Vatican newspaper examines deaconesses and the early Church [CC]
- Status
L
LittleFlower378
Guest
By ‘studying women in the diaconate’ the Pope means studying deaconesses. I’m pretty sure its a dogma that only men can be ordained.
F
FrDavid96
Guest
Actually, no, this is not an open issue.
From the Catechism:
1577 “Only a baptized man (vir) validly receives sacred ordination.” The Lord Jesus chose men (viri) to form the college of the twelve apostles, and the apostles did the same when they chose collaborators to succeed them in their ministry. The college of bishops, with whom the priests are united in the priesthood, makes the college of the twelve an ever-present and ever-active reality until Christ’s return. the Church recognizes herself to be bound by this choice made by the Lord himself. For this reason the ordination of women is not possible.
Emphasis added, of course.
There is nothing open about the question.
From the Catechism:
1577 “Only a baptized man (vir) validly receives sacred ordination.” The Lord Jesus chose men (viri) to form the college of the twelve apostles, and the apostles did the same when they chose collaborators to succeed them in their ministry. The college of bishops, with whom the priests are united in the priesthood, makes the college of the twelve an ever-present and ever-active reality until Christ’s return. the Church recognizes herself to be bound by this choice made by the Lord himself. For this reason the ordination of women is not possible.
Emphasis added, of course.
There is nothing open about the question.
C
ComplineSanFran
Guest
Considering the Commission that has been created to study the issue, with Phyllis Zagano on it, I believe it will probably throw the question wide open.
S
SyroMalankara
Guest
I don’t think it’ll throw anything wide open. “Deaconess” may be re-introduced, but only in a very limited way - like among Carthusian nuns - and they will not be female deacons.
U
Usige
Guest
And that is where I keep trying to find more information on the Sacramental Theology of Holy Orders. In specific the continuity and harmony between the 3 degrees. Most of the theology of holy orders I find focus on the priesthood with some information relating to bishops, but there seems to be very little on the diaconate as it relates to the presbyteriate and episcopate. In other words it seems most of the theology is on the priesthood with the bishop having additions and deacons having exclusions. I have as yet to find a good treatise on Holy orders itself starting with the sacramental underpinnings as the basis and then explaining the 3 degrees as extensions of that fundamental underpinning.
Ordinatio sacerdotalis confirms that priestly ordination may only be conferred to men, but it specifically left out the lowest degree in the hierarchy. The first bolded section is in reference to CIC 1024 which confirms that only men may receive sacramental ordination. Many are now questioning if this is simply a legislative matter and a discipline that may be changed. It would seem if it is one sacrament in 3 degrees, that the restriction would apply to the sacrament itself and not simply to parts of the whole, but that is more gut feeling then a studied theological reasoning.
Reading through the article (with very, very limited skill in Italian), it seems to focus on some 30 historical inscriptions mentioning women as deacons. It appears to be a rehash of previous discussions that say “yes we have women associated with the title of deacon”. I don’t think there is any dispute that *diakonos *has been used to refer to women in history, but the discussion is if the title always implied an ordained ministry or simply referred to a servant (of any stripe) to the Church. One of the interesting parts is that the vast majority of references to “female deacons” are from Asia Minor/Turkey with almost zero reference in the western Church. It raises the question if it was a difference in word usage or perhaps differences in theology or some other reason that “female deacons” have never been universal in the whole Church.
U
Usige
Guest
Yes, and poor woman will have nothing to write on if her pet project is answered once and for all either way.
I suspect it will just be another study that says “we can’t answer it one way or another” and kick the can down the way for another 10 - 20 years until the next wave of feminist demand a change. Rinse and repeat.
Nothing in the historical record proves that an ordained female diaconate has ever existed as a stable ministry in the Church. There is enough ambiguity that one likely cannot shut the door either way. The Holy Father also has to ask if there is a pressing need to do so given that it will very likely cause a rupture in the Church not unlike the Anglican/Episcopalians saw when they opened ordinations to women. The risk would seem to require more than a handful of inscriptions that are not conclusively in favor of a female diaconate.
U
Usige
Guest
If they chose to reintroduce an instituted, but non-ordained, ministry of service then I certainly hope they chose another name than deaconess. There is already enough confusion around what a deacon is (I’ve talked to many that think it’s an honorific for a glorified altar boy). We don’t want to throw yet another thing into blurring the line into what a deacon is and is not.
J
Just_Lurking
Guest
My bet is that the current commission will simply conclude that the Church does indeed have the authority to sacramentally ordain women to the diaconate. Then what will be kicked down the way is the question of what, if anything, should the modern Church do in response to this knowledge.
U
Usige
Guest
Just curious why you think that will be the conclusion?
Even the best arguments for female deacons that I’ve seen have been countered fairly convincingly. The sheer weight of tradition so vastly outweighs the smattering of support that I could only see it as an exception in very closely prescribed situations.
I think if the commission and the Holy Father say that it is possible to ordain women, that it would not be kicked down the road. Feminist would not let it linger. As soon as there was an opening, however small, they would be a constant demand that women be ordained immediately. Heck we already have women simulating ordination ro the priesthood despite a definitive ruling in the negative 20 years ago. This would be a crack they are looking for to wedge the door open with all speed.
A
_Abyssinia
Guest
Consider this excerpt from a response Pope Francis gave when he was asked about deaconesses:
The International Theological Comission, according to this, “devoted over five years of research to the topic of the history and theology of the diaconate before approving the text of its study at its recently concluded meeting.”
The document came out originally in 2002. You can read the document from The International Theological Comission here:
vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/cti_documents/rc_con_cfaith_pro_05072004_diaconate_en.html
All bold text by me.
catholicnewsagency.com/news/full-text-pope-francis-inflight-press-conference-from-armenia-45222/
The International Theological Comission, according to this, “devoted over five years of research to the topic of the history and theology of the diaconate before approving the text of its study at its recently concluded meeting.”
catholicnewsagency.com/news/pope-francis-says-hes-open-to-studying-the-female-diaconate-94916/
The document came out originally in 2002. You can read the document from The International Theological Comission here:
vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/cti_documents/rc_con_cfaith_pro_05072004_diaconate_en.html
catholicnewsagency.com/news/theologian-dismisses-call-for-women-deacons/
All bold text by me.
U
Usige
Guest
_Abyssinia, those are many of the arguments that I have seen to counter the scant historical mention of female deacons. I don’t know that significant new developments over the last 10 years really address those findings. Despite that many simply gloss over the arguments that female deacons always worked under a male deacon or priest. I am interested to see if new arguments or historical evidence is presented, but I doubt it. One thing very few proponents do is address the question from a theological rather than a historical basis. I have simply never seen a convincing theological argument that would allow the divorcing of the diaconate from the priesthood as part of the continuum of a single sacrament.
F
FrDavid96
Guest
That is not a known fact. It is a “red herring” thrown out there by those who wish to distort the meaning of the document. It is a document about the priesthood (hence the title) so it is only natural that it would not address specifically the issue of diaconal ordination. That does not mean that the question is left open. It merely means that it is not being addressed at that moment. There is quite a bit of difference.
To say that “many are questioning it” is not the same as the Church questioning it. Many question the divinity of Christ. That doesn’t mean it’s an open question as far as the Church is concerned.
Fair enough as it applies to you personally. But it is indeed “studied theological reasoning” in the mind of the Church. In other words, you’re on rock solid theological grounds there.
This is a distinction which must be made. There are no historical references to women deacons; instead there are references to deaconesses. This is not merely an accident of vocabulary. The office of deaconess was always completely and entirely distinct from the Order of Deacon. Every single piece of historical evidence actually proves that deaconesses were not deacons. In fact, most of those references are actually statements articulating that deaconesses are not deacons. For example, there is a line in the Apostolic Constitutions which many will cite as proving female deacons. The sentence actually reads (something like, since I am writing from memory) “the deaconess is not a deacon.” People will say “look here, see the word deaconess” but they point to the presence of one word while ignoring the sentence.
Actually, the word means a female servant. It could mean any female servant. Like many of our early Christian words, they borrowed the word from everyday language. It also meant a woman whose job was to serve food in an tavern.
Now, in an ecclesial context, yes, the word does refer to a specific office in the Church. A deaconess had to be formally installed. There were ceremonies for installing a deaconess. The office was more than just any woman who had some role in the Church.
Yes, differences. However, it is universal that there were never female deacons. There were deaconesses. Again, an absolutely essential distinction.
F
FrDavid96
Guest
The real problem is that they take neither a theological nor a historical approach. The simple fact is that the approach they take is one of deception. The amount of misdirection and faulty logic they employ is truly mind-boggling. In any other discipline, their methods of reasoning would be laughed out of the room.
For example, one of the most cited sources they employ is what they claim to be a translation of an ancient ceremony for ordaining a deaconess, in which they point to the ‘fact’ that the words and gestures of ordination are the same for men as they are for women. That sounds very convincing, until one actually goes back and traces the sources. The reality is that a modern day translator took the ceremony for a deaconess, noticed that the ordination was absent, and took the liberty of inserting the ordination into the ceremony. This so-called ancient ceremony did not exist until it was composed in the 1970s.
That is the academic equivalent of someone who claims that George Washing liked to watch television by making a copy of a famous 1700s portrait and having a modern-day artist add a TV to the painting, under the pretense that it was there all along until someone in the 1800’s erased it, then saying that we have a 200 year old painting of George watching TV.
P
Polycarp1
Guest
True and we can’t assume historical records are true just because they’re “historical”. In a thousand years will we assume something must be true because historically it was on the Internet?
G
gilliam
Guest
I think the whole point of the commission is to look into the history and filter out what can or can not be documented as historical fact and report.
It provides a baseline for going forward.
J
Just_Lurking
Guest
In Ordinatio Sacerdotalis, Pope John Paul II didn’t just say it’s not a good idea to ordain female priests, or that there isn’t really a necessary role for female priests in the modern Chruch. Instead, he cut to the heart of matter, and said that the Church doesn’t even possess the authority to ordain female priests. He did this because that is in fact the key, fundamental question at hand.
Similarly, the key, fundamental question that is being raised by the existence of historic deaconesses is whether the Church has the authority to sacramentally ordain women to the diaconate. All other questions that are being raised are secondary, such as:
- Did historical deaconesses have a liturgical role? - No
- Were sacramentally ordained deaconesses commonplace in all regions and eras in the early Church? - No
- Were there regions and eras in the early Church that had deaconesses who were not ordained? - Yes
- Was it the case that in some regions and eras of the early Church the term “deaconess” referred to deacon’s wives, or widows, or virgins? - Yes
F
FrDavid96
Guest
Actually, that’s already been done.
In reality, this is nothing more significant than being an expression of HH Francis’s style of Petrine ministry. As a Jesuit, he is always listening and discerning. So, when the question was posed to him, rather than say “the matter is closed” he welcomed a discussion.
A Vatican Commission already studied this matter sometime prior to October 2002.
Here is a text that refers to the Commission’s work. press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/it/bollettino/pubblico/2002/10/17/0512/01602.html
scroll down for the English
I am looking for the Commission’s actual text.
Here is the text that summarizes the Commission’s work
The general secretary of the International Theological Commission, Father Georges Cottier, O.P., has responded to certain questions about the Commission’s study of the diaconate raised by the October 8th issue of La Croix. Fr. Cottier stated that the Commission’s study has not concluded that the possibilty that women could be ordained to the diaconate remains open, as asserted by La Croix, but rather tends to support the exclusion of this possibility.
The Commission of theologians, even if it has not the role of pronouncing with the authority which is characteristic of the Magisterium, presented two important indications which emerge from study of the matter. In the first place, the Commission observed that the deaconesses mentioned in the tradition of the early Church cannot simply be assimilated to ordained deacons. In support of this conclusion, Fr. Cottier noted that both the rite of institution and the functions exercised by deaconesses distinguished them from ordained deacons.
Furthermore, Fr. Cottier noted that the Commission’s study reaffirmed the unity of the sacrament of Holy Orders. The distinction between the ministry of bishops and priests, on the one hand, and that of deacons, on the other hand, is nonetheless embraced within the unity of the sacrament of Holy Orders. The commission’s reaffirmation of this teaching arose from a careful study of the ecclesial tradition, of the documents of the Second Vatican Council, and of the postconciliar Magisterium of the Church.
Fr. Cottier stated that “it belongs to the Magisterium to pronounce with authority on the question, taking into account the historical and theological research presented by the study of the International Theological Commission.”
The International Theological Commission devoted over five years of research to the topic of the history and theology of the diaconate before approving the text of its study at its recently concluded meeting. The study was produced at the request of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.
emphasis added
F
FrDavid96
Guest
Here is the text from the International Theological Commission from 2002
gsearch.vatican.va/search?q=cache:eVcHAJ48xdwJ:www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/cti_documents/rc_con_cfaith_pro_05072004_diaconate_en.html+deaconess&client=default_frontend&output=xml_no_dtd&proxystylesheet=default_frontend&ie=UTF-8&access=p&oe=ISO-8859-1
gsearch.vatican.va/search?q=cache:eVcHAJ48xdwJ:www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/cti_documents/rc_con_cfaith_pro_05072004_diaconate_en.html+deaconess&client=default_frontend&output=xml_no_dtd&proxystylesheet=default_frontend&ie=UTF-8&access=p&oe=ISO-8859-1
G
gilliam
Guest
There were some unanswered questions about the history of the early Church not addressed in 2002 that the current commission will be delving into. The history was deliberately not settled in 2002.
- Status