Comments on: Ed Peters on Diaconate Revisionism

By: Matt

Matt — Wed, 26 Sep 2012 21:05:11 +0000

@John, there are two problems here. In the Roman Church, that is true. It would not be true in the Eastern Churches; in fact, only a priest can serve as the minister of marriage in those Churches. One’s intent would be shaky if they knowingly chose as the ordained witness someone ordained invalidly. Also, how can the couple demonstrate that the use of the proper form of the sacrament of marriage, even to the minimum extent necessary for validity (according to St Thomas Aquinas, for instance)? It would most certainly be illicit to use only the minimum words required without a proper witness.
The next questions involve the connection between the diaconate and the presbyterate, whether an ontological change occurs at ordination to the diaconate, and whether the diaconate is of divine or ecclesiastical institution. I believe the two grades of holy orders are intrinsically connected, and that the former is necessary for the latter. Also, it is presumed that the diaconal functions at Mass should be fulfilled by concelebrating priests in the absence of a deacon. This is always the case in the Eastern Churches. In the EF, it is more explicit, as a priest may vest as deacon (and subdeacon) when there is no deacon (or subdeacon).
@Dante, I doubt deacons will get the power to anoint, since they have no power to absolve which is done either by hearing Confession, or through the grace of the sacrament of Anointing of the Sick if they cannot confess their sins at that time. Perhaps I am mistaken, but it should be noted that in the early Church and today in the Eastern Churches there is a practice of oil being anointed on the foreheads of the sick, but it is a sacramental, *not* the Sacrament. This could be what deacons did, or do.

By: Dante

Dante — Wed, 26 Sep 2012 16:23:12 +0000

“…diaconal ordination does not invest any sacramental “power” not already possessed by all others.” Yes as current canonical laws and practice stand. However, in the bigger picture of church history deacons heard confessions and granted absolution (per St. Cyprian 3rd century) and administered Anointing of the Sick. Apparently, the request from various episcopal conferences for granting deacons faculty to anoint is said to be under consideration in the Vatican. Deacons have never, however, and cannot validly preside at Mass, which is the ultimate priestly function.

By: John

John — Wed, 26 Sep 2012 15:36:03 +0000

@Matt and David Nickol – since, in marriage, the ministers of the sacrament are the two being married and the priest or deacon is merely a witness, the sacrament is valid as long as all other requirements for validity are met (matter, form and intent).

As David was alluding, diaconal ordination does not invest any sacramental “power” not already possessed by all others. There is not a single sacrament that a deacon effects that cannot be validly effected by the non-ordained, and that is only one anyway: baptism. The only sacramental difference between a deacon and the non-ordained is the grace of the sacrament of orders, which is not negligible, but ultimately, not a functional difference either.

By: Matt

Matt — Wed, 26 Sep 2012 03:27:21 +0000

“There are, of course, obvious differences between men and women, but I have a hard time figuring out what the differences are that would prevent a woman from being validly ordained.” @David Nickol, it’s the fact that Christ was a man, and chose 12 men to be His Apostles, that limits the Church to the male priesthood.
Well,deacons can witness a marriage so the marriage would probably be invalid-no sacrament occurred-and illicit-against canon law. All laypersons can baptize and it will be valid (presuming that the formula Ego te baptizo in nomine Patris, Filio, et Spiritus Sancti-I baptize you in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit-is used with water flowing). It will be illicit, however, unless it is for a dying person.
‘Belives himself to be ordained…’ gets into questions of both the sacrament being valid and licit. Since ordination is an act of the will, it pretty much takes the bishop declaring that the sacrament was not carried out as the Church believes (or the deacon candidate could as well, I think) to be invalid. It would be illicit if he did not meet the criteria for ordination, but likely not invalid, unless someone other than a bishop ordained him or there are issues with the validity of sacraments performed by ordained bishops (like with the Society of St Pius X).

By: Phyllis Zagano

Phyllis Zagano — Wed, 26 Sep 2012 01:28:43 +0000

The question of women deacons was raised to me, personally, by John Cardinal O’Connor many years ago, and he asked me to begin my studies on the topic. Some time after, Joseph Cardianl Ratzinger affirmed that the question was, in his words, “under study”–and that my work could continue. Since that time, Pope Benedict XVI has amended Canon Law (Canon 1009) to affirm that the diaconate is not the priesthood. If the church teaches definitively that it does not have the authority to ordain women as priests, there should be no concern about women called and ordained to the diaconate being somewhere on the road to priesthood. Is such thought to be the case with the 40,000 men in the order of deacons today–most of whom are married? Historical arguments have little bearing and are not dispositive one way or the other–many different local practices are evidenced in the early church–and literary, epigraphical, and historical data demonstrate that some bishops in some locales ordained women to their service as deacons. This is still the case in modern Eastern Churches, and in the contemporary Armenian Church. To call these ordinations into question would be to upset the delicate agreements on the validity of sacrament and order between the Catholic Church and various Orthodox churches. The Peter’s commentary is on the liceity of any current attempt in the Roman Catholic Church to ordain a woman. But liceity does not determine validity, and laws not rooted in dogma (such as current restrictions against women deacons) can be changed. Ordinatio Sacerdotalis specifically left the question of women deacons aside. The Canon Law Society of America discussed this fully in 1996; the International Tehological Commission concluded in 2002 that the matter of women deacons was up to the ministry of discerment, which Christ left his Church, to rule authritatively on the matter. Rome cannot say “no.” It remains to be seen if it will ever say “yes” to the increasing calls to include women in the renewed order of deacon.

By: William Tighe

William Tighe — Tue, 25 Sep 2012 22:47:18 +0000

One suggestion; read Martimort:

http://www.ignatius.com/Products/DEAC-P/deaconesses.aspx

*Deaconesses: An Historical Study* by Aime-Georges Martimort (published originally in French in 1982; in English in 1986).

Short synopsis: (1) “deaconesses in the Early Church were not “female deacons;” (2) in many parts of the Early Church there were never deaconesses (e.g., Rome), and in others their appearance was quite late (e.g., France, Spain); & (3) it would be pointless and dangerous for the Catholic Church to revive the “diaconissate” today; pointless, as the ministries which deaconesses once fulfilled are either obsolete or carried out in other ways today, and dangerous, as it would imply that women can be ordained to Holy Orders.

By: TUESDAY EVENING EDITION | Big Pulpit

TUESDAY EVENING EDITION | Big Pulpit — Tue, 25 Sep 2012 20:23:39 +0000

[...] Female Diaconate Revisionism – Mathew Cantirino, First Things/First Thoughts [...]

By: JDD

JDD — Tue, 25 Sep 2012 16:22:09 +0000

Mickey,

Here’s at least a little of how the Chruch actually sees women. Some excerpts from the Apostolic letter “Mulieris Dignitatem”:

“In one of his Discourses Paul VI said: “Within Christianity, more than in any other religion, and since its very beginning, women have had a special dignity, of which the New Testament shows us many important aspects…; it is evident that women are meant to form part of the living and working structure of Christianity in so prominent a manner that perhaps not all their potentialities have yet been made clear”.

“A woman is to be found at the centre of this salvific event.”

http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/apost_letters/documents/hf_jp-ii_apl_15081988_mulieris-dignitatem_en.html

By: Steve

Steve — Tue, 25 Sep 2012 15:56:31 +0000

The Truth cannot be subjugated to what’s trendy in any particular culture. “Women’s lib” is a misguided trend, as it is “preached” in our culture, that does not lead women to happiness or peace. It makes them try to be men, for lack of a better term, and eventually leads to misery.

God created men and women equal…in dignity… but certainly not the same. He created them to fulfill the roles He created for them, not the roles that society brainwashes them to pursue. This supposed interchangeability between the sexes ignores Natural Law.

By: Mickey

Mickey — Tue, 25 Sep 2012 03:38:58 +0000

Yes, let’s rationalize that “deaconess” didn’t really mean deaconess in Scripture. We need to be like the Muslims and make sure women are always in subordinate positions in the Church, because they are inferior and seductresses. We need to get those 10 year old girls off the altars too. Only boys should be servers because they are male.