Why do you believe that only men can be ordained as deacons?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Deacon2006
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
D

Deacon2006

Guest
I started this thread because of an excellent discussion I was having with a couple of very faithful, if not a tad bit legalistic posters. The discussion was moving into areas that I felt merited a new thread for more detail.

My next post in this thread will present my first arguement why I believe women’s ordination to the deaconate is the mirage of the dissenter and radical.

God Bless
 
"Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur ! "

Well, Latin IS profound language! 😉
 
The deaconate is the step before priesthood and only men can be priests.

I had this same conversation with the nun in my old parish who ran the religious education. But then, she believed that women should be priests. Needless to say, I didn’t enroll my children in her RE classes again.
 
The female deaconess that has been spoken of in Orthodox circles lately has nothing to do with the diaconate.

It is not part of Holy Orders.

When there were deaconesses they served a role in ministering to women as society was different back then. They also assisted in the baptism of women as baptism was done in the nude.

They also had no liturgical role.

They filled a role in society that the nun has taken up. Before there were uncloistered nuns, deaconesses did what those nuns do today.

Women can not be ordained deacons, just as they can not be ordained priests. The deaconess is not a deacon.
 
For one, deaconesses are not necessary. When the Church had them (in non-monastic settings), there were adult baptisms, which were done nude. The deaconesses helped the bishop or priest (who were blindfolded when the catechumen as female) with the baptism and chrismation, guiding the hands and whatnot. Also they took communion to and otherwise assited with widows. The deaconate has lost almost all notions of service outside of the Liturgy (this is the situation in the East) or absolutely all sense of service (as is or at least was the case in the Latin Church) to where the order is a mere stepping stone or formality one one’s way to the priesthood. Either which way, the role of the deacon has changed significantly since the early Church.

In Christ,
Adam
 
What Adam says is great but I want to add.

There were never woman deacons. There were deaconesses. I believe that this in part shows that there was a difference.

And again, their role disappeared as the non-cloistered nun appeared.
 
The primary reason I believe that Holy Orders in the degree of Deacon can only be available to men stems in part from the earliest revealed truth of our Christian faith. It is very clear from the scriptures what was required to be ordained as a Deacon in the apostolic times.

Brothers, select from among you seven reputable men, filled with the Spirit and wisdom, whom we shall appoint to this task, whereas we shall devote ourselves to prayer and to the ministry of the word." The proposal was acceptable to the whole community, so they choose Stephen, a man filled with faith and the holy Spirit, also Philip, Prochorus, Nicanor, Timon, Parmenas, and Nicholas of Antioch, a convert to Judaism. They presented these men to the apostles who prayed and laid hands on them. Acts 6

The Apostles did not call on the men (brothers) to select women, or men and women, they called on them to select men. This is the most basic of all teachings and perhaps the clearest of all scriptural basis for any of the sacraments

The fact that deacons existed prior to priests creates a logic trap that says if a bishop, priest and deacon all receive Holy Orders how can it be that the second to receive orders is different from the third to receive orders?

Paul also makes it clear that deacons are men in the epistle to Timothy:
“Deacons must be serious not double tongued, not addicted to much wine, not greedy for gain; they must hold the mystery of the faith with a clear conscience. And let them also be tested first; then if they prove themselves blameless let them serve as deacons. The women likewise must be serious, no slanderers, but temperate, faithful in all things. Let deacons be the husband of one wife, and let them manage their children and their households well;….”

Many misinterpret the meaning of women in this passage to mean they were deacons as well and reject the obvious meaning of the women being the deacons wives. If you missed that point then Paul clears it up by stating the marriage prohibitions in strictly male terms. That pastoral guidance about the wives is as important today as it was then.

Finally under full disclosure I must introduce the scriptural passages in Romans 6 where Paul calls Phoebe usuaalyy translated to be deacon/ness. While the context makes it hard to clearly see if we are talking about a deacon of holy orders, a deaconesses or as St Thomas Aquinas calls her a sister. What is very clear about Paul is that at this time within the church titles were extremely fluid and he an apostle would sometimes call himself a deacon. The application of titles that reflect the sacramental reality being established by The Holy Spirit in Christ’s church obviously took time to align themselves.

continued
 
continued

What is clear is that before the close of the apostolic era it was common only to refer to deacons as configured spiritually to the personhood of Christ.

“Let everyone revere the deacons as Jesus Christ, the bishop as the image of the Father, and the presbyters as the senate of God and the assembly of the Apostles. For without them one cannot speak of the Church”

and again St Ignatius of Antioch states

“Take care, therefore, to be confirmed in the decrees of the Lord and of the apostles, in order that in everything you do, you may prosper in body and in soul, in faith and in love, in Son and in Father and in Spirit, in beginning and in end, together with your most reverend bishop; and with that fittingly woven spiritual crown, the presbytery; and with the deacons, men of God. Be subject to the bishop and to one another as Jesus Christ was subject to the Father, and the apostles were subject to Christ and to the Father; so that there may be unity in both body and spirit”

Finally The Didache (60’s-90’sAD) has this to say:

Appoint, therefore, for yourselves, bishops and deacons worthy of the Lord, men meek, and not lovers of money, and truthful and proved; for they also render to you the service of prophets and teachers.

Based on the scriptural evidence of the early church I believe that Holy Orders as we understand it today were only applied to men. The non-biblical testimony of apostolic church also bears this conclusion out.

God Bless
 
To begin by answering your question: Because the Catholic Church teaches, and has always taught, that she only has the authority to ordain men.

There are some Early Church texts (I don’t have my copy of “The Faith of the Early Fathers” with me so I don’t have citations) that reference deaconesses; however, if you read the description of the roles they filled and the description of the rites of ordination, it is clear that these women were essentially like nuns. They served special roles in the Church and were recognized for this, but they were never ordained to the deaconate by the laying on of hands from a bishop. The description of the rites of ordination make it clear that only men were ordained to the diaconate.
 
One of the vows a man takes, is obedience to his bishop. Can you picture a lady desiring to do that? Just kiddin…
 
40.png
Deacon2006:
Why do you believe that only men can be ordained as deacons?

God Bless
Click to expand...
Because the Church does not, nor has it ever allowed the ordination of women.

That said, the Church has not declared that the diaconate is off limits to women. If the pope said women could be ordained (and there is nothing that is absolutely stopping him from doing this), I would follow the new Church teaching.

Conversely, I do wish the pope would once and for all proclaim that women cannot be ordained as deacons. The Church moves slowly. I expect this pronouncement within another 5-10 years.
 
40.png
Crusader:
Conversely, I do wish the pope would once and for all proclaim that women cannot be ordained as deacons. The Church moves slowly. I expect this pronouncement within another 5-10 years.
Click to expand...
It will be a sad day when that happens, not because it clarifies an issue that the faithful has known for 2000 years but that we have once again tempted God through the pope and demanded a miracle ie dogma. It is a real shame that modern catholics want to only believe what is taught by dogma. This mentality breeds contempt for other forms of teaching from the church that borders on heresy. Can you imagine before Vatican 1 actually debating what was taught by the pope based on the adjectives he used? Was it strong enough? Was it nuianced enough? Its all really quite pathectic to hear this pharisee nonensense coming from the mouths of some catholics.

God Bless
 
I believe it because the Church teaches it.

Why doesn’t anyone put faith in their Church ahead of personal opinion anymore?

We are supposed to believe the Church’s teachings on faith and morals first, whether we ever come to fully understand and/or appreciate the reason the Church teaches them is secondary to having faith in it as the means for our salvation.

I don’t suppose I will ever completely understand the trinity or things like the filioque, but that does not matter.

I am taught to have "the simple faith of a peasant girl…: as the Jesuit DeCaussade wrote.

I must believe first and understand later. It is not important that every Christian be a professional apologist or have degrees in Dogmatic or moral theology.

It is important that they believe in Jesus and follow his teachings. In Jr. High, I did not fully understand the Church’s teaching on one issue, but I did not leave Her while I struggled with it and God did not abandon me while I came to see the sense behind His reasoning.

I have met scores and hundreds of women who completely accept the Church’s teaching on vocations. It would be patently absurd to ordain women as clergy and deacons, not because women are less intelligent, faithful or as competent as men - but because Christ did not choose women for his apostles and the Church is apostolic in character.

Those who are hung up on this would do well to remind themselves that being a priest or deacon is not a reward for being a man, or a position of power. They are our servants.

Any lay person, male or female who is getting poor service from them is duty bound to report any transgressions to Rome or any illegalities to the civil authorities.

This is a closed issue as far as the Church has stated. I feel uncomfortable seeing it posted here all the time. I try to limit my response and not quote what the Church has written on this dead issue chapter and verse but ask you to drop this thread.

Responsible Catholics do not talk about this outside the communion but I would not bother writing or petitioning Rome on this one - when it says and issue is closed they mean it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top