Pope institutes commission to study the diaconate of women

[Just_Lurking]

I don’t know what was wrong with the 2002 study. I’ve read it twice since this story hit the news. It is a beautifully written examination of the history of not just the diaconate, but of the entire sacrament of holy orders. I loved the section examining the possibility of deacons acting “in persona Christi Servi”, and am eager to see if the new commission can flesh out the theology even more.

I’m wondering why the 2002 study left the door ajar for the new study to let women deacons in.

 

[TMC]

I’m wondering why the 2002 study left the door ajar for the new study to let women deacons in.

The 2002 study drew no real conclusions. I don’t know why, but the new commission now has the opportunity to do so.

 

[Thursday1]

I’m wondering why the 2002 study left the door ajar for the new study to let women deacons in.

Probably because it had only been 40 years since the Church was certain that deacons were sacramentally ordained. That is hardly enough time to examine all of the nuances of the subject.
I think they laid the groundwork for limiting a sacramentally ordained diaconate to men with the section positing that deacons act in persona Chisti Servi.

The first study took 10 years, I highly doubt this one will be much shorter, so we’ll have a long time to wait and see what comes next.

 

[Usige]

The first study took 10 years, I highly doubt this one will be much shorter, so we’ll have a long time to wait and see what comes next.

But Prof. Zagano has already done all the research and proved everything. It is simply a matter of taking her books to the Pope and having him say yes or no to restoring the deaconess right now.

[End sarcasm]

I am curious how much more research needs be done. Between the work done for the study at the turn on the millennium and scholarship like Prof. Zagano’s it seems we have fairly extensive research into the scant information on the subject. I don’t know that 10 more years would provide a smoking gun that says “yes, female ordinations were sacramental”. If you read Prof Zagano’s article in America, then she seems to consider all ordinations to automatically have been sacramental and doesn’t even consider that a key question. The majority of the time I suspect will be over jockeying on how much space each theologian’s conclusion will get in the final report.

I unfortunately think that any report will not be purely driven by theology, but there will be a certain amount of sociopolitical motivation as well. I hope I will be pleasantly suprised, but I have become rather jaded with the politicalization of academic research of late.

 

[Ron_Conte]

The Commission is unlikely to reach any definitive conclusion. They might present more than one point of view, since they are so sharply split from the start into pro and con opinions on deaconesses. They will issue a document discussing the topic, and the Pope will decide.

 

[deaconjohnO]

It always baffled me, especially considering how extreme the priest shortage is in some of the more rural / semi-rural dioceses. In my parents’ town, one priest cares for two parishes and a mission…I’m sure a deacon would be a lot of help…

I think proper understanding is in line here. Deacons are the sacramental sign of Christ the Servant in the midst of the people of God. They are not a half priest or a fallback if a priest is not avail. The priesthood and diaconate are two different vocations and paths of service to the Church. Starting a deacon formation program because of a shortage of priests is the wrong answer. Deacons do have pastoral training but most of us have full time Jobs and in my case 4 school age children who are very busy. Diaconal ministry at least in my diocese is split between my parish and diocesan ministry (in my case the Prison). I realize that Priests enter a “transitional” diaconate period and most often are eventually ordained to the priesthood but the “permanent” diaconate and the priesthood are two distinctly different paths. I get questioned a lot regarding the shortage of priests whether deacons can “fill in” for them. The answer most often is “no” aside from pastoral visits to hospitals etc. (which laypeople can do as well). I guess the idea that deacons are there to pick up the slack for the shortage of priests is like saying policemen are there to pick of the slack for the shortage of firemen. Maybe a bad analogy but the only one I can think of. If a diocese has a shortage of priests it might be in the best interest of the diocese to move resources in the deacon formation program to solve the priest shortage problem. In my opinion if a diocese has many deacons and a priest shortage, something is very wrong.

 

[Usige]

The Commission is unlikely to reach any definitive conclusion. They might present more than one point of view, since they are so sharply split from the start into pro and con opinions on deaconesses. They will issue a document discussing the topic, and the Pope will decide.

That is really what I expect. Point → counter point for the pro women deacons camp and then point → counter point against a sacramental female diaconate.

As to how the Pope decides? Who knows. If it take 5 -10 years, the commissions findings might be deliver under a new pontificate with a very differnt focus than Pope Francis.

 

[phil19034]

If Vatican II hadn’t revived the permanent diaconate, then we wouldn’t have this problem of whether women could fill this role. There is certainly no doubt that women cannot be transitional deacons.

Very true. The truth is there is no difference between the transitional deacon vs the permanent deacon, other than the fact that the permanent deacon isn’t planning on becoming a priest.

 

[phil19034]

If a diocese has a shortage of priests it might be in the best interest of the diocese to move resources in the deacon formation program to solve the priest shortage problem. In my opinion if a diocese has many deacons and a priest shortage, something is very wrong.

Yeah, I know a Diocese that had a 110 Permanent Deacons and 114 Diocesan Priests in 2014 (plus 59 Religious Priests living in the Diocese).

The same diocese currently only has 3 seminarians for the priesthood, none of them are actually from the diocese.

Breaks my heart because I used to live in that diocese. I’ve know for years that something was wrong, but the fact that they have no seminarians who are native to the diocese is scary.

 

[twf]

I think proper understanding is in line here. Deacons are the sacramental sign of Christ the Servant in the midst of the people of God. They are not a half priest or a fallback if a priest is not avail. The priesthood and diaconate are two different vocations and paths of service to the Church. Starting a deacon formation program because of a shortage of priests is the wrong answer. Deacons do have pastoral training but most of us have full time Jobs and in my case 4 school age children who are very busy. Diaconal ministry at least in my diocese is split between my parish and diocesan ministry (in my case the Prison). I realize that Priests enter a “transitional” diaconate period and most often are eventually ordained to the priesthood but the “permanent” diaconate and the priesthood are two distinctly different paths. I get questioned a lot regarding the shortage of priests whether deacons can “fill in” for them. The answer most often is “no” aside from pastoral visits to hospitals etc. (which laypeople can do as well). I guess the idea that deacons are there to pick up the slack for the shortage of priests is like saying policemen are there to pick of the slack for the shortage of firemen. Maybe a bad analogy but the only one I can think of. If a diocese has a shortage of priests it might be in the best interest of the diocese to move resources in the deacon formation program to solve the priest shortage problem. In my opinion if a diocese has many deacons and a priest shortage, something is very wrong.

Deacon,
True and point taken. However, from a practical pastoral standpoint, if vocations aren’t increasing and seminaries are empty, yet a group of men are ready to serve as deacons, could not their ministry alleviate the burden on priests? In the diocese in question, there are zero permanent deacons…there have never been permanent deacons in that diocese. Should the program be suspended until the bishop is confident there is no crisis with priestly vocations? Deacons have a distinct ministry, to be sure, but in a practical sense they can assist with weddings, baptisms, and funerals and provide formation and pastoral care in a way that most laity aren’t equipped to. Surely that would remove some of the burden from an overworked priest who has multiple parishes.

My own archdiocese has vocations. We have good, young priests coming out of the seminary up at the Abbey. The fact that we now also have a first “batch” of permanent deacons is a separate and unique blessing. My comment was more in regards to other dioceses that have never had deacons and are truly struggling with priest shortages.

 

[PPeterson]

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.

I believe that the statement “the gates of hell will never prevail against her” does not logically demand or even remotely imply “she can’t make a mistake.” I would also suggest that interpreting thus is a convenient way to maintain otherwise untenable positions.

 

[TMC]

I believe that the statement “the gates of hell will never prevail against her” does not logically demand or even remotely imply “she can’t make a mistake.” I would also suggest that interpreting thus is a convenient way to maintain otherwise untenable positions.

I agree on both points.

 

[JB_Brother_4446]

I believe that the statement “the gates of hell will never prevail against her” does not logically demand or even remotely imply “she can’t make a mistake.”

No, it doesn’t. It means GOD will PREVENT her from making mistakes.

 

[Corki]

They’d be filling the same needs the males fill.

But, naturally, they’d be doing it *better. *Because we all know women are smarter, wiser, stronger, more creative, multi-taskers…

And maybe they’d be filling more needs. If I was in the Catholic church and needed a deacon, I’d rather go to a female than a male. Perhaps many other women feel that way, and maybe some men, too.

.

What would a situation be where you would “need a deacon” and get to choose one? Deacons are assigned duties by their bishop. The main things that deacons do that lay people cannot are Baptize (outside of emergencies where anyone can), officiate at weddings and funerals, preach at Mass and read the Gospel. Many are in ministry to prisons, hospitals and nursing homes. Some do things like counseling but that can be done by lay people as well.

I don’t mean to imply that deacons are not fill an important role for the Church. But deacons serve the bishop and, by extension if assigned, a pastor. There are times when a Catholic would definitely say “I need a priest” such as to hear Confession or to give last rights but the same does not really apply to a deacon.

 

[SilverLight]

I still have not seen a solid argument on what need is not fulfilled that women in holy orders would magically fix.

Well for me (and we are all allowed to think what we want I believe) I would just feel better about being in church I guess for one thing.

 

[Melchior_1]

Guess what? Media overreacted to Pope Francis again, fails to follow up with what he actually said so people will only remember the first “story”.

Here’s the followup, apparently, Pope Francis is angry over the media slant taken in the first story.

 

[Tony_Micelli]

as i understand it, women were ordained as deaconesses but they were not equivalent with the deaconte. they didn’t perform the same roles as a deacon.

this is from the apostolic constitution of the nicene council:

A deaconess does not bless, nor perform anything belonging to the office of presbyters or deacons, but only is to keep the doors, and to minister to the presbyters in the baptizing of women, on account of decency.

though I suspect if Pope Francis wants to make women deacon equivalents, he will find an excuse to justify the change.

 

[Usige]

But, naturally, they’d be doing it *better. *Because we all know women are smarter, wiser, stronger, more creative, multi-taskers…

I think you forgot that women are obviously more humble too.

And maybe they’d be filling more needs. If I was in the Catholic church and needed a deacon, I’d rather go to a female than a male. Perhaps many other women feel that way, and maybe some men, too.

Well for me (and we are all allowed to think what we want I believe) I would just feel better about being in church I guess for one thing.

So if I follow, it has nothing to do with any theological reasoning, but simply a feeling of comfort with a woman versus a certain disquiet with men or a male only clergy?

 

[Usige]

While I would agree that this is an older story, Deacon, it is interesting what he says. In particular I wonder if these statements give any indication of what the Pope sees as the purpose of the commission.

“They said: ‘The Church opens the door to deaconesses.’ Really? I am a bit angry because this is not telling the truth of things.”

“We had heard that in the first centuries there were deaconesses,” he continued. “One could study this and one could make a commission. Nothing more has been requested.”

I think many are making it out as if the commission is to study the feasibility of allowing women to be ordained to the office of deacon. It is possible that Pope Francis is merely keeping his word about studying the nature of female deacons in the early Church without any intent of making any changes.

I don’t pretend to know the mind of the Holy Father, but given his apparent frustration with media attempts to turn the original conversation into a doctrinal change, I think we should not assume that the Pope’s intent is to do more than what he has stated. Namely to study the role of the deaconess in the early Church.

 

[Angel_Bradford]

JP II in his Apostolic Letter Ordinatio Sacerdotalis uses the scriptural evidence of the Apostle choosing the 7 Male servants (deacons) to demonstrate a male only clerical state. Some say Ordinatio Sacerdotalis pertains only to the Priesthood. But the scriptural example used by the Great Saint in his Letter is of deacons. So JP II uses scripture on deacons as evidence backing he male only clerical state.

Additionally Phyllis Zagano has been pushing for the ordination of women to the PRIESTHOOD for decades not just the diaconate.

This is not true, as even she has said, that ordination of women to the priesthood is not possible.