Pope institutes commission to study the diaconate of women

[Blessedwithfive]

I am extremely skeptical of this. How do we know that allowing female deaconesses wont lead into female priests or that having female deaconesses wont pry the door open for birth control and abortion?

I was taught the only infallibility statements made by a modern Pope were the Assumption of Mary and the Immaculate conception.

 

[Usige]

To me, the most important question is theological - Does the Church have the authority to ordain women as deaconesses?

I think that all other questions are secondary, and in fact serve to distract from this key point. Questions such as what deaconesses’ roles were, or were there also situations where non-ordained deaconesses existed. That was what I found so disappointing about the 2002 study - it focused almost exclusively on these secondary questions, without coming to a conclusion about the primary question.

I would agree it is important to know if women were sacramentally ordained in the past.

But there’s the rub; how do we know if any ordination was sacramental? We know that Stephen and the other 6 deacons in Acts were men that were ordained by the Apostles. We don’t know who ordained Phoebe or any other deaconess; they are simply called servants of the Church. The Apostolic Constitutions from yhe 4th century also has different prayers for men and women named deacon. We cannot simply say that the use of the words deacon and ordain means that it was sacramental and hence the reason we have to look at historical context.

Throughout Church history, the deaconess has always ranked below male deacons in the hierarchy and in things like baptism required a male deacon or priest to pronounce the prayers over the waters. If the deaconess was coequal with male deacons why would the female deacon require the male counterpart to fulfill their sacred duties? Why would they sometimes be ranked below some, if not all, minor orders at various times?

It really seems there are two camps. One is the broad interpretation that says if there is any hint, however remote, then the Church can sacramentally ordain women. The others take the more narrow and conservative view that requires a preponderance of evidence that they were sacramentally ordained and doesn’t gloss over questions like I mentioned above. Given that we are talking about a sacrament, I would suspect the Church would err on the side of caution and set the bar fairly high when weighing any evidence.

 

[Usige]

I was taught the only infallibility statements made by a modern Pope were the Assumption of Mary and the Immaculate conception.

That is incorrect. Those are the only two new dogmatic pronouncements, but the way that St John Paul II concludes Ordinatio Sacerdotalis makes it an infallible declaration also.

Wherefore, in order that all doubt may be removed regarding a matter of great importance, a matter which pertains to the Church’s divine constitution itself, in virtue of my ministry of confirming the brethren (cf. Lk 22:32) I declare that the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women and that this judgment is to be definitively held by all the Church’s faithful.

How the sentence is structured it is clear that he was speaking as the Vicar of Christ with a definitive teaching on an area of faith and morals. A pope does not have to implicitly state that a teaching is ex cathedra if it meets the criteria by it’s very nature. There is some debate wether Humanae Vitae’s teaching on birthcontrol is infallible also, with a large number of Bishops and theologians saying that it does meet the criterion for infallible teaching.

 

[Blessedwithfive]

That is incorrect. Those are the only two new dogmatic pronouncements, but the way that St John Paul II concludes Ordinatio Sacerdotalis makes it an infallible declaration also.

How the sentence is structured it is clear that he was speaking as the Vicar of Christ with a definitive teaching on an area of faith and morals. A pope does not have to implicitly state that a teaching is ex cathedra if it meets the criteria by it’s very nature. There is some debate wether Humanae Vitae’s teaching on birthcontrol is infallible also, with a large number of Bishops and theologians saying that it does meet the criterion for infallible teaching.

Good to know. Definitely not what is taught at our church. I will pass the information along to the other catechists.

 

[TMC]

That is incorrect. Those are the only two new dogmatic pronouncements, but the way that St John Paul II concludes Ordinatio Sacerdotalis makes it an infallible declaration also.

How the sentence is structured it is clear that he was speaking as the Vicar of Christ with a definitive teaching on an area of faith and morals. A pope does not have to implicitly state that a teaching is ex cathedra if it meets the criteria by it’s very nature. There is some debate wether Humanae Vitae’s teaching on birthcontrol is infallible also, with a large number of Bishops and theologians saying that it does meet the criterion for infallible teaching.

I disagree. The Pope did not make an infallible statement on the ordination of women. The Pope opined that the Church has always taught definitively that the priesthood is open only to men, and that teaching has been accepted by the episcopate and the faithful. A teaching that has always been taught definitively and accepted as true is considered infallible. So the Pope did not himself declare the teaching infallible, he opined that it was by its nature infallible. For a future Pope to change such a teaching, he would have to declare that the prior opinion on infallibility was mistaken, but he would not have to actually reverse an express infallible declaration. I am not saying that will ever happen, but I believe it is technically possible.

 

[Blessedwithfive]

I disagree. The Pope did not make an infallible statement on the ordination of women. The Pope opined that the Church has always taught definitively that the priesthood is open only to men, and that teaching has been accepted by the episcopate and the faithful. A teaching that has always been taught definitively and accepted as true is considered infallible. So the Pope did not himself declare the teaching infallible, he opined that it was by its nature infallible. For a future Pope to change such a teaching, he would have to declare that the prior opinion on infallibility was mistaken, but he would not have to actually reverse an express infallible declaration. I am not saying that will ever happen, but I believe it is technically possible.

Interesting… is what we currently teach. Confusing, to me at least, and confusing to those I teach as well. but the above is what we currently teach.

 

[Thursday1]

I am extremely skeptical of this. How do we know that allowing female deaconesses wont lead into female priests or that having female deaconesses wont pry the door open for birth control and abortion?

Do you believe that Christ founded the Church, promised to send the Holy Spirit to guide her, and declared that the gates of hell will never prevail against her?

That is how we know this won’t lead to female priests. Saint John Paul II infallibly declared that the Church does not have the authority to confer priestly ordination on women. That is fixed, it can never be changed. If it was, it would mean that Christ lied about the guidance of the Holy Spirit.

Here is JPII’s apostolic letter ORDINATIO SACERDOTALIS
Here is the CDF’s affimation that the teaching is infaliable.

I can’t find a single connection between female deacons and abortion or birth control, but if you share how you think we’d get from A to B, I’d be happy to take a look at your reasoning.

 

[Thursday1]

I disagree. The Pope did not make an infallible statement on the ordination of women. The Pope opined that the Church has always taught definitively that the priesthood is open only to men, and that teaching has been accepted by the episcopate and the faithful. A teaching that has always been taught definitively and accepted as true is considered infallible. So the Pope did not himself declare the teaching infallible, he opined that it was by its nature infallible. For a future Pope to change such a teaching, he would have to declare that the prior opinion on infallibility was mistaken, but he would not have to actually reverse an express infallible declaration. I am not saying that will ever happen, but I believe it is technically possible.

According to the CDF, it cannot be ever be reversed as it is now formally defined as part of the deposit of faith:
RESPONSUM AD PROPOSITUM DUBIUM CONCERNING THE TEACHING CONTAINED IN “ORDINATIO SACERDOTALIS”:

Thus, in the present circumstances, the Roman Pontiff, exercising his proper office of confirming the brethren (cf. Lk 22:32), has handed on this same teaching by a formal declaration, explicitly stating what is to be held always, everywhere, and by all, as belonging to the deposit of the faith.

Source

 

[Just_Lurking]

It really seems there are two camps. One is the broad interpretation that says if there is any hint, however remote, then the Church can sacramentally ordain women. The others take the more narrow and conservative view that requires a preponderance of evidence that they were sacramentally ordained and doesn’t gloss over questions like I mentioned above. Given that we are talking about a sacrament, I would suspect the Church would err on the side of caution and set the bar fairly high when weighing any evidence.

Given that it took the Church almost 2000 years to settle the question of whether episcopal ordination is a sacrament, it will be interesting to see what happens here.

 

[anon98328916]

As a young Catholic woman I feel things cannot change as the way thing are is what Jesus intended. If the church starts changing where will it end? Priests marrying same sex couples…Priests marrying people who are divorced…the Holy Mass will change? Just a few examples. The church cannot change as it has remain the way it’s founder intended.

 

[Usige]

Given that it took the Church almost 2000 years to settle the question of whether episcopal ordination is a sacrament, it will be interesting to see what happens here.

What I suspect will happen is that 4 or 5 years down the road, the study will come to some conclusion eitherway, but without any definitive conclusion. That will allow the question to be kicked down the road another 15-20 years. I suspect that this pattern will be repeated in some fashion or another for the foreseeable future unless there is some new evidence or there is a societal change that makes the question moot in some fashion.

Pope Francis could certainly suprise me (wouldn’t be the first time), but I simply don’t see female ordination happening anytime in the next 20-30 years. Even if it comes to pass there will still be places where female deacons do not exist. There are parts of the world were permanent male deacons are rare or nonexistent and a bishop could decide that he simply will not ordain women even if it means not ordaining anyone to the permanent diaconate.

 

[Brendan]

Good to know. Definitely not what is taught at our church. I will pass the information along to the other catechists.

More specificially, Pope St. John Paul II was restating what was ALREADY an infallible teaching.

The Church has two modes of teaching infallibly. The Ordinary Infallible Magisterium ( what has been received from the Apostles and taught throughout the Church since the time of the Apostles

And the Extraordinary Infallible Magisterium ( Ecumenical Councils and Ex Cathedra Statements by the Pope)

Both are infallible.

The teaching on the lack of authority to Ordain women to the priesthood, by definition, is part of the Ordinary Infallible Magisterium. The Church cannot teach what it did not receive. If the Church did not receive authority to ordain women from Christ via the Apostles, then it simply does not have the authority. That would be part of the Ordinary Infallible Magisterium.

It does not require either an Ecumenical Council or Ex Cathedra statement to make this teaching infallibly true. That the Church did not receive the authority would be part of the Ordinary Infallible Magisterium.

here is a good review

dummies.com/religion/christianity/catholicism/what-are-extraordinary-magisterium-and-ordinary-magisterium/

 

[TMC]

According to the CDF, it cannot be ever be reversed as it is now formally defined as part of the deposit of faith:

Source

Yes. What I am saying is that the Church has opined that the teaching is infallible by virtue have having always been definitively taught. That is different than being declared infallible by the Pope.

 

[Ron_Conte]

It is not clear if the Church ever had ordained deaconesses in the past. Scholars disagree on this point.

Even if women have never been ordained, the question remains open as to whether or not the Church possesses the authority and ability to ordain women deacons. I suggest that Pope Francis may decide this doctrinal question, apart from the historical question, after the Commission issues its report. And he is not bound to agree with whatever they say.

We might possibly have deaconesses in the Church soon.

 

[TMC]

It is not clear if the Church ever had ordained deaconesses in the past. Scholars disagree on this point.

Even if women have never been ordained, the question remains open as to whether or not the Church possesses the authority and ability to ordain women deacons. I suggest that Pope Francis may decide this doctrinal question, apart from the historical question, after the Commission issues its report. And he is not bound to agree with whatever they say.

We might possibly have deaconesses in the Church soon.

I think this is correct. I think that it is well accepted that women served as deacons in the early Church, but there is much disagreement over whether they were ordained or not, and what their exact role was. I don’t know if there is enough evidence to answer the question either way. In the end, the it will be the Pope that decides the doctrinal question. If I were a betting man, I would bet on some form of woman deacon in the future, but it could certainly go either way.

 

[Corki]

Wow, the comments in that link are scary!

 

[edwest2]

Nothing scary at all.

Ed

 

[Gertabelle]

From the article:

Question: …] In the Church there is the office of the permanent diaconate, but it is open only to men, married or not. What prevents the Church from including women among permanent deacons, as was the case in the primitive Church? Why not constitute an official commission to study the matter?

Pope Francis: This question goes in the direction of “doing”: consecrated women already do much work with the poor, they do many things … “doing.” And it touches on the problem of the permanent diaconate. … In effect this exists in antiquity: there was a beginning.… I remember that it was a theme I was quite interested in when I came to Rome for meetings … there was a good Syrian theologian there and one day I asked him about this, and he explained to me that in the early times of the Church there were some “deaconesses”. But what were these deaconesses? Were they ordained or not? The Council of Chalcedon (451) speaks about this but it is somewhat obscure. What was the role of deaconesses in those times? It seems—I was told by this man, who is now dead but who was a good professor, wise and erudite—it seems that the role of the deaconesses was to help in the baptism of women, their immersion; they baptized them for the sake of decorum, and also to anoint the body of women, in baptism. And another curious thing: when there was a judgement on a marriage because a husband hit his wife and she went to the bishop to complain, deaconesses were responsible for inspecting the bruises left on the woman’s body from her husband’s blows, and for informing the bishop. … There are various publications on the diaconate in the Church, but it is not clear how it was. I think I will ask the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith to refer me to some studies on this theme, because I have answered you only on the basis of what I heard from this priest, who was an erudite and able researcher, on the permanent diaconate. In addition, I would like to constitute an official commission to study the question: I think it will be good for the Church to clarify this point, I agree, and I will speak so as to do something of this type.

It sounds like this is a study of the history of women deacons in the very early Church. It is not a commission set up to figure out how to ordain women. Consecrated women religious seem to have taken up the work (and so much more!! ) that is attributed to the women called deacons in the early Church.

And I agree with Corki – some of the comments in the combox are just scary.

 

[Padres1969]

Wow, the comments in that link are scary!

How so? Are you referring to how supportive of the idea of women deacons the comments are?

 

[twf]

Good to know. Definitely not what is taught at our church. I will pass the information along to the other catechists.

Please do not pass on information to catechists at a say so by a forum member. The poster in question is incorrect. This is not my opinion, but rather the judgment of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. Pope St John Paul did not exercise papal infallibility. He did not define a new dogma. You are correct that this has only happened twice in modern history. Rather, the Pope, as the chief shepherd of the Church, used his authority to definitively clarify what the ordinary magisterium has always taught. The teaching itself, that women cannot be ordained to the priesthood, is infallible - but by virtue of the ordinary magisterium. The ordinary magisterium is the collective, consistent teaching of the popes and bishops in every place and time. The teaching on artificial birth control would be infallible for the same reason. No dogma was promulgated by Humanae Vitae.
Here’s the response from the Congregation - note that they explicitly state that the declaration itself did not make the teaching infallible, but rather it always was an infallible teaching of the ordinary magisterium: jimmyakin.com/library/womens-ordination-its-infallible#responsum.
Many Catholics tend to over emphasize the role of the Pope in the Church’s exercise of indallibility. The vast majority of infallible teachings have been infallibly taught by the ordinary magisterium or defined as dogmas by ecunenical councils. The Pope rarely, rarely, rarely exercises the Church’s infallibility unilaterally.