(Image: Prassede Mosaic depicting “Episcopa” Theodora, believed by feminist theologians to be an example of women’s ordination in the Early Church; Source)
On May 12, 2016, during a meeting with 800 women serving as general superiors of religious orders from around the world, Pope Francis surprised Catholics everywhere when he announced that he was preparing to set up a commission to investigate “deaconnesses” in the early Church — a proposal that came in response to a question as to whether such women might have a role in 21st century Catholicism. Shortly thereafter, Pope Francis’ favorite harbinger of radical change, Cardinal Walter Kasper, began advancing the issue in an interview with La Repubblica:
“There is going to be a fierce debate, I think. On this issue, the Church is split down the middle,” German Cardinal Walter Kasper said in an interview with Italy’s La Repubblica.
Kasper’s comments came a day after Francis said he would set up a commission to study the possibility of having women serving as deacons, ordained members of the clergy who can carry out many of the duties of priests.
Kasper, one of the most influential liberal voices in Catholicism, said Francis wanted the issues aired after years of demands for women to have a greater role in the Church hierarchy.
“I personally don’t have a clear position but I am always open to and ready for innovation,” Kasper said, adding it was impossible to predict the outcome of the review.
“If you look at what has happened in the past, it would lead you to say no (to female deacons). But anything is possible.” [emphasis added]
At the time, I shortsightedly observed that I didn’t “expect much movement on female deacons. They’ll dredge it up and look at it all over again, and very little will come of it, despite the excitement of Fr. James Martin and company.” My primary concern was the near-constant introduction of novelty, and the instability it causes in the Catholic mindset.
And at first, it appeared I might have been correct. After a brief flurry in the Catholic media, the matter died down from public view as the controversy over the then newly-released post synodal apostolic exhortation, Amoris Laetitia, surged. Nevertheless, in August of 2016, the commission proposed by Pope Francis was established. And quietly, the question of a female diaconate has continuously been advanced behind the scenes ever since.
Looking back over the past year it’s possible to observe small glimpses of this agenda surfacing. In May 2016, Dr. Stefan Sander, a German theologian and the managing director of the International Diaconate Center in Rottenburg, was received in a papal audience. Dr. Sander has been on record as an advocate for the female diaconate, and he published a report that same month with Radio Vatikan — the German division of Vatican Radio — entitled, “The Church Needs Women as Deaconesses.” As Maike Hickson reported at the time:
Sander now claims, according to katholisch.de, that “there is no dogmatic stipulation that would exclude women from the diaconate.” As Sander told Radio Vatikan: “A diaconal Church needs the deacon, and a diaconal Church needs the women!” He continues, by saying: “In my view, this Church also needs women as deaconesses.”
In June 2016, there was another blip on the radar. A meeting of the group “Women’s Ordination Worldwide” was held in Rome, and the group was granted an audience with the Vatican Secretariat of State. A petition with their concerns was given to the pope, and they were allowed to protest in the gardens of Castel Sant’Angelo on the very same day that the Pope was offering a jubilee mass for priests in St Peter’s Square. Members of the group were also given tickets to attend that papal Mass for priests, a symbolic gesture not lost on their leadership:
“We thought that the Jubilee for Priests was a perfect time to really give an offering and a celebration for all women called to priesthood,” said Kate McElwee, co-executive director of the Women’s Ordination Conference, the U.S.-based member of WOW. “We really wanted to have this as a celebration and a serious conversation of women in the church.”
In August of 2016, a statement was released by the Central Committee of German Catholics (Zentralrat der Deutschen Katholiken – ZDK) — the largest lay organization in that country — advocating a relaxation of the rules of priestly celibacy in response to Germany’s devastating vocational crisis. In the statement from ZDK, there was another theme – a proposal to further discuss the idea of female deacons.
The issue of relaxing priestly celibacy came up again in September 2016, in separate reports from Vaticanistas Marco Tosatti and Sandro Magister. And while the question of female deacons was not specifically addressed in these reports, the not uncommon intermingling of calls for the relaxation of priestly celibacy and a move toward the female diaconate, as seen in the ZDK statement above, should be remembered when evaluating such proposals. At the time, Magister spoke of a possible forthcoming “Amazon synod” that would address certain issues that might therefore also invite conversation on the female diaconate:
There is renewed vigor behind the rumor that Jorge Mario Bergoglio wants to assign to the next worldwide synod of bishops, scheduled for 2018, precisely the question of ordained ministers, bishops, priests, deacons, including the ordination of married men.
In December 2016, noted liberation theologian Leonardo Boff gave an interview to the German newspaper Kölner Stadt-Anzeiger. In her translation of that interview, Maike Hickson reported a noteworthy observation by Boff which echoed Magister’s prediction:
[Boff]: …Only recently, Cardinal Walter Kasper, a close confidant of the pope, told me that soon there will be some great surprises.
Q: What do you expect?
Who knows? Perhaps a diaconate for women, after all. Or the possibility that married priests may be again engaged in pastoral care. That is an explicit request from the Brazilian bishops to the pope, especially from his friend, the retired Brazilian Curial Cardinal Claudio Hummes. I have heard that the pope wants to meet this request – for now and for a certain experimental period in Brazil. [emphasis added]
What was only rumor at the time of Magister’s report and Boff’s interview has since been at least partially confirmed as fact. We now know that the next synod will take place in 2018, and that the topic will be “Youth, faith and vocational discernment”. In the synod’s preparatory document, released in January 2017, there is nothing specifically addressing priestly celibacy or the female diaconate, but there is language that could easily establish the groundwork for such innovations:
Accompanying young people requires going beyond a preconceived framework, encountering young people where they are, adapting to their times and pace of life and taking them seriously. This is to be done as young people seek to make sense of the reality in which they live and to utilize the message which they have received in words and deeds in their daily attempts to create a personal history and in the more-or-less conscious search for meaning in their lives.
[…]
Precisely because the proposed message involves the freedom of young people, every community needs to give importance to creative ways of addressing young people in a personal way and supporting personal development. In many cases, the task involves learning to allow for something new and not stifling what is new by attempting to apply a preconceived framework. No seed for vocations can be fruitful if approached with a closed and “complacent pastoral attitude that says: ‘We have always done it this way’” and without people being “bold and creative in this task of rethinking the goals, structures, style and methods of evangelization in their respective communities” (Evangelii gaudium, 33). [emphasis added]
In February 2017, Magister again noted a more significant development in the push toward a female diaconate — one which comes by way of revisiting the question of women’s ordination to the priesthood:
On August 2, 2016, Pope Francis instituted a commission to study the history of the female diaconate, for the purpose of its possible restoration. And some have seen this as a first step toward priesthood for women, in spite of the fact that Francis himself seems to have ruled it out absolutely, responding as follows to a question on the return flight from his journey to Sweden last November 1 (in the photo, his embrace with Swedish Lutheran archbishop Antje Jackelen):
“For the ordination of women in the Catholic Church, the last clear word was given by Saint John Paul II, and this holds.”
But to read the latest issue of “La Civiltà Cattolica,” the question of women priests appears to be anything but closed. On the contrary, wide open.
“La Civiltà Cattolica” is not just any magazine. By statute, every line of it is printed after inspection by the Holy See. But in addition there is the very close confidential relationship between Jorge Mario Bergoglio and the magazine’s editor, the Jesuit Antonio Spadaro.
Who in turn has his most trusted colleague in deputy editor Giancarlo Pani, he too a Jesuit like all the writers of the magazine.
So then, in the article with his byline that appears in the latest issue of “La Civiltà Cattolica,” Fr. Pani calmly rips to shreds the “last clear word” – meaning the flat no – that John Paul II spoke against women’s priesthood.
To see how, all it takes is to reread this passage of the article, properly speaking dedicated to the question of women deacons, but taking the cue from there to express hopes for women priests as well.
Specifically, Fr. Pani asserts:
The historical fact of the exclusion of woman from the priesthood because of the “impedimentum sexus” is undeniable. Nevertheless, already in 1948, and therefore well ahead of the disputes of the 1960’s, Fr. Congar pointed out that “the absence of a fact is not a decisive criterion for concluding prudently in every case that the Church cannot do it and will never do it.”
Moreover, another theologian adds, the “consensus fidelium” of many centuries has been called into question in the 20th century above all on account of the profound sociocultural changes concerning woman. It would not make sense to maintain that the Church must change only because the times have changed, but it remains true that a doctrine proposed by the Church needs to be understood by the believing intelligence. The dispute over women priests could be set in parallel with other moments of Church history; in any case, today in the question of female priesthood the “auctoritates,” or official positions of the magisterium, are clear, but many Catholics have a hard time understanding the “rationes” of decisions that, more than expressions of authority, appear to signify authoritarianism. Today there is unease among those who fail to understand how the exclusion of woman from the Church’s ministry can coexist with the affirmation and appreciation of her equal dignity.”
Magister sums up:
In the judgment of “La Civiltà Cattolica,” therefore, not only should the infallibility and definitiveness of John Paul II’s “no” to women priests be brought into doubt, but more important than this “no” are the “developments that the presence of woman in the family and society has undergone in the 21st century.”
And then, in language very much reminiscent of the above-cited preparatory document for the 2018 synod, Magister exposes Pani’s conclusion:
“One cannot always resort to the past, as if only in the past are there indications of the Spirit. Today as well the Spirit is guiding the Church and suggesting the courageous assumption of new perspectives.”
And Francis is the first “not to limit himself to what is already known, but wants to delve into a complex and relevant field, so that it may be the Spirit who guides the Church,” concludes “La Civiltà Cattolica,” evidently with the pope’s imprimatur. [emphasis added]
This push from La Civiltà Cattolica, a periodical that is reportedly reviewed by the Vatican Secretariat of State before publication, can hardly be seen as merely speculative. As Canadian priest and Convivium editor Fr. Raymond de Souza wrote in 2015, La Civiltà Cattolica editor Father Antonio Spadaro is “both a close confidant and mouthpiece of Pope Francis. It is inconceivable that he would write something contrary to what the Holy Father desired.” What is likely happening in Father Pani’s piece, therefore, is likely the setting up the thesis and antithesis in one of Francis’ favorite approaches to injecting controversial issues into the heart of the Church: the Hegelian dialectic. If John Paul II’s “final word” in Ordinatio Sacerdotalis is the thesis; Pani’s promotion of a female priesthood the antithesis.
And the synthesis?
This has now, it seems, been presented to us by Cardinal Gianfranco Ravasi, President of the Pontifical Council for Culture. In a February 24, 2017 interview with the official online publication of the German bishops, katholisch.de, Ravasi pushes the issue of the female diaconate further into the Catholic consciousness. Asked what possibilities he sees for women in the Catholic Church, Ravasi responded:
A diaconate for women would be possible, I think. But of course, it must be discussed, the historical tradition is very complex. In general, I think it is clerical to constantly focus on women’s priesthood. Why do we not start talking about other, very important functions of women in the Church? For example, the leading of a parish, from a structural point of view. Or the area of catechesis, volunteering, finance, architectural planning, design. Why should that not be in the hands of women? Also in Vatican institutions, there could be a stronger presence of women, at higher levels. This is what the Pope also said. Of course, this does not happen immediately.*
The interviewer noted that Ravasi has implemented a first — a female only advisory body for his Pontifical Council for Culture. Ravasi responded with some background on these 35 women – noting that there are among their number Muslims, a Jew, and “non-believers”. He goes on to say that he hopes what he has done will be a model for other Pontifical Councils. When asked why the only pontifical commission with female advisers is Ravasi’s own, he dismissed the insinuation that it is because culture doesn’t play a significant role in the Vatican. He also warned against a danger of women in such roles as being seen as merely filling a “quota”. He then went on to say:
Of course, I also take a risk here. If one of the female counselors, for example, would say that she is in favor of the female priesthood — and in my opinion it would be legitimate to express her opinion — most probably afterwards, there would be the headline: Cardinal Ravasi has proposed the female priesthood. This ambiguity in the field of communication and in the media is currently a very big problem.
It appears here that Ravasi thinks women in positions of influence at the Vatican advancing the idea of a female priesthood are perfectly acceptable. As for the communication problem he says such a statement would represent — namely, that he would be associated with any such position put forward by one of his advisers — it appears to be a problem that nobody in the Vatican is very keen to solve. After all, such a statement attributed to a cardinal of stature like Ravasi is just the kind of thing that helps keep the issue of the female diaconate moving forward. And too much work has already gone into that cause for it to be merely a trivial piece of the papal agenda.
* Translation by Maike Hickson. This post has been updated.
It is men who serve us as deacons and priests. Women ought to appreciate the men
who choose to sacrifice much to follow Christ and serve all Catholics including women.
Motherhood as well as spiritual motherhood is how women follow Christ and serve
others. It is not so much that women are excluded from the priesthood as it is,
that by nature they have other things to do.
Well hey there, Steve Sunshine! Thanks for the storm warning(s). On the cheery side however, the SSPX is going to be regularized. (cough)
“Motus in fine velocior” – “Motion accelerates when the end is near.” –
When I started this, thought it was going to just be a quick post on Ravasi’s comments, tied into the recent Magister piece. Then I saw the rabbit hole.
There went today.
It was worth your effort, Steve. Thank you.
The madness in the Church today reminds me of an awareness drill, i.e. ‘Bull in the Ring’, we had to endure when I played high school football.
32 team members, all given a number from 1 – 32, would encircle 1 lone team member, i.e. ‘The Bull’, and then ferociously charge the encircled team-mate when their assigned number was randomly shouted-out by the coach.
The object was to heighten your awareness of a sudden blow from an unexpected quarter. Thanks for the drill, Coach Steve.
Somebody’s Law: “The task at hand always expands to fill the time available.” 🙂
There is an anonymous Italian blog claiming to have inside information that some kind of non-ordained deaconesses will be announced by this fall. The idea is to allow them to preach at Mass, among other things. I dunno, it seems odd that with the push back on the exhortation something so radical would be attempted so fast. I feel like it’s more something they are laying the groundwork for Pope Tagle to bring to fruition.
That blog seems worth paying attention to. Unfortunately, an anonymous blog filled with hearsay isn’t the kind of thing we can report on here. But it has the ring of truth.
Hey, Steve! You mean you are going to best the self-righteous prigs of the MSM by NOT printing what you cannot source properly?!!?! What a dinosaur you are. 🙂 (Thank the Lord! 🙂
Pope Tagle? God forbid! I would not enthuse at the prospect of that smirking face being any more prominent in the Church than it already is.
Why Pope Tagle….why not Pope Rodriquez Maradiaga?…………..
err…um sarcasm.
No, surely Godfried Daneels is even more deserving?
God preserve us from a Pope Tagle!
#Burke4Pope
I pray the SSPX is regularized, that all traditional orders are subsumed by them and all become SSPX, that Cardinal Burke and all faithful prelates and priests become SSPX, that the SSPX grows exponentially and re-inhabits all the empty shells of former Catholic Churches that dot the landscape worldwide and that the apostate congregations wither and die. I will not set foot in a Church with a female deacon. I will encourage other Catholics to do likewise. http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/06/26/article-0-13CA7811000005DC-87_468x676.jpg
Some serious dental work is needed before theological repairs can proceed.
“I will not set foot in a Church with a female deacon.” These two Priests or decons…in which Church?
They are just two drag artists playing at dressing up.
Eve offered the fruit and men have been eating them since.
It’s sad that we don’t have men with backbone in the Vatican.
I don’t share your desire. A compromise will dilute the SSPX. This is Francis’s way of getting them toothless.
Neither will I.
Oh dear.
I am thoroughly disgusted with this pope.
He is on the MOVE!!
Warning: Fraternal and public rebuke is required for our Lord!!
I can post and post until the cows come home about how this absolutely undermines the priesthood.
Goodness….I am really tired of preaching to the choir!
Time good and faithful bishops…..point your finger and call out this scourge upon Christ’s Church or forever help you.
Name ‘it” for all to see and hear. The Holy Spirit is with you.
Amen, about “preaching to the choir fatigue”.
What they are proposing here is not Catholic. That’s not even a question any more. The only question is whether anyone cares and what, then, will they do?
I don’t have the authority of a (silent) Bishop. I do, however, help pay the Bishop’s bills. Peaceful, silent, financial protest is my response. At some point they will notice that more than letters, most of which never get beyond the Chancery trash can. Time to make a mess.
These outrages must be acknowledged by the Apostles.
Just when I get to feel comfortable knowing I couldn’t possibly dislike Jorge Bergoglio more, he manages somehow to nudge me out of that “comfort zone” once again. He is indeed the gift that keeps on giving.
Am I alone in perceiving that things are advancing at an accelerated pace the past few weeks. It appears each day another outrage.
You are not alone. Rome is spinning out of control. https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8460/7917699358_34a7219a22_b.jpg
I’ve had that feeling for a few weeks too. Others have said as much. Makes me wonder (with no evidence but what my mind invents) if Francis got a bad prognosis from his doctor recently or something.
Satan’s time is running out. He is on the move to ravage what he can.
If Francis does not change his ways, his eternal prognosis will be very grave, and i would include many prelates who have been so silent throughout this as well.
Yesss….
I think this is all to distract from the Amoris catastrophe. Don’t pause long enough for momentum to build behind the dubia. Keep everyone reeling by pressing on into the next outrage.
This is a very good point. Flood the news with as much insanity as possible, people won’t figure out which is the worst problem.
Every cloud has a silver lining – so they say.
Motus in fine velocior.
Yes. It’ s like being inside a Maelstron.
One of his sidekicks (I think Fernandez) said a while ago that he will accelerate once he feels he does not enough time. I hope this is true. At least we know that this terrible time is at an end. It gets worse before it gets better always runs true.
I’ve been thinking of that quote for the last couple of months.
Not to put too much stock in numerology, but consider this:
May 13, 2017 is the centenary of the first apparition of Our Lady at Fatima. The apparitions of Our Lady at Akita, Japan are believed to be a sort of continuation of the message of Fatima. It was at Akita, that Our Lady made the oft repeated prophecy of “cardinals against cardinals, bishops against bishops” which appears to be playing out in this crisis. Those apparitions began on October 13, 1973
Forty years after that is October 13, 2013…7 months to the day into the pontificate of Pope Francis. Three and half years (“a time, two times, and half a time) later would be April 13, 2017–Holy Thursday.
How fitting if on the day we remember Peter denying Christ and Judas handing Him over to His enemies, the Successor of Peter would initiate some fresh hell that amounted to denial and betrayal of He of Whom he is the Vicar. And don’t be surprised if this involves the Eucharist in some way as well..
Thomas, your comment is stunning. No, I’m not “into numbers” and what you have written here is striking, as in foreboding. We shall see, won’t we?
We shall.
I think with today’s news from the London Times, the pieces are moving into play even faster than before.
I’ve long ago expected the worse but I still get angry when I hear the worse. I suppose one cannot really prepare for it.
The Bergoglian wrecking-ball proceeds apace.
You mean like this?http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-nrXwwZDzw9Q/Vjv0Z4g08tI/AAAAAAAATCo/XlxYrzVvraU/s1600/CS-Vn75WsAA6icY.jpg
My first thought was “a Miley-Cyrus-style ‘wrecking ball'”?! But, then, I noticed that the tongue wasn’t hanging out. Disappointing.
The foot is actually preventing the tongue to show.
Exactly as I imagined.
When Pope Francis addressed the question of “female deacons” on two different occasions he clearly stated that deaconesses in the early Church only served other women in very limited roles. Cardinal Kasper has said on multiple occasions and written that deaconesses were not ordained. Cardinal Nichols of England, another friend of Francis, recently said that he did not think a female deaconate was not a possibility. I do not see any forthcoming movement on this in any way whatsoever. Francis is a simple, straightforward man who always makes his intentions very clear ( yes, his verbiage is ambiguous). I would say pray, but not worry about this one.
Okay Stu, we will be sure not to worry!https://timeentertainment.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/fictioninfluence_poll_pollyanna.jpg?w=350&h=350&crop=1
Love it!!
Always love your views cs.
Pearl, who’s this? You or a scary poster in your bedroom? Give me something factual and I’ll take you seriously.
Hayley Mills as “Pollyanna,” Walt Disney, 1960
Walt Disney, the 33rd degree Scottish Rite Freemason and as such another master of the Hegelian dialectic of synthesis. Very patient in their movement of truth with one iota of lie contained, awaiting the day when the lie becomes the “truth”, while at once knowing that they themselves may not live long enough to witness the poison fruits. Only insidious, pernicious, and rotten fruit can fall from the tree whose root is established by a Freemason. This all dressed up in the “innocence” intoned from the picture above. “You think I came to bring peace. I came to bring the sword.”, as it is only in division that the truth springs forth and is plainly seen. In caritas.
Mark, I was just replying to Stuart’s “Who is this?” and the reference to “Walt Disney” was to identify the studio that made “Pollyanna” in 1960.
I don’t know if Freemasonry has much to do with this little digression from the discussion. (Maybe it does. I have to reread the Hegelian stuff again. I’m not as well-versed in philosophy as I should be, but it sure is interesting information.)
Hello Patricia. Thank you for your charitable response. Indeed, my attempt was not to suggest any covert contempt on your part, rather simply to make you and anyone else who may read that aware of just who Walt Disney was, as a willful and degenerate hater of Christ and His Church, as only any avowed 33rd degree member of the Freemasonic Craft can be. At that level (“33rd”, as a blasphemy of the age of Christ at His death on the Holy Cross) Freemasons proclaim themselves to be the “adept”, those who in a Gnostic understanding, hold the keys to the “Light”, who is Lucifer, at once deceiving all of those, the “profane”, including their lesser degrees of Freemasonry (the first 3) as the useful idiots, into believing that they are something other than they in truth are. As Lucifer presents himself as an “angel of light”, so does the 33rd degree Freemason. And when you are Walt Disney, your nefarious appeal is to the very heart of the innocent child, at once with a goal of stealing their very soul as Lucifer’s prize. The Freemason in his implacable pride, cherishes his cunning by “hiding right before their eyes” the evil root of the tree which they plant and nurture for the deception of the “profane”, at once on their path to eternal hell to be with their king. We know what our Blessed Lord said of the man who would do precious anything to harm the heart of the innocent child in any way. I pray this helps clarify the purpose of my earlier response to you. In caritas.
Thank you so much for taking the time to explain this for me. I’ve seen, in passing, references to hidden symbols and messages in Disney films and animation, but I had no idea of the evil at the root of it all.
For me (maybe for others here too?), this sheds new light on the nature of the “Wonderful World of Disney”: the “Mickey Mouse Club,” on every day after school; the spectacular show I watched with my parents, siblings, cousins, and grandparents every Sunday evening in the late ’50s and early-to-mid ’60s; the live-action and animated feature films that the studios have generated for generations now.
Whew. New Eyes. More Rosaries!
Hello again Patricia. It is unutterably stunning to bear witness to the lengths which those whose purpose it is to invoke evil, as the very privation of the good which is due in the act, are willing to endure to make that evil happen. They work at this project insidiously, with a singular goal in mind, as though the utter “absence” of the “good”, is the good. This all done in the name of “The Prince”, whose grotesque and murderous “monarchy”, can only be understood from its infinitely desolate and singular prison of one. I too have pleasant memories of Disneyland as a child and taking my young family 15 years ago to Disneyworld. Once the truth has been revealed though, as to whom much is given much is expected, we are then called, each one of us, to utterly and completely reject the evil as evil can never be freely accepted in the name of any (yet alone pleasure seeking) purported good to be achieved, which is authentic Catholic moral teaching, of course. Thank you, Patricia Gallagher. In caritas.
[gentle curtsy, sir!]
May the Grace and Peace of God the Father of our Blessed Dominus Deus Sabbaoth and Savior, Jesus the Christ, be and always remain with you and yours’, Patricia Gallagher. Amen. In caritas.
IF Mother Mary was QUEEN OF THE APOSTLES, why can’t women who have Godly fitness in Jesus The Lord be PRIESTS?
Read Pope Francis’s comments on the subject. He has clearly explained why not. Most recently, he deferred to Saint John Paul II, but on other occasions he has expounded on why women cannot be ordained to the priesthood or diaconate.
Yeah. Right. That is why his people are working to implement a female diaconate.
His people are not working to implement a female diaconate. Please name one of these people.
I think there is something called ‘GROWTH in DOGMA”; may be John Henry Cardinal Newman’s Book can enlighten.
Yes development of doctrine.
It means a deeper understanding of the same faith. Not a new understanding. The church has always taught that women cant be priests or even teach in church.
We cannot defect from this but only gain a deeper understanding of why this doctrine is in place and must be believed
Pope St Pius X believed in doctrinal development but didn’t believe in heretical versions of it as he said :
“I reject the heretical invention of the evolution of dogmas, passing from one meaning to another, different from that which the Church first had”
– Pope St Pius X
Peter the Roman—Your language, “We cannot defect from this but only gain a deeper understanding of why this doctrine is…”, is a very incisive, intellective view into the essence of the reality of dogma. Thank you for that. In caritas.
There will be a non-ordained diaconate for these women. See my post above. There are women pastoral administrators now in the post-conciliar mess. They will just receive a non-ordained office which will formalize and provide an enhanced ecclesiastical status.
Um… ?
Revelation 14:4
Please Quote the original Whole en block. THANKS
Open a bible. THANKS
“It is these who have not defiled themselves with women, for they are chaste; it is these who follow the Lamb wherever he goes; these have been redeemed from mankind as first fruits for God and the Lamb” -Revelation 14:4
THANK YOU.
Mary has other unique titles. Mary is also Queen of Heaven. Mary is Mother of God. Mary is the New Eve. Blessed Among Women. Mother of Mercy. Star of the Sea. Cause of our Joy. Etc.
Mary is many unique things. But one thing she certainly is not, is an Apostle; a Priest.
Look to Tradition. Women Religious are the fortunate inheritors of Queen Mary on earth.
Men are not Nuns. Women are not Priests.
Their ordaining vows define this. A woman can not marry the Bride. A man can not marry the Bridegroom.
C’mon people, don’t dignify this guy with a response. He’s a troll. It would be like me going on CNN and asking why Donald Trump could not become the CEO of the company. And if by some remote chance, he is legit — and I sincerely doubt it — direct him to a few good books to read.
Don’t feed the zoo.
I find that engaging the opposing view helps me better understand my own belief.
It’s easy to agree with something you already believe. It’s more difficult to explain why something else may be wrong.
The person who asks this may not be legit (a “troll”), but there are many others (including the Pope) who may seriously believe this proposition. And be in positions to advance it as practical theology among us.
Having an answer to questions like this strengthens personal belief and presents a strong remedy to mistaken ideas that can grow and spread heresy.
II Timothy 4:2
Sir: this has been such a debated topic for so long, I would suggest that whoever is in doubt about it go and do some reading. THEN if there are questions, fine. But to expect a Board to explain a theological issue like this in a comment box type discussion is naive.
So what exactly is the point of the comment box?
You can’t ask about or explain theological issues here at 1P5?
No. Not ones about which entire volumes have been written. Do your homework, then if there is a particular point that is not clear or even questionable to you, the comment box is fine. The Church is burning down around us over these kind of issues with which most people here are familiar. It’s a courtesy to the readers and posters here to try to be informed and then discuss.
“It’s a courtesy to the readers here to try to be informed and then discuss.”
Ban trolls like Thomas. Shame ignorants like Aqua.
Thanks for that.
Trolls exist. I never referred to you in a pejorative manner. If you wish to take offense, that’s your decision. Courtesy is a virtue. I’m just trying to explain why you probably will not get too many knowledgeable people to engage you here. Many of us simply don’t have the time.
We keep the comment boxes open here so that people CAN discuss these issues. If someone makes it obvious that they’re trolling and have no intention of participating in respectful debate, we typically remove that person. Otherwise, what’s the harm in hashing it out? We’re not paying for com box space by the square foot.
In caritas, let us give “Thomas Poovathinkal SSP” a try to test his capacity for the authentic desire of truth. In caritas.
Never said he couldn’t. People get frustrated with posters who show up, don’t know the issues and want the answers. If people have time to do that, great. I and many others do not.
I come to this Board because I presume there is a certain sophisticated clientele who know the issues. When there are people who ask basic questions like John Henry Newman’s “development of dogma” applied to this issue (the poster above called it growth in dogma), it’s difficult to know whether or not he’s serious or just wants to light a match.
I used to ask that question until I thought about it, ..not that I cared that women become priests but wondered why? If you THINK about it in terms of not only
tradition, what Christ intended, and nature …Gods design…you will come to the
correct conclusion.
E.g. Christ is male and groom of his Bride, the Church [a she]. Priests act in persona Christi. A woman does not have the essential matter to be a priest i.e., to be e.g. a husband and father to a parish, diocese, universal Church, etc.
***
PS There is also the aspect of a sacrament [outside sign of inward grace] both of the Eucharist and of Holy Orders.
Of course.
St. John Paul II addressed Mary Magdalene, “APOSTLE to THE APOSTLES.”
Cf. Apostle to the apostles history on Wikipedia – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Magdalene#Apostle_to_the_apostles
***
Eymologically, Apostle literally means “person sent forth” – http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=apostle
So the meaning here is clearly she has been sent forth to the ones who are to be sent forth [to preach the good news of Our LORD and testify about him]. Her mission here is to specifically announce to the 11 that the LORD is risen hence the title and not that she belongs to the ordained ministry as theirs.
Thomas, “why can’t women who have Godly fitness in Jesus The Lord be”—FATHERS?, in contradistinction to mothers, as they are naturally ordered to be, as properly understood ontologically, from their essence as matter and form? In caritas.
“SOME OF THE WOMEN TRAVELLING WITH THE APOSTLES, WERE THEMSELVES APOSTLES.” SO SAID BLESSED FR. JAMES ALBERIONE.
IN APOSTLESHIP, THERE IS PRIESTHOOD, ALREADY. HENCE MOTHER MARY IS….
Because a woman cannot biologically genetically sociologically or litergically etc etc be an Alter Christus . You really do need to be trained in the basics.
THE PROBLEM IS…..of MEN CAUGHT UP IN THE OBSESSION with FLESH.
Boom boom boom. That’s the sound of the destruction of tradition.
Lord, grant us a faithful pope, and do it soon.
The Cardinal Gianfranco Ravasi is the same that asked for the acceptance of Satanic Freemason in the Catholic Church and it is now asking to ordained priestesses? And accepting that it has a commission of women composed of atheists and Jews? After seeing the case of the Cardinal Raymond Burke, which the Pope Francis asked him to clean the Order of Malt from Freemasons, it would be good to start with heretic Ravasi !!!
Pope Francis asked him to clean the Order of Malt from Freemasons And you think Pope Francis meant it? All indications is that he is under their influence if he is not yet a member.
***
Cf. What changed from Card. Sarah’s Speech at SACRA LITURGIA UK 2016 to Fr. Lombardi’s communiqué? ? – http://wp.me/p2Na5H-H9
Got a problem with Jews?
This would of course be the straw that breaks the camel’s back. A female diaconate leaves no room for bishops and priest to hide.
Let him fall. There’s no turning back. Let him fall from the Papacy.
And fall he will, soon, and very soon. It is a dreadful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.
When this discussion first started I thought, “Oh, this will never happen.” Now after I’ve seen the strategy behind AL work itself out, I’ve completely changed my mind.
The male priest is ordained “in persona Christi”, and the Church is the Bride of Christ. To have women as priests, how can they be “in persona Christi” when Christ is a man. Then of course, we would have a woman as the bridegroom. Wouldn’t the ‘same sex marriage’ bunch love that?
A lesbian Church – the hope and dream of all those with psychological disorders a.k.a. homosexuals. This is just part of the Freemasonic infiltration of the Church, and the Vatican is riddled with Modernists. Our Lady has warned that the events we are seeing now will bring on the great chastisement.
I completely agree with a previous comment WRT the SSPX – may God grant them success
If they knew Francis like we know Francis…. This has nothing to do with female deacons, it has everything to do with creating a bridge toward female ordination to the priesthood. That is the goal of these women, and the bishops who carry their cause forward, plain and simple. Let us pray that there will be only one more resignation by a pope, and that it happens soon. Then it is time to sweep the Church clean of these children of the Iscariot.
No doubt. Soon they will have massaged it to Priestesses. The Pope is intent on the paganization of Christianity.
Hi MA – I think Francis will settle for the protestantization of the Church. Is that the same thing?
Or a sudden death… heck, I’ll take almost anything at this point, so long as Francis is off the throne. Though, I should say, a second resignation at this point would potentially do more damage than good, reducing the papacy to a “job.” The resignation of PBXVI is an anomaly. The resignation of Francis would start a trend.
Hi Jafin – Maybe the lightning strikes on Saint Peter’s when Benedict resigned was only a preview of coming attractions. Francis should definitely keep his eyes to the skies. I agree, but there would be a sort of poetic justice if Francis resigned, and perhaps that would serve as a warning to those who would consider resignation in the future. God is not amused by such acts of infidelity.
The last time we had three popes…it didn’t end well
Well I hope that the new Deaconesses can be and get married.
Hi Julius – Why?
I suppose if they already allow permanent married Deacons and will soon consider married clergy then it would only be fair. (I’m assuming you have picked up my sarcasm)
Hi Julius – I get it now. Sorry for being so slow on the uptake.
Sarcasm can be hard to pick up on online 🙂
Hi Jafin – I have been on both sides of that, I think that says something ironic about me. Oh well.
Most of us have I think 🙂
This may be relevant: http://www.newadvent.org/summa/5039.htm#article1
Thank you, Przemyslaw for the wonderful Thomistic reference. In caritas.
You are welcomed, Mark. In caritas.
There will be Deaconesses. They will not be ordained. They will be able to perform every function of a priest except offering Mass and absolving sins. But then again, they can pretty much do that now. BUT, this will be a formal “office” in the Church with it’s own proper Rite of Installation.
Expect the explicit right to preach and be named Pastoral Administrators to be announced.
I also expect that they will be able to wear a distinctive garb. Don’t be surprised if it’s a clerical shirt of color (there are many different colors) with a tab collar.
This is just the Modernists first salvo into breaking down the barrier. Don’t expect it to stop here.
I think deacons are ordained.
Yes they are: normally. These women will have the title but will not be ordained in the sacrament.
How do you know this?
It’s being discussed as I type within the Roman Curia. Francis and his allies have decided that this would be a good gesture to the Lutherans and Anglicans (and God knows what other Protestant sects) who have women bishops. This is another concession to the ecumenical agenda. It also, of course, will satisfy (very momentarily) the aggressive women religious in the Church who have been vocally pushing women’s ordination for years.
Not ordained? ….do you think the aggressive nuns will accept being
glorified altar boys ?
To them, it’s just a step: but if you think having an officially recognized pastoral office outside the priesthood, with its own Rite of Installation, with the commission to preach the Gospel is no small thing, I think you and I have a very different view of a “glorified altar boy.”
You are probably right …they are not just going to send the ladies a bone ..
not destructive enough. This has been in the planning for years and years
beginning with the contrived shortage of priests, pollution of the seminaries,
female extraordinary ministers of the Holy Eucharist, female lectors etc..No
it is not a small thing and yes, only a step toward the priesthood.
The Church is not even remotely split “down the middle”. A tiny minority of dissenters still push this agenda. The vast majority of Catholics recognize it is a settled issue. This man always seems to begin with a lie.
Yes, Michael, the authentic Magisterium of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church was indeed implacably settled with the death of the last Apostle. There is no “new doctrine” to unfold, nor is there any “new” understanding, as VCI clearly edified in its pronouncement of papal infallibility and its precise limits. This “unsettled doctrine” language is Luciferian, placing doubt in the minds of Catholics, both faithful and unfaithful–at once supporting the unfaithful in their errors. Language the likes of, “the concrete complexities of life” is indeed a specific Luciferian, linguistic conundrum, a web spun to suggest that we are only capable of sin and spiritual death, but not to worry because the “pope” has now proclaimed mortal sin no longer to be objectively understood as it is. What this at once accomplishes is a full-on and unmitigated rejection of grace, which is entirely consistent with the Modernist rejection of Christ Jesus as True God and True Man. They profess to believe that Christ was simply and only “Man” (large case “M” intended in their use) who was then elevated to his “proper place”, if you will, as God. This diabolical lie sets up the foundation for every mere miserable human creature to also become as Christ in His Divinity and thus, “man” becomes God, as God Himself. A perfect blasphemy of God.
This all stems from an “evolutionary” model of Truth, which remains in the heart of Fr. Joseph Ratzinger, for instance, as evidenced in his litany of theological writings over his entire clerical life and still. His writings are brilliantly and artfully nuanced in such a way that the moment of rupture in thought, that which is contrary to Catholic teaching, is so subtle that it escapes the intellects of most and I suggest this in utter humility, as the truth just is. That which must be existentially evident, in all of this revolution against God Himself and focused on the Divine Person of the Beloved Son, is that before a “pope” as Francis could claim the occupancy of the Chair of Saint Peter, as the Vicar of Christ in this world, the rhetorical, linguistic foundation had to pave the road for the preparation of the arrival of such an obvious and abject monster as Bergoglio to be “enthroned”. I pray this helps. I know it is hard. In caritas.
“Fr. Jospeh Ratzinger?” Don’t you mean Jospeh Cardinal Ratzinger and later Pope Benedict XVI?
I don’t disagree at least in principle with really any of these points, but thought such a phrase curious…
A Blessed nascent Lent to you and yours’, Jafin,
It is, I suppose, somehow related to the grand conundrum that we find ourselves living in, within Holy Mother Church as the Singular Corpus Christus in this godless world, whose Prince is Lucifer. And the so called, “secular” world, as though in truth one iota of any of it is somehow apart from the divine Jurisdiction of Christ the King. With that as the introduction, it is Joseph Ratzinger who chooses not to call himself, that which he should have as tradition speaks powerfully, and that of course is the title of one’s eminence and prince of Holy Mother Church, as Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger. It is I who choose not to call him by a title which in reality does not exist, as so called “Pope Emeritus BXVI”. With that title, there is an implacable pseudo-reality, if you will, created that somehow intones and implies without saying so, that the Petrine Office, that which was established by Christ the King, is now shared. This fits precisely into the scheme that Archbishop Georg Gaenswein suggests lives in the mind of Ratzinger and that, as I’m sure you know, is a new duality of the Petrine Office, one reality as governance and the other as contemplative. I fully and pertinaciously reject this as it is an heresy of heresies. Christ Jesus as One God, One Church, One Faith, and One true Religion, simply cannot be divided as neither can His Petrine Office be.
This Truth in “evolution(ists)”, if you will, must always as it only can, first be introduced with the use of their insidious, dialectical language, initiating within the psyche of the other, whomever the “target” the other may be”, a question? and that question has almost unmitigated power in an human sense. The question begins the slippery and inescapable slope down into the abyss of the Hegelian dialectic. It is the “synthesis”, of course, which these minions of the Prince always desire as he is the Father of Lies and its brother, deception. The synthesis is a “shared Petrine Office”, at once and, if it were possible, forever altering Almighty God’s plan of Unity in Holy Church under one Vicar of Christ. This opens the floodgates for “ecumenism” the likes of which would make Martin Luther blush. The thesis of the dialectic is Pope Bergoglio, the antithesis as created in the mind of Ratzinger is “Pope Emeritus BXVI”, and the synthesis is ecumenism writ large on the scale of the “one world religion”, which is the “religion of man”, which the Protestant revolt and deformation established in praxis, and it is the heart of Freemasonry and the essence of the person of the Anti-Christ. May Almighty God have mercy on me and His One, True Church. Amen. In caritas.
I think I remember Pope (Emeritus) Benedict XVI, when asked what he should be called, indicated a preference to be called simply, “Father”. Maybe I dreamt that? But at any rate, it certainly fits with the genuine humility of the man (as opposed to the “humility” practiced by Bergoglio).
Sacerdotalis Ordinatio settled this one for anyone left with questions. It is “to be held by all the faithful.” This is a confirmation of what has been always taught thus part of the infallible ordinary magisterium (as distinct from fallible ord. magisterium). Any who disagree are disobedient and in danger of heresy and schism. Just saying.
On magisterium solemne vs. ordinarium magisterium – Cf. this comment of mine: http://disq.us/p/1glhazu
“Accompanying young people requires going beyond a preconceived framework, encountering young people where they are, adapting to their times and pace of life and taking them seriously. This is to be done as young people seek to make sense of the reality in which they live and to utilize the message which they have received in words and deeds in their daily attempts to create a personal history and in the more-or-less conscious search for meaning in their lives.”
Quoting Fr. Gerald Murray, there is a passage in Cd. Sarah’s new book, The Power of Silence that goes something like: “….modernists multiply words and thereby dilute the rigor of the Gospel message”.
Or, if you like, my not-so-eloquent perspective: More psychobabble from a Vicar who is allergic to the Name of Jesus.
I think the young people are going to be played ….and the synod ,in order to
please the young people, will discover that young people overwhelmingly
want women deacons and priests and a married clergy. Surprise, surprise.
All indications are that what Pope Francis intends to do on this issue won’t wait for Synod 2018. After all, he has already established a commission. If one recalls the lead up to the Synods on the Family, Pope Francis had said annulments would be tackled within the Synods but then went ahead to revise the annulment process via 2 motu proprio[s?] Mitis Iudex Dominus Iesus and Mitis et Misericors Iesus. Recall what was said that Pope Francis will accelerate his reforms [all there in his programmatic Evangelii gaudium] to make sure that they are accomplished [cf. @MarcAlcan’s commment: http://disq.us/p/1gkpo9e%5D. He has already demontrated his use [and misuse] of the tools at his disposal.
***
Cf. [To me, the Hegelian synthesis:] “Spifferi parte IX: particolari troppo inediti” di Fra Cristoforo – https://anonimidellacroce.wordpress.com/2017/02/25/spifferi-parte-ix-particolari-troppo-inediti-di-fra-cristoforo/. Eventual goal: ordination of women or in practice, women who act as if ordained [move the Catholic Church toward the ‘separated brethren’ instead of the other way around]. The ultimate goal, one world religion headed by none other than Pope Francis or how can one understand the recent “ecumenical” actions and utterances with Lutherans [cf. Did Blessed Anna Katharina Emmerick foresee the Lutheranization of the Catholic Church in Our Time? – http://wp.me/p2Na5H-VY%5D, Anglicans, etc?
And this from a pope of the one holy catholic and apostolic Church???!!!
***
Btw it is my strong suspicion that these Q&As are staged.
Notice how they needed their celebrations …….did anyone up north not want
to spend Sunday without the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass?…….
I do not even know where to begin addressing Pope Francis’ statement above that first reduces the Catholic Mass to a celebration and then equates it to an Anglican service, whilst catholic bishops and priests remain silent.
Have you noticed at the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass that all the old terms are
cleansed from the priests’ vocabulary…mortal sin, sanctifying grace, offering
up of pain and suffering, etc. The Mass is now the liturgical celebration…..
so pleasing to Protestants.
Er … is mortal sin in the EF? Looking at the Ash Wednesday Liturgy [http://www.liturgies.net/Liturgies/Catholic/roman_missal/lentmass.htm], the Entrance Antiphon
I am hoping that you are not suggesting that the OF or EF is just now nothing more than a “celebration”, because if you do, you will find nothing objectionable in the Pope’s statement.
The ‘illogical logic’ of the spawns of the Evil One
And yet
The again
And
***
Cf. The Innovators pretend to go to “the early days of the Church” when it suits them – http://wp.me/p2Na5H-KX
Any Catholic who thinks we need women deacons, go join the Anglicans. You will have them to your heart’s content.
I could be wrong, but scratch the surface of proponents of women’s ordination of any kind and you will find dissenters from many other Church Teachings as well. This error does not stand in isolation.
The gates of hell won’t prevail, but they sure are trying.
Cardinal Kasper’s myopia is manifest when he insists that the Church is split down the middle about women deacons. No doubt that in Germany, GB, and the US there are people who favor women deacons. The Church, however, is much bigger than that. Is there no doubt that the 175 million African Catholics want no part of the project. Oh, wait, Kasper doesn’t think their opinions count.
The Holy Spirit is God so therefore He doesn’t change. He is not the Spirit in charge here at all because He does not go where it is impure. All these changes come from the evil one. If a person is filled with the Light of Jesus Christ, they don’t care where God has put them — much less wanting to be “somebody.” Jesus chooses whom He will whenever He wants to get his point across. I think Jesus is letting the evil one get his final blows in before He says enough. The filth still existing in the skeleton of the Vatican has made me sick and it is still spewing forth…….bleccchhh.
I am most cut up for his disregard of his predecessors and Apostolic Tradition; the very things that give him any power. The very Mark of Catholic Faith, that he’s trying to destroy.