Tony Flannery: Responding to the Vatican statement on the ordination of women as deacons.
My initial reaction to the statement from the Vatican ruling out the possibility of women being eligible for the diaconate in the Catholic Church was one of great sadness.
This development has something of the same feel for me as the papal document, Humanae Vitae, of 1968 declaring that the use of artificial means of contraception was a serious sin. One of the great problems with that document was that it emerged from a ‘shadowy’ group of male clerics in the Vatican — largely nameless – and that it went against what was then the developing consensus among the members of the Church.
This present statement has again come from a ‘shadowy’ body – apparently ten members appointed by the Curia, but names are not revealed.
If the 1968 document went against a developing consensus, this one is much more problematic in this area. We are now in the middle of a Synodal Process in the Church, which is based on the notion of giving a voice to all the baptised. That voice has so far been clear and strong on its view of the need for equality for women in all aspects of Church life and ministry; in this country a survey a couple of years ago recorded that 96% of church going Catholics were in favour of women being ordained, not just as deacons, but also as priests.
So once again the Vatican, with its secretive methods, has dismissed the views of the faithful, even in the midst of much hyped synodality.
The consequences of this could be serious for the Church. I know that the large majority of women, especially in the western world, will reject it, and the exodus of young women from the Church will increase.
Can Synodality survive this development? At the very least it will be damaged. How can people be expected to continue to give their time and energy to the significant amount of work involved if they know that a secret Vatican ‘cabal’ can dismiss the findings with the stroke of a pen? Does Pope Leo not realise that?
So, in my view, this is a bay day for the Catholic Church.
Tony I have nothing to add. Synodality how are you?
One wonders where we are going if anywhere.
I have earned what some people might call the dubious distinction of being blocked by @synodalpathway on X. (Aka Twitter).
To coin a phrase from the man who confirmed me ( Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre), This blocking “is a badge of Honour”.
This is proof, if ever it was needed,
that Todos, Todos is Sanctimonious Hypocrisy.
To borrow a phrase from Iggy’s contribution above “Synodality How are You!”
“One wonders where we are going if anywhere.”
Why not all go to taking seriously – absolutely seriously – the teaching – and truth – that we are all exactly equal in dignity anyway, by virtue of our baptism – and that ordination does not change that?
Is it not because of our inherited mistake of thinking of the church as a status pyramid – and of ordination as THE status-bestowing sacrament – that people make up nonsense such as masculinity being ‘integral’ to a sacrament – to cling to the superior status they think they have and want to keep?
Why not instead award greatest respect to those who serve others with integrity – as Jesus did – knowing well that many women do that far better than the status-conscious ordained males?
The older I get the more convinced I become that status anxiety is the original human frailty dramatised in Genesis and still at the root of all evil today. [Trump is as status-anxious as Putin, and together they are plotting to carve up Ukraine – just as Caiphas, Herod and Pilate did in solving their Passover crisis with Jesus.]
No wonder that Pope Francis was hated by the status-obsessed for saying he was a sinner – for if even popes are to be considered sinners what’s the point of ecclesiastical ambition? Might that even be a sin too, if the last are truly first?
How come so many enthusiasts for synodality are women anyway? Could it be because they know that the Trinity are not delaying the bestowal of grace until the misogynists have finally capitulated? The strangest things can happen when people pray seriously in a spirit of exactly equal dignity.
For me, this discussion seems to be between those who view the Church as an organisation and those who view the Church as a sacred institution, instituted by the Son of God, and which has followed 2000 years of teaching and tradition.
Clearly, if the Church is merely a human organisation – albeit with a benign, spiritual purpose – then there is no reason why contemporary values (notably Western-centric), HR and Diversity policies should not apply. We should simply recruit the best person for the job – whether they be women, married people, same-sex couples, or actually even a Catholic. It all depends on what the “job” of a Priest entails. Why can’t a female, lesbian, non-Catholic be “ordained” to carry out certain tasks? After all, these tasks are really being done for the benefit of baptised Catholics, not necessarily for the benefit of the “priest”.
So you can recruit for the purposes of the job.
That is the logical outcome of seeing “equality” as the measure of “inclusion”. There is no reason why the rules pertaining to anything cannot be altered to ensure current western sensibilities of Equality are satisfied.
But if you see the Church as more than a human construct, if you see Jesus’ apostles as being deliberate (given Jesus’ radically modern attitude towards women) and if you see the development of Church doctrine and tradition as being divinely inspired through the Holy Spirit, then you may need to take a humbler approach towards things that you superficially disagree with.
The Church of England is becoming extinct. Evangelical and other churches are transitory by nature. Instead of lamenting the barring of women to the diaconate or the priesthood, we should be evangelising more young men and shouting loudly for vocations to the priesthood. The Diaconate itself is not necessary, at the end of the day. But with no priests there is no Church.