What Will Francis Choose: ‘Expert’ Opinion or Orthodoxy?

[Cathoholic]

OCTOBER 29, 2019

What Will Francis Choose: ‘Expert’ Opinion or Orthodoxy?​

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

Nobody was under any illusions about the stakes at the Synod on the Amazon. Ostensibly, the synod was convened to help the Pope address concerns about the Amazon in consultation with Amazonian church authorities. It was evident from the very beginning, however, that the synod would serve instead as a staging-ground for progressively-minded bishops to challenge Church teachings that have stood unquestioned for millennia. Given that a well-known ally of liberation theology like Cláudio Cardinal Hummes was chosen as relator general, many assumed the final document was drafted before the synodal fathers even bought their plane tickets.

Now the synod is over—and, to quote its most vocal progressive, Bishop Erwin Kräutler: “It is what we expected, of course.”

The final document does indeed recommend the Pope allow for the ordination of married men in the Amazon and asks that he “reopen” the possibility of female deacons. Francis has consistently refused to rule out the possibility of either. The synodal fathers also request that Rome consider the possibility of formulating an “Amazonian Rite” liturgy.

As Robert Cardinal Sarah pointed out during the synod, . . . If married priests are a viable solution to the vocations crisis in the river basin, why shouldn’t they be so in Germany or France or America?

Likewise, Gerhard Cardinal Müller condemned any effort to use the synod as a platform for advancing the cause of female deacons. “The impossibility that a woman validly receives the Sacrament of Holy Orders in each of the three degrees is a truth contained in Revelation and it is thus infallibly confirmed by the Church’s Magisterium,” His Eminence warned. . . .

. . . Yet Pope Francis has previously expressed his reservations about changing the law of celibacy. This past January, Francis echoed Pope St. Paul VI in saying, “I prefer to give my life before changing the law of celibacy.” And, while he remains open to the possibility of ordaining women to the diaconate, the Holy Father seems to genuinely understand the gravity of such a decision. “I can’t do a decree of a sacramental nature without having the theological, historical foundation for it,” he said back in May, addressing a nun who supported women’s ordination. . . .

Loading…

www.crisismagazine.com

I was not aware that females could never be eligible for the office of an ordained deacon.

I knew it has never occurred before in a Holy Orders sense.

I knew that the Church has no authority to ordain females as priests or bishops.

Evidently if Pope Francis is considering ordaining females as deacons, he does not agree with Cardinal Müller (“impossibility”).
.
What do I think about that subject?

It is irrelevant what I think as regards to “the process” of the bishops discerning such things, so I won’t comment on that here and now.

 

[steph03]

Pope Francis will choose whatever the Holy Spirit guides him to choose.

 

[Weserthy]

I don’t think there is any chance that Pope Francis will be authorizing the ordination of women deacons as a result of the synod (at least in the final document that he will release soon, the long game is a different matter).

For one thing, the synod document just released did not outright request the female diaconate (it said many members requested the diaconate), rather, it basically asked to share its concerns with the commission, which we have now learned, will be reconvened (for what purpose given that it just carried out a study on the subject, who knows). I think what probably happened is that a lot of bishops did want to start ordaining women deacons, but maybe not the 2/3rds number that was needed, so they settled on the softer language they used to assure the votes for it to pass. Note that this section of the text actually received more votes for it than the section on married priests, which outright requested them without any “study” to be conducted.

Pope Francis made some comments very recently, within the past 12 months, indicating that he is cool on the possibility of women deacons. The commission he started came back with seemingly no evidence that women were ordained in the same manner as men, and he later answered a question that a woman religious posed to him about women deacons warning her that she must accept the teaching of the Church if it doesn’t fit with her personal expectations (see here:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1126806978251169792

).

This whole debate about women deacons is obviously a much larger deal than the married priests debate, since while the latter is ultimately a discipline (as much as it would be unwise to tinker with it), conferring the sacrament of holy orders on women would be heresy. It is interesting that to our knowledge, the commission, and most studies that have taken place over the years, have mainly focused on the historical precedence for women deacons, and not the theological question, namely, why would a woman be able to receive one degree of the sacrament but not the others, when it is one sacrament (holy orders) and not three separate sacraments? (deacon, priest, bishop).

I think that the recent report by the commission should be released, and see no reason why it should not be, unless perhaps the commission was more negative overall on women’s deacons than Pope Francis let on, and they don’t want to upset the progressive wing of the Church too much.

 

[stpurl]

Are you sure of that? The Holy Spirit can indeed guide us, but we are all of us free to disregard that guidance. Otherwise we’d have no free will.

Ultimately God is in charge and knows what is what and will work it all to good, but that is not quite the same as saying that any given person, Pope or no, will ‘do as the Holy Spirit guides him/her’.

 

[Hodos]

I think that scripture and Church history both demonstrate that women have fulfilled roles as deaconesses in the Church, and I see no reason that a woman could not receive Holy Orders to her office in the diaconate. The real question remains though is what are the boundaries of that office should it be reconstituted so that the Holy Orders issued to a deaconess would reflect her office. Theological liberals will look for anything to seize and twist for the purposes of advancing their agenda, so that should not be the thrust of the issue. The thrust of the issue is what do the scriptures support and allow for with respect to a female diaconate. While there are some passages that give a glimpse into what women can do, there is no one clear passage that can be pointed to in order to define the office. That is where the Pope is on shaky ground. And quite frankly, I see no reason scripturally or historically why celibacy should be a prerequisite for entering the priesthood.

 

[steph03]

Ultimately you are correct, God is in charge. He owns the ship we call the Church. And God has a captain for that ship. He is the Bishop of Rome. Jesus was very clear when he first named peter in matthew 16. As for me, I am just a janitor on the ship, it is not my decision on how the ship should be running.

Jesus replied, ‘Simon son of Jonah, you are a blessed man! Because it was no human agency that revealed this to you but my Father in heaven. So I now say to you: You are Peter and on this rock I will build my community. And the gates of the underworld can never overpower it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of Heaven: whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven; whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.’" (New jerusalem Bible)

 

[Cathoholic]

Weserthy . . .

I don’t think there is any chance that Pope Francis will be authorizing the ordination of women deacons as a result of the synod (at least in the final document that he will release soon, the long game is a different matter).

I think you are right.

I think we will see some sort of non-holy orders new office or reapplication of an old office (accolyte? – again. Non-holy orders) here. But time will tell.

 

[Cathoholic]

Hodos . . .

. . . quite frankly, I see no reason scripturally or historically why celibacy should be a prerequisite for entering the priesthood.

It’s not a prerequisite for entering the priesthood.

We have lots of married men in the Catholic Eastern Rites (Catholic. Not merely Eastern Orthodox) who are married priests.

But in the Latin Rite (with a few exceptions I won’t get into here),
celibacy is the disciplinary norm.

And if married priests are needed, we could always ask the Eastern Catholic Churches to step up to the “evangelism plate”.

And if not, they could at least bring in people, go among the people and train them as Eastern Rite Catholics for ordination.

I’ve heard that many of these “people of the forest” already live in bigger cities (80% is the figure I heard, but did not archive a source) so some of these men could be trained.

There is more going on here with the push for married priests, than the mere need for more priests it seems.

Chastity, along with poverty and obedience are called the three evangelical counsels.

They seek to imitate Christ in a more radical or “perfect” way.

Chastity in the form of celibacy . . . is a discipline to "follow the Lamb wherever he goes."

It is the more perfect way.

Celibacy by the way, is a GIFT. It’s not something these guys are called merely to live up to.

It is a gift that was in the past, and discerned for in the future. This gift lived out (with God’s grace), results in Heavenly glory for uniting yourself to Christ in this way.

St. Paul had this gift.

1st CORINTHIANS 7:7 7 I wish that all were as I myself am. But each has his own special gift from God, one of one kind and one of another.

Celibacy is particularly suited to evangelize peoples that have never heard the Gospel before.

Chastity includes celibacy for a virginal man who is entering the priesthoid with the intent of remaing chaste.

.

The three evangelical counsels.

• Chastity
• Poverty
• Obedience

How do the natives (historically) react to men with these gifts many times? . . . .

“Chastity - He doesn’t want our women.”
“Poverty - He doesn’t want our gold.”
“Obedience - He doesn’t want power over us.”

“OK. Let’s listen to what this guy has to say about this Jesus Christ.”

 

[Weserthy]

Weserthy . . .

I don’t think there is any chance that Pope Francis will be authorizing the ordination of women deacons as a result of the synod (at least in the final document that he will release soon, the long game is a different matter).

I would tend to agree with this. I think some kind of new or re-purposed role for women is inevitable as a result of this synod, for better or for worse, but not the diaconate. My guess on what will ultimately happen is that the topic of women deacons will be shifted off into commission-limbo for the immediate future. While the women diaconate will not become a reality, I don’t think there is any chance of it being definitively ruled out during this pontificate either. I think for defenders of orthodoxy, that is the best that can reasonably be hoped for.

 

[Hodos]

I understand that the requirement of celibacy is a discipline, not a requirement, except for the fact that it was created as a requirement through the passage of canon law, and is only granted as a dispensation occasionally. So what I said is within bounds. With regard to the use of 1 Corinthians 7:7, it would be wise to actually use this quote within context. Paul is addressing the general assembly of the Church, not addressing the requirements for clergy. It is speaking as an opinion generally to the Church who will experience trials and would be unencumbered by such trials if they are single. If you would like to look at those requirements specifically, you can look to the pastoral letters which address this directly. 1 Timothy 3 actually assumes that candidates for duty as overseers and deacons would be married, and that their ability to manage their family in the faith is one of the main means for evaluating whether someone is fit to hold the office. So while I see how celibacy can be a welcome gift to a man who is considering a clerical vocation, it was not the norm then, and quite frankly may be excluding many men who can point to their families as evidence for their proclivity to be a faithful servant of the Church.

 

[stpurl]

Absolutely, but that still does not guarantee that the Pope (God preserve and keep him) is necessarily going to always make perfect decisions. I’m with St. Catherine of Siena (who, of course, did not know that she was going to be named a saint when SHE spoke with the Pope of that time regarding her concerns); the Pope is the Vicar of Christ and I’m not, but that doesn’t mean that I regard his every word and every action and every thought as something that I have to hold as absolutely correct and binding. For example, if he supported the Astros and told me to root for them, I would (most respectfully) decline.

Go Nationals!

 

[steph03]

I have no problems with bringing up concerns, or even disagreeing with the Pope. But, he is in command of the ship and we follow his lead. As long as that is clear, no problem. Using the ship example, the problem is not with the janitor disagreeing with the captain on how to stir the ship. The problem is when the janitor tells everyone that the captain is wrong, or worse, when they start campaining against the captain. So unless there is a teaching that is contrary to an ecumenical council or something ex cathedra, there is no reason to go against the Bishop of Rome.

Oh and on the baseball front, I have to agree with the Pope

 

[stpurl]

LOL. . . hey, at least the Nationals won the NL title. . .for the first time in forever. . .

 

[Cathoholic]

steph03 . . .

Pope Francis will choose whatever the Holy Spirit guides him to choose.

I don’t know if you are talking about “inspiration” or not.

But for the benefit of lurkers that might be reading here, popes do not routinely teach with the charism of “inspiration”.

“Inspiration” is a positive charism.

Popes MAY teach “infallibly”.

But this does not mean every decision they make is “infallible”.

“Infallibility” is a negative charism.

It PREVENTS a pope from teaching the wrong thing in the areas of faith and morals . . . . under certain circumstances (many of those circumstances are outlined in Vatican I and Vatican II).

A decision for example, to allow married priests (in this circumstance), would not fall under inspiration or infallibility.

steph03 . . .

Pope Francis will choose whatever the Holy Spirit guides him to choose.

You may be right here Steph03.
But you may not be right too.

For now, I am waiting to see what the Pope even says.

 

[Cathoholic]

Hodos . . . .

I think that scripture and Church history both demonstrate that women have fulfilled roles as deaconesses in the Church . . .

Not in the sense of Holy Orders.

 

[Genesis315]

Experts have done a number on us since Vatican II. (Fr. Simon’s “Short History of the Hootenanny Mass and Other Absurdities” (pdf) has some good descriptions of the damage done by “experts.”)

As St. Paul says:

Rom 1:21 for although they knew God they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking and their senseless minds were darkened. 22 Claiming to be wise, they became fools, 23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man or birds or animals or reptiles.

24 Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves, 25 because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed for ever! Amen.

Interesting that many churchmen, who act as if they are wiser than all who came before them that embraced the tradition they received, seem to have problems with these two issues these days…

 

[Hodos]

Not in the sense of Holy Orders.

That is debatable since Holy Orders itself is not scriptural but based on later tradition. What we do know is that women were in fact deaconesses, whatever role that may be, and that this role did not include the teaching of men in the Church. We also know that they assisted in administration of the sacrament of baptism from Church history.

If you actually want to look at scripture in regard to Holy Orders what we see in Acts is that deacons were commissioned with an expressed purpose and function, that this involved the laying on of hands to bless them in this work, and that they were then sent with the authority of the Church to accomplish that work. From that standpoint, I see no reason why a woman could not be similarly invested with authority to carry out specific functions of the Church, under the Church’s authority, in the ministry of a deaconess.

 

[stpurl]

Why do they need a title of ‘deaconess’ when the function of deaconess of old was assisting with baptism of nude women? How often do we have nude full immersion baptisms in the Catholic Church today?

Why does a woman need to have ‘authority’ and a name given to her in order to carry out 'specific functions of the Church, which will NOT include the specific function that was the ORIGINAL reason for said ‘deaconess’ .

And are we going to make sure these women are already the wives of deacons? Because those women were usually if not always the ones who were deaconesses. Not just random women of the congregation.

Such a tempest and such an artificiality. I’d have a heck of a lot more respect for women who were clamoring to the Vatican to be allowed to do more work of ANY kind, without asking them for titles and powers and all kinds of what they think they ‘need’ or ‘deserve’. Seems a bit more Christian to me.

 

[OneSheep]

Not in the sense of Holy Orders.

I tried to look up when “holy orders” became an official “sacrament”, but could not find it. There may have been some kind of “ordination” for women deacons, just as for men deacons, that predate such designation.

There is an answer to this question, but I don’t know it. Do you? It could have been as late as the mid-1500s, the council of Trent.

From that standpoint, I see no reason why a woman could not be similarly invested with authority to carry out specific functions of the Church, under the Church’s authority, in the ministry of a deaconess.

I don’t see a reason either.

 

[Cathoholic]

OneSheep . . .

I tried to look up when “holy orders” became an official “sacrament” . . .

Jesus gave us the Seven Sacraments OneSheep.