Survey: Religious superiors support possibility of women deacons

  • Thread starter Thread starter SuscipeMeDomine
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

SuscipeMeDomine

Guest
From Catholic News Service
https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/...rs-support-possibility-of-women-deacons-40410
A survey of both male and female religious superiors in the U.S. found that most believe that the Church can and should ordain women as deacons.
…
The survey, released this week by The Center for Applied Research in the Apostolate at Georgetown University (CARA), reached out to all 777 U.S. religious institutes and societies of apostolic life. These included members of the Conference of Major Superiors of Men (CMSM), the Council of Major Superiors of Women Religious (CMSWR), and the Leadership Conference of Women Religious (LCWR), as well as 137 contemplative women’s groups.
Click to expand...
 
“They said: ‘The Church opens the door to deaconesses.’ Really? I am a bit angry because this is not telling the truth of things,” the pope said.
“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.”
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
I thought religious superiors would be more orthodox, but the article makes it seem like they want women priests and ordained women deacons.
 
From the report, respondents were asked about influences on their position of women deacons. 38% cited Joan Chittister, OSB; 36% cited Sandra Schneiders, IHM; and 15% cited Phyllis Zagano (89% of all respondents). I think it is safe to say that the sampled population is not representative of the greater population.
 
Technically it could happen, depending on what one means by “deacon.”
 
Last edited:
That’s a lot of accusation there!

Religious orders to a lot of good, especially for the most vulnerable around us.

Let’s not get too stressed just because some support women deacons — when in fact that could very much be a possibility, depending on what someone means by “ordain” and “deacon.”
 
catholic1seeks said:
Let’s not get too stressed just because some support women deacons — when in fact that could very much be a possibility, depending on what someone means by “ordain” and “deacon.”
Click to expand...
Let’s be honest here. I would wager that most of those religious superiors surveyed who voted in favor of women deacons, would likely be in favor of women priests too. And as tseleehw pointed out, other heinous things as well. Maybe not the majority, but more than a few.
 
I’m not really sure how to determine this either way.

Regardless, the church is indebted to the great work carried out by Catholic religious communities. I would never want to put them in a bad light or accuse them of something I have no real evidence for.

God Himself knows my own life could use the example of these wonderful men and women!
 
Last edited:
The early church had female deacons. Their role was not the same as current deacons (they weren’t clergy)…
 
You’re right it gets sticky.

Because with many of these rolls, they aren’t inherently connected to ordained ministry, even if they are currently legally so. For example, baptizing is not inherently connected to the ordained ministry. I suppose this could change. Even with preaching.
 
So was it terrible when the early church had women deacons?

Again, we have to be careful in how we are using our terms.
 
Considering that altar girls, EMHCs, and communion in the hand are all licit, what is your point?
 
His point is probably that it’s a slippery slope to women becoming priests, at which point the entire church is apparently taken over by women and all the men quit en masse and go to Hell . Amirite?
 
Preach is inherently connected to ordination, for deacons as well as priests, but especially for bishops.

Teach is hard to distinguish from preaching, but women have been dedicated to teaching for centuries.

Marry is done by men and women. The ordained can witness for the Church, but their role is not sacramental, more jurisdictional.

Bury has been the realm of women for millennia, as in Mary Magdalene et alia going to perform the rites of burial on Easter morning. It would be odd to exclude women here.

Baptize can be done by anyone, but a formal baptism is another jurisdictional issue. This was a place where female deacons were active in the early Church.

Proclaim is preaching isn’t it? Proclamation of the Gospel? The Exsultet? Mary Magdalene was entrusted with this by Angels, Jesus, on Easter, so it is hard to make a case againrt this.

Bless is clerical role? Not entirely, but somewhat.

Minister Holy Communion is done by women extraordinarily, hard to see why it could not be ordinary.

More broadly, deacons do not have anything beyond what a bishop gives them to do. If the bishop approves, I do not see why a woman cannot do any of these. What is “sticky”?
 
I don’t need to reference anything other than the fact that these are all licit, unless a bishop sees fit to bar these practices in his diocese there isn’t anything else for us to talk about…
 
Such a bishop would have bigger problems than the opinion of one or the other layperson…
 
Those problems (if they actually exist) raise significant above the pay grade of lay people moaning on the internet…
 
Boy ain’t that the truth! I agree one should familiarize themselves with the opinions of their conference of bishops and endeavor to be obedient to those Instructions. It can be a challenge when we personally disagree with the decisions of our conference of bishops…

Thank you for the prayers! I need as many as I can get.
 
Last edited:
I find it interesting that both male and female superiors support this idea. I think it could have real implications for women’s communities. They often have trouble getting priests when needed. A deacon in the community who could lead a communion service or other liturgy when needed could be a real blessing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top