There is rumor that the pope is forming a commission on
reestablishing women deacons. I have to admit, I’m a bit torn on the subject.
Within the Church, I’m all for deaconesses, whether officially ordained or not.
In the earliest days of the Church, women performed ecclesiastical duties.
Women baptized women entering the church, they led prayer, and they provided
worship space. Phoebe was one of the first deacons, in fact, she’s the only
person given that title in the Bible. She is introduced by Paul as a deaconess,
an emissary of Rome, who is instructed to share his letter with the church in
Cenchreae (Romans 16:1-2). Priscilla, Junia, Tryphena, Tryphosa, and Persis are
also listed as women working for the Church, and they are commended by Paul
(who, you know, is commonly regarded as a backwards sexist in some modern
circles).
At the Council of Chalcedon in 451, it was stated that women
shouldn’t receive the laying of hands as a deaconess until age 40, “and then
only after searching examination.” I think the age limit shows that deaconesses
were probably widows but certainly women with leadership and some life
experience. The “laying of hands” isn’t clear if they were specially-blessed
laity or actually ordained. So that is a matter that the Church will have to
still decide. The role of deaconess stopped in the West in the 13th century, although Orthodox churches continued it. If the diaconate were be
opened to women again, there is a ritual on the books (so to speak) for
ordaining deaconesses from the 10th century, and their role would be
the same as what is laid out in the Second Vatican Council’s reestablishment of
the permanent diaconate for men. So there is some sort of precedent, although
the Church would have to determine if a deaconess actually receives Holy Orders
or is just an elevated lay role. In either case, I’d like to see the role of
deaconess in the Church, in the tradition of Phoebe.
But I worry about the message others might take from deaconesses.
Like the “spirit of Vatican II,” this could get out of hand for the uninformed.
Within the Catholic community, both far right and far left will go nuts. There
will be cries of Pope Francis going off the rails. The radical socialist out to
upend the Church. And the implementation could be disastrous, (like, 1970s
religious music bad)— an adrenaline shot to the “spirit of Vatican II.” Women
joining to prove a point, not because of a calling. Photo ops all about girl
power and fighting the patriarchy.
Outside the Catholic community, you can already see the
headlines: “Vatican finally accepts women.” “Catholic Church changes position,
gets with the times.” It would be broadcast as the Church capitulating to the
zeitgeist, to overturning its beliefs, to changing for the sake of staying
relevant. News of such a change would overlook the history and doctrine and
just focus on the visual: a woman in an alb overseeing a Catholic wedding. It
would cause people to complain that the Church is willing to forego its beliefs
for popularity while at the same time people would complain that it’s not doing
enough.
And for the people who want the Catholic Church to morph
into whatever they desire, it will be regarded as a victory. Today, women
deacons; tomorrow, women priests! And gay weddings! And abortion on demand! They
will think they have gained something from all this. They will push for women
in the priesthood even harder. Because to them there is no difference in a
deacon and a priest. Because to them there is no difference between anything,
ever. All is relative. Ontological truths or morality or divine mandates are
secondary to current culture wars. The Church is their tool for social adequation
instead of a vessel of God’s grace.
At this point, there has only been the suggestion that a
commission might seek clarification. That’s a lot of ifs and a lot of boring bureaucracy. We’re not the East; we like to
minutely define our doctrine, in our legalistic, Roman way. Slow, steady, and
wordy. According to Catholic News Service, “Pope Francis had said his understanding
was that the women described as deaconesses in the Bible were not ordained like
permanent deacons are. Mainly, he said, it appeared that they assisted with the
baptism by immersion of other women and with the anointing of women. However,
he said, ‘I will ask the (Congregation for the) Doctrine of the Faith to tell me
if there are studies on this.’” Of course, deciding that no, women can’t be
ordained deacons will also cause a media frenzy about the big, bad Catholic
Church whose stances won’t fall in line with 2016 America.
No comments:
Post a Comment