Pope institutes commission to study the diaconate of women

[Padres1969]

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.

What if the commission concludes the church already changed and that women were allowed to be deacons in some form in the early Church but then were later barred due to a change?

 

[Peccavi]

The article says that there were women deacons in the early Church. Does anyone know anything about this?

Read Acts and you’ll find the evidence.

 

[Peccavi]

Read this - St Paul’s Letter to the Romans.

I commend to you our sister Phoebe, a deacon of the church at Cenchreae, so that you may welcome her in the Lord as is fitting for the saints, and help her in whatever she may require from you, for she has been a benefactor of many and of myself as well.

Greet Prisca and Aquila, who work with me in Christ Jesus, and who risked their necks for my life, to whom not only I give thanks, but also all the churches of the Gentiles. Greet also the church in their house. Greet my beloved Epaenetus, who was the first convert in Asia for Christ. Greet Mary, who has worked very hard among you. Greet Andronicus and Junia, my relatives who were in prison with me; they are prominent among the apostles, and they were in Christ before I was. Greet Ampliatus, my beloved in the Lord. Greet Urbanus, our co-worker in Christ, and my beloved Stachys. Greet Apelles, who is approved in Christ. Greet those who belong to the family of Aristobulus. Greet my relative Herodion. Greet those in the Lord who belong to the family of Narcissus. Greet those workers in the Lord, Tryphaena and Tryphosa. Greet the beloved Persis, who has worked hard in the Lord. Greet Rufus, chosen in the Lord; and greet his mother – a mother to me also. Greet Asyncritus, Phlegon, Hermes, Patrobas, Hermas, and the brothers and sisters who are with them. Greet Philologus, Julia, Nereus and his sister, and Olympas, and all the saints who are with them. Greet one another with a holy kiss. All the churches of Christ greet you (Romans 16:1-15, NRSV).

Mysoginists get out of that !

 

[Brendan]

What if the commission concludes the church already changed and that women were allowed to be deacons in some form in the early Church but then were later barred due to a change?

That particular issue has already been examined and found not to have been the case. Given that there has been no new historical evidence since that last determination, the likelihood of making that determination is extremely small.

 

[Usige]

Wow, the comments in that link are scary!

I make it a point not to read comments on America Magazine or National Catholic Dis… err… Reporter. Both tend to support heterodox opinions and draw readers that agitate for change even on settled matters. The only reason I read the articles is to know thy enemy.

 

[Angel_Bradford]

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.

 

[Angel_Bradford]

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

 

[Padres1969]

That particular issue has already been examined and found not to have been the case. Given that there has been no new historical evidence since that last determination, the likelihood of making that determination is extremely small.

Then why have another commission if that were the case? If it’s a settled matter, what’s to discuss?

 

[Angel_Bradford]

The problem is other scholars come to a different conclusion from Professor Zagano. The biggest detraction from scholarship like hers is that she is not simply reporting her finding, but then advocating a change. When biases come into play it is hard to take their conclussions as completely unadulterated. Does she overstate an aboration while downplaying contrary findings for example?

I think it will really come down to a few questions. What role did a deaconess play historically? Was ordination a norm or aboration and if a norm was it sacramental? Has that role largely shifted elsewhere? Since they have always played a small role (relatively speaking) what benefit would be served by reestablishing the deaconess as either a lay or ordained ministry?

Persoanlly, I do not see this pressing need for female deacons (ordained or lay), but if that is what happens eventually I think there needs to be a strong theological foundation for reestablishing it. It has to be something better than simply saying “it is unjust to not do so” given the cloudy nature of the historical evidence.

The ordination rite of women deacons was identical to that of male deacons; the only difference was that the women did not prostrate where the men did.;

 

[Usige]

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.

I would agree that St John Paul II confirmed the infallibility of the existing teaching. I never said that it was a new teaching. But you are 100% incorrect that it is an opinion that might be changed by some later pope’s opinion. When JPII issued OS it was to say, with finality, that the question of women priest was closed. Not only is it not up for debate, but it must be held as true by all the faithful. Those who now say women priests are possible are rejecting the authority of the Church.

The problem is we have people that beleive, even 20 years after the CDF confirmed that only men can be ordained to the priesthood, that perhaps, someday, women might be ordained. They also ignore countless teachings against birthcontrol in the ordiary magisterium. Why? Because there are those that teach anything not declared ex cathedra is still up for debate.

So, yes, JPII did not declare a new infallible truth, but that does not mean that he didn’t state, unequivocally, that it is a infallible truth that is part of the deposit of the faith, never to be changed.

 

[Usige]

The ordination rite of women deacons was identical to that of male deacons; the only difference was that the women did not prostrate where the men did.;

The “consecratory” prayers were also different to the best of my knowledge.

 

[Usige]

Then why have another commission if that were the case? If it’s a settled matter, what’s to discuss?

Because the Church must change to not offend Social Justice Warriors?

Heck we know that it is valid to ordain married men to the priesthood and it is continuously rejected to change the discipline, so even if it is found to be theologically possible one has to ask why tweak doctrine when the Church will not even relax this discipline?

What question or need is not being served with the absence of female clergy? Does anyone think that the truth with change depending on if you no longer have a Y chromosome? Perhaps speak the truth differently, but it would not (could not) change the truth.

 

[Angel_Bradford]

The “consecratory” prayers were also different to the best of my knowledge.

I did a research paper on the topic and had copies of both rites; no other differences…

 

[Padres1969]

Because the Church must change to not offend Social Justice Warriors?

Heck we know that it is valid to ordain married men to the priesthood and it is continuously rejected to change the discipline, so even if it is found to be theologically possible one has to ask why tweak doctrine when the Church will not even relax this discipline?

What question or need is not being served with the absence of female clergy? Does anyone think that the truth with change depending on if you no longer have a Y chromosome? Perhaps speak the truth differently, but it would not (could not) change the truth.

That doesn’t answer the question though since the Pope isn’t some social justice crusader on this issue. His own statements on forming this commission belay that. So again I ask, if they already know the result, why have yet another commission to tell everyone the same thing all over again?

 

[Usige]

I did a research paper on the topic and had copies of both rites; no other differences…

Which rites are you using? From the apostolic constitutions; an eastern rite; some other source?

 

[Gertabelle]

The ordination rite of women deacons was identical to that of male deacons; the only difference was that the women did not prostrate where the men did.;

The “consecratory” prayers were also different to the best of my knowledge.

Can one of you post a link to this rite of which you are speaking?

Thanks!

 

[E_7]

Wow. That’s really bad. So sad. It discourages men from entering the priesthood. What’s next? Women priests? For Pete’s sake.

 

[phil19034]

Then why have another commission if that were the case? If it’s a settled matter, what’s to discuss?

Because I think the Pope wants to know if the deaconesses were ever something more than what female lectors are today. We know they were not ordained. However, were they a minor order? If they were a minor order, were they considered clerics? If they were considered clerics, could they become a Cardinal?

I strongly believe there are still some influential people who believe that while a woman cannot become a priest or bishop, a woman could become a Cardinal.

So I think this is really about determining once and for all if women were ever considered clerics.

God Bless

 

[Padres1969]

Wow. That’s really bad. So sad. It discourages men from entering the priesthood. What’s next? Women priests? For Pete’s sake.

Curious. How would women deacons, if they ever came to pass in the RCC, discourage men from being priests?

 

[Padres1969]

Because I think the Pope wants to know if the deaconesses were ever something more than what female lectors are today. We know they were not ordained. However, were they a minor order? If they were a minor order, were they considered clerics? If they were considered clerics, could they become a Cardinal?

I strongly believe there are still some influential people who believe that while a woman cannot become a priest or bishop, a woman could become a Cardinal.

So I think this is really about determining once and for all if women were ever considered clerics.

God Bless

Interesting. That does make sense. It will be interesting to see what they conclude. Though I imagine we’ll have to wait quite a while for the results.