Synod should reflect on possibly allowing female deacons, says archbishop

  • Thread starter Thread starter gilliam
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Maximilan_Kolbe said:
Seriously. Some people insist on doing things just to do something. Unless there is a moral edict from the Holy Spirit, or scores of empirical data showing how this would be a boon for the faithful, why can’t some people just sit quietly and stop wasting everyone’s time with needless ideas?

What is the spark that inspired this “need?”
Click to expand...
The Devil knows that the Church cannot change doctrine. So, instead, he poisons the minds of churchmen and inspires them to assault orthodox praxis. Yes, the doctrines remain the same on paper, but by gutting the praxis, it eventually leads countless faithful to believe that the actual faith itself has changed.

This is what happened to the Mass. This is why, in my humble opinion, most self-identified Catholics don’t believe in the Real Presence today. Now it will happen to Marriage.

Lex orandi, lex credendi.
 
on_the_hill said:
Doubtful. The Holy Spirit generally only supports conservative positions.
Click to expand...
Yes those dreaded liberals. I must have briefly forgotten the forum I was on and faith I was discussing. Someone even mentioned liberal reforms back there.
 
Sy_Noe said:
Do we know if the Holy Spirit might not be the spark? I know some of the most inspirational sermons I have heard preach have been by female priests and pastors of other Christian communities. It might be a boon for some families to hear a female deacon preaching.
Click to expand...
But why is that? Because one agrees with their liberal views?

That would not be a very good reason at all. :nope: :dts:

In any case, ability to give good sermons is only a part of the job.

PS–What if I heard a speech by a racist person who thought a woman’s place was barefoot in the kitchen and pregnant. Should that person also be able to advance and be given special status?
 
edwest2 said:
That’s true, but some of the ‘gluten free’ commentary has taken on a certain tone that some find a bit much. Yes, caution is always wise.

Ed
Click to expand...
Not to derail the thread…but where is this gluten free commentary with an overbearing tone that you speak of? Just curious.
 
outremer said:
The Devil knows that the Church cannot change doctrine. So, instead, he poisons the minds of churchmen and inspires them to assault orthodox praxis. Yes, the doctrines remain the same on paper, but by gutting the praxis, it eventually leads countless faithful to believe that the actual faith itself has changed.
Click to expand...
👍

Yes indeed. Change ‘pastoral practice’ so that it appears to be contradictory to doctrine and the result will be more people thinking that doctrine has in fact changed, resulting in people acting contrary to doctrine thinking that the Church has changed what it believes.
 
gilliam said:
One of the leading experts on the history of women deacons reacts to Archbishop Durocher’s call for women deacons. praytellblog.com/index.php/2015/10/06/what-happened-at-the-synod-today-about-women-deacons/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=facebook …
Click to expand...
:confused: She seems to take it for granted that everyone knows there were women deacons in the early Church. Yet, everything I have learned, including the very liberal version of Chruch History offered in our diocese, makes clear that women deaconesses were not the same as deacons and that they were not ordained but rather instituted into a ministry in much the same way acolytes are today.
 
Brendan_64 said:
👍

Yes indeed. Change ‘pastoral practice’ so that it appears to be contradictory to doctrine and the result will be more people thinking that doctrine has in fact changed, resulting in people acting contrary to doctrine thinking that the Church has changed what it believes.
Click to expand...
Kinda like how many people think there’s such a thing as Catholic divorce now since the pope changed the process. I can’t even tell you how many people who I know who are non practicing Catholics who think many things have gone soft in the church since Pope Francis. The latest one I heard was 2 Catholics saying that with this new pope he’s all about love and getting married inside the church isn’t required anymore. I’m Sorry to say but for the people out there that never read the cathicism of the Catholic Church or even know
The faith at all, they are guided by a false version of what the main stream media reports and whatever makes them feel good. Does the Vatican not know that there are many out there distorting what pope Francis is all about?
 
Corki said:
:confused: She seems to take it for granted that everyone knows there were women deacons in the early Church. Yet, everything I have learned, including the very liberal version of Chruch History offered in our diocese, makes clear that women deaconesses were not the same as deacons and that they were not ordained but rather instituted into a ministry in much the same way acolytes are today.
Click to expand...
There’s debate on this and conflicting evidence. See my earlier post in this thread. I personally believe it was a sacramental separate from the sacrament of holy orders, but something much more profound than instituted acolytes. Perhaps more akin to the sacramentals of the profession of religious, the consecration of virgins, or the blessing of abbesses… or on the male side of the fence, the ordination of sub-deacons. The Church speaks of ordaining sub-deacons yet they do not receive the sacrament of holy orders. It is a special sacramental instituted by the Church.
 
No, the Synod should not consider starting a process that would inevitably lead to first a dicussion on women priests and then women priests being ordained. Father Duracher is being divisive, Mary is the model for women, ask St Teresa of Avila. Also St Paul in Timothy. The Anglican church shows us where such a decision leads. The management of peadophile priests from within the church was woeful, I pray God that the spirit of St Catherine of Sienna emerges and puts the Church back on track. The Church indeed needs direction from a Spirit filled woman. God Bless
 
Is there any actual proof that deaconesses in the early church didn’t preach and we’re just deacon’s wives there to baptize ladies in the nude?

I always had the impression that was more a tautological bit of whimsy:

a)I.e we have already decided (with no evidence whatsoever) that they weren’t real deaconesses, therefore they must have just been there to baptize naked ladies.

b) as far as proof that they weren’t real deaconesses (or even priestesses) we’ll refer back to a).

Not exactly convincing. I think we could infer from Paul that deaconesses during his time we’re not to preach to men, but that’s probably about it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top