methodists. Any church body that thinks ‘it can’t happen here’ is sadly mistaken.
 
gilliam said:
Just to be clear.

This commission is not looking into whether or not women should be ordained as deacons.
Instead it is looking into the role of women and what the women deacons did and did not do in the early church.

There is some controversy as to whether what women deacons did in the early church is the same as what is expected of deacons today. It is very possible that the title meant something entirely different in those days and something different when referring to a woman rather than a man. We do know a lot about the period but it would be good to have a study concentrating on this subject and that is what the commission has been asked to address.

The commission will issue a report when it is finished.

There is no indication that any further action may or may not be taken after the report is issued and the commission is not being asked for any sort of recommendation for any further action. It is a commission looking into history.
Click to expand...
This is comforting, but how long will it stay this way?
 
gilliam said:
Just to be clear.

This commission is not looking into whether or not women should be ordained as deacons.
Instead it is looking into the role of women and what the women deacons did and did not do in the early church.

There is some controversy as to whether what women deacons did in the early church is the same as what is expected of deacons today. It is very possible that the title meant something entirely different in those days and something different when referring to a woman rather than a man. We do know a lot about the period but it would be good to have a study concentrating on this subject and that is what the commission has been asked to address.

The commission will issue a report when it is finished.

There is no indication that any further action may or may not be taken after the report is issued and the commission is not being asked for any sort of recommendation for any further action. It is a commission looking into history.
Click to expand...
Thanks for this.
 
gilliam said:
Just to be clear.

This commission is not looking into whether or not women should be ordained as deacons.
Instead it is looking into the role of women and what the women deacons did and did not do in the early church.

There is some controversy as to whether what women deacons did in the early church is the same as what is expected of deacons today. It is very possible that the title meant something entirely different in those days and something different when referring to a woman rather than a man. We do know a lot about the period but it would be good to have a study concentrating on this subject and that is what the commission has been asked to address.

The commission will issue a report when it is finished.

There is no indication that any further action may or may not be taken after the report is issued and the commission is not being asked for any sort of recommendation for any further action. It is a commission looking into history.
Click to expand...
Time will tell. While they are starting to look at why/if deaconess were used in the early church, it is pretty easy to infer that if they were used in the early church, they could be used in the modern church as well. After all, women might have a real place at in the church after all.:o Like I said, time will tell…
 
This is great so long as it is made very clear that there will and can never be deaconesses who are ordained like deacons. If not it only adds more confusion when there is enough confusion in the Church.
Bill_Martin said:
I thought of Romans 16:1 too, but I’m not sure if the translation of “deacon” there means what it means in modern terms.

There’s also 1 Timothy 3:12
This brings up the same question of translation.
Click to expand...
I’m no expert but my understanding is that deacon means a servant. Priest/presbyter means elder. Bishop/episcopus means overseer. The words for the clergy had meanings that corresponded to their function. The word deacon is in English used, so far as I know, only to describe an office in the Church. But in the original Greek I don’t know that deacon, or more specifically deaconess, was only used in Holy Scripture to describe the office. Based on Catholic teaching the word deaconess never meant an office like deacon. In a modern translation the choice of which word to use can be made for lots of reasons. It can be made to further a belief. Romans 16:1 uses deacon in the NIV (as does the NRSVACE), but servant in the KJV. So far as I know anywhere that Holy Scripture describes how to choose people for Church offices it clearly speaks of men.
 
ComplineSanFran said:
It certainly says something when Phyllis Zagano is a member of the commission. She is an excellent scholar and a strong advocate in favor of ordaining women to the diaconate. I’ve been reading her work for years.
Click to expand...
She is one of the world’s experts on the topic. It tells me the Holy Father wants an open or honest study.

She does advocate women in the diaconate. However a recommendation to do that is not what the commission is being asked to do.

For those who don’t know her, here is a recent interview with her and goes into her opinions:
americamagazine.org/media/podcasts/catholic-women-deacons?utm_content=bufferd98c0&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer
 
Blessedwithfive said:
Time will tell. While they are starting to look at why/if deaconess were used in the early church, it is pretty easy to infer that if they were used in the early church, they could be used in the modern church as well. After all, women might have a real place at in the church after all.:o Like I said, time will tell…
Click to expand...
Yes, obviously. The commission was not instituted merely for intellectual curiosity.
 
Blessedwithfive said:
Time will tell. While they are starting to look at why/if deaconess were used in the early church, it is pretty easy to infer that if they were used in the early church, they could be used in the modern church as well. After all, women might have a real place at in the church after all.:o Like I said, time will tell…
Click to expand...
That is certainly one possibility.
 
I don’t believe the Orthodox necessarily believe that deaconesses are simply women ordained to the order of the diaconate. There may be differing views in Orthodoxy, but at least one Orthodox Christian I’ve spoken of believes that the order of deaconess is separate and distinct from the order of deacons. From what I have read on the topic, this seems to be supported by the historical record. There is no doubt that Deaconesses were ordained and served in both the Western and Eastern Churches, but were they ordained to the first degree of Holy Orders in the same way that male deacons are? I personally believe it was a distinct vocation involving an “ordination” completely separate
from the sacrament of the holy orders - a rite that we today would understand as a sacramental (perhaps akin to the consecration of virgins or the blessing of an abbess - a life changing sacramental to be sure, but not the sacrament of orders).
 
Blessedwithfive said:
Time will tell. While they are starting to look at why/if deaconess were used in the early church, it is pretty easy to infer that if they were used in the early church, they could be used in the modern church as well. After all, women might have a real place at in the church after all.:o Like I said, time will tell…
Click to expand...
Given that women make up better than 80% of catechists and probably 70% of readers and EMHCs, where do you not see women having a “real place” in the Church? By a “real place” do you simply mean hold any position in the Church that a man may?
 
I’d like to point out that deaconesses have been mentioned in two ecumenical councils:

325 A.D. - The First Ecumenical Council - “Concerning the Paulianists who have flown for refuge to the Catholic Church, it has been decreed that they must by all means be rebaptized… Likewise in the case of their deaconesses, and generally in the case of those who have been enrolled among their clergy, let the same form be observed. And we mean by deaconesses such as have assumed the habit, but who, since they have no imposition of hands, are to be numbered only among the laity.” (Canon 19)

451 A.D. - The Fourth Ecumenical Council - “A woman shall not receive the laying on of hands as a deaconess under forty years of age, and then only after searching examination. And if, after she has had hands laid on her and has continued for a time to minister, she shall despise the grace of God and give herself in marriage, she shall be anathematized and the man united to her.” (Canon 15)
 
Undoubtedly. But she does add expertise to the commission. This is a good thing.
 
I sure hope that the commission will strongly encourage the Holy Father to defeat this modernist nonsense

There is no need for women deacons in the Church and never has been
 
Trad_Catholic27 said:
to defeat this modernist nonsense
Click to expand...
If you have been reading the thread, you will note that this isn’t a modern thing. There were indeed women deacons for hundreds if not over a thousand years in the history of the Church.
 
So what does she think of the commission that looked at the diaconate for 5 years. They didn’t come to the conclusion she did, did they?!
 
No they were not all they simply did was help the priests with female baptism that’s it

They never had any Holy Orders given to them
 
I’m confused. Does she think women were ordained in the same way that men were ordained as deacons? If that is what she thinks, then why did women not do exactly the same things that men did, see this?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top