jump to navigation

Bergoglio establishes commission to study diaconate of women August 2, 2016

Posted by Tantumblogo in different religion, disaster, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, paganism, priests, Revolution, scandals, secularism, Society, suicide, the struggle for the Church.
trackback

If this study goes anything like the Synods, we can safely assume not only has the matter already been decided, but the papers announcing the change in policy after the close of the study are already written, or at least well underway:

On May 12, 2016, the Holy Father, in the course of the meeting — in the format of dialogue in the Paul VI Hall — with the participants at the Plenary Assembly of Superiors-General, expressed his intention of “establishing an official commission that can study the question” of the Diaconate of women, “especially regarding the first years of the Church”.
After intense prayer and mature reflection, His Holiness has decided to institute the Commission for the Study of the Diaconate of Women……..
There follows the list of individuals making up the study group, including 6 women and 6 men, plus a president from the CDF.  I know only a few names on the list – the ones I know lean heavily liberal, including Phyllis Zagano, who has written for the Apostate Reporter for  years.

There were deaconesses in the early Church.  Their role, however, was strictly limited, and nothing like the modern role of the deacon, especially in the Novus Ordo realm.  Since baptism in the early Church involved full immersion and little clothing, women assistants were needed to perform them to prevent the risk of scandal and sin.

I think we can rest assured this study will ignore the true historical realities, and instead try to invent out of whole cloth a sweeping mandate for an expansive list of female diaconal duties.  I have to believe, in spite of Bergoglio’s statements to the contrary, that this is ultimately about paving the way for false women priestesses.  That is what this “movement” (of a very small number of disaffected women and some ignorant, worldly hangers on) has been driving at all along, since the scourge of feminism first burst into reality in the Church in the late 60s.  Thankfully most of the women clamoring for this are quite elderly and they are not being replaced by younger followers.   But a female diaconate could breathe new life into an increasingly moribund effort.

Will something like this only continue to expand the growing divide between the traditional practice of the Faith, centered on the TLM, and the Novus Ordo practice?  It is impossible that it would not, unless it is planned to unleash all the recent novelties of the NO on the TLM at some point (or just do away with “permission” for the TLM outright).

Either way, it’s disconcerting.  Some may say “you’re over-reacting,” but all I can say is, look how the Synods went, and what is planned for future ones.  The Left telegraphs its objectives well in advance.  I don’t think I’m over-reacting at all, I think I’m making a sober assessment of the situation.

Which may soon look like this:

Oh, bring it on……and while you’re at it, do tell me all about your absent father and bullying at school.  Quite the rich tapestry, I’m sure.

So how do you reconcile this with a sudden breakthrough with the Society?  How could the Society accept?

Comments

1. Micah - August 2, 2016

If fake women priestesses are brought in, and the TLM is officially suppressed or permission taken away causing there to be no TLM availability, I will prayerfully consider going full time to an Eastern Catholic Church (Byzantine, Melkite, etc) vs a crazy liberal NO parish.

No matter what happens, I will never leave the Church (where would I go?), but a reverent Eastern Catholic parish like the Byzantine Catholic parish north of DFW may be an alternative.

2. David L Alexander - August 2, 2016

In ecclesiastical parlance, “appointing a commission” means what one person referred to as “a slow inglorious torturous death, followed by saying ‘we looked into it.'” In any case (and leaving aside the disrespectful habit of referring to the Holy Father by his previous name, as if to imply something), what it is, and what it ain’t, can be found in this excruciatingly orthodox essay: Deaconess: A Rose By Any Other Name

Tantumblogo - August 2, 2016

Well, I’d say in many cases that is correct, but I’d rebut that the recent Synod was a powerful contraindication of that. There, and it is now known, the conclusion to be reached was decided in advance, with the post-synodal summary being written in advance, before the 2nd session even met, and the post-synodal exhortation drew heavily from the writings of Tucho Fernandez dating back years.

David L Alexander - August 2, 2016

First of all, a synod isn’t a commission, if only inasmuch as the former is highly visible, while the latter is not so much. Most people didn’t even know there had already been a commission to study the issue about thirteen years earlier.

Second, the previous commission had already reached a conclusion. Which brings us to …

Third, the most likely reason for convening another one, is because when the Holy Father was asked about it, he simply didn’t have an answer, and said the first thing that came to his head. Even popes don’t learn everything about the job in the first few years, and even they too find a need to save face now and then.

Fourth, however confusing the post-synodal document may be, and whatever its faults, it does have some content of merit, as Father Peter Stravinskas has taken pains to point out in his writings (which you should really read sometime).

And finally, the only conclusion they’ll reach, is the only one *to* reach, which will not satisfy the Phyllis Zaganos of the world. Yes, she’s on the commission. So are a lot of other people no less well versed on the subject. They didn’t call me, and (in all humility) I can tell you right now what they’re going to say.

Or, rather, I already did. (See above.)

c matt - August 3, 2016

To say that the post “Sin”odal document has some points of merit is like saying a poisoned glass of Cabernet still retains some of its wonderful bouquet. Why do the defenders of it never quite comprehend that point?

David L Alexander - August 3, 2016

Because they don’t have to.

The “defenders” to which I refer, including Father Joseph Fessio, make no excuses for certain ambiguous or problematic sections of the document (which you’d know if you actually knew what they said). Also, cutting and pasting in print is easier than doing so with a glass of Cabernet, thus your comparison is completely arbitrary.

If Father Stravinskas’ comments were available online, I’d link them here, but they appear in his bi-monthly periodical “The Catholic Response.”

Tantumblogo - August 3, 2016

I think it comes down to how one views this pontificate and its aims. The Synod and the exhortation that followed unleashed a massive change, an unprecedented change, to the Church’s practice regarding the divorce/remarried receiving the Blessed Sacrament, even if it did so in somewhat surreptitious ways. This came after many solemn declarations from very well meaning people that such a change was impossible and never to be feared. Amoris Laetitia also proposed, or strongly hinted at, many other novelties.

I don’t think we’re going to convince one another, if I’m wrong and nothing comes of this, I owe you a Coke.

David L Alexander - August 3, 2016

Your response assumes that 1) this issue is confined to any one pontificate (that is, that of Pope Francis, which is what we call him now), and 2) he has an “aim” with regard to an issue on which he probably doesn’t spend a lot of time personally and all by himself (which would be just about anything). So, “it comes down to” the facts. Hence, a commission, one of people who know a little more than he does (by his own admission) about a particular subject.

Payment may be rendered upon your next visit to the DC area. Bring the wife and kids. See the monuments. Visit the Smithsonian.

Tantumblogo - August 3, 2016

No, my response is not predicated on assuming this is the only pontificate to raise the issue, it’s predicated on what I believe, based on a vast amount of evidence, this pontificate intends to do with the issue. Just as the Synod recovered ground already studied, and solemnly settled (centuries ago, but most recently, in Familiaris Consortio).

There are no “facts” regarding contingent future events. You have your estimation, I have mine, but similar past estimations have already been proved wrong regarding the Synod – and don’t I remember you strongly arguing that nothing novel would emerge from that? – we’ll have to wait to see who is right, but I’m very confident we will see women deacons emerge out of this study, or doing this pontificate.

I have no more time to discuss this. Enjoy your final word, as I’m sure you will.

David L Alexander - August 3, 2016

You keep talking about the Synod as though it’s the only issue in play here, and about this pontificate as though it can only be seen in a vacuum. Neither is true.

Commission. Synod. Two different words. Two different things. Two different levels of authority. Two different … everything.

Steve D. - August 4, 2016

Is it any wonder that the Arian heresy lasted for so many centuries? Some Catholics just refuse to accept what’s staring them in the face, usually a sign of a weak faith.

3. Richard M - August 2, 2016

“There were deaconesses in the early Church. Their role, however, was strictly limited, and nothing like the modern role of the deacon…”

Which makes one wonder if Phyllis Zagano would be happy with the vow of perpetual chastity for deaconnesses (such as they were) that was a consistent requirement in the Early Church.

But I think we all know the answer to that.

c matt - August 3, 2016

I don’t know, if that picture of her is accurate, it might not be that much of a challenge for her.

David L Alexander - August 3, 2016

Because they don’t have to.

The “defenders” to which I refer, including Father Joseph Fessio, make no excuses for certain ambiguous or problematic sections of the document (which you’d know if you actually knew what they said). Also, cutting and pasting in print is easier than doing so with a glass of Cabernet, thus your comparison is completely arbitrary.

If Father Stravinskas’ comments were available online, I’d link them here, but they appear in his bi-monthly periodical “The Catholic Response.”

David L Alexander - August 3, 2016

(This was intended as a reply to the comment of “c matt” about a glass of Cabernet, not about Dr Zagano’s physical appearance, which really should not be an issue here.)

Judy - August 3, 2016

I have read some of that woman’s writings in the National Schismatic Reporter. She is scary. I wouldn’t want her teaching CCD classes in the smallest parish in America. But now she is on this commission.

David L Alexander - August 3, 2016

Judy:

True, Dr Zagano is on the commission (which won’t involved teaching in public). That being the case …

Her work was encouraged by the late Cardinal John O’Connor of New York, and she posed the question of the female diaconate to then-Cardinal Ratzinger fifteen years ago (when he replied that it was “under study”). Most of her research is sound (and I can speak with authority on that); the problem is with the conclusions that she draws through selective leaps of reasoning. I deal with this in my article. (See link above at my first response.) And while she may be on the commission, her serious gaps in understanding may place her at a disadvantage with those not so afflicted, thus discrediting herself in the process.

Honestly, they would have been better off appointing me, but my day job often interferes with my apostolate, so it’s just as well.

4. Gc5341 - August 3, 2016

Enough is enough. I am sick and tired of Francis. I hope his terrible reign comes to an end soon.

David L Alexander - August 3, 2016

I’d recommend putting those hopes aside for a moment, and ask yourself if you’re praying for him hard enough. I’ll bet you spend more time reading “Tantumblogo” whining about things he can do nothing about, attacking people behind a pseudonym, than you do praying for the Holy Father. It’s for people like us (you read it right, us) who are disconcerted by Pope Francis’ occasional foot-in-mouth issues, that the following homily was given. There’s much more where this came from, but let’s start with this, shall we?

12 thoughts on the papacy and life in the Church today

Oremus pro invicem,

DLA

Judy - August 4, 2016

That was an unfair assessment. Many Catholics are praying for Francis every day, saying Rosaries for him, and praying for him at Mass. Unfortunately, things just don’t seem to be getting any better. Hoping that his papacy ends does not mean hoping that he dies. We are ready for an end to the off-the-cuff remarks and interviews and insults and stunts like putting a beach ball on the altar or washing the feet of women and muslims. We need strong leadership, and he is not providing it.

David L Alexander - August 4, 2016

It is more than fair. “Many Catholic are praying for Francis every day” without calling him “Bergoglio” to the exclusion of his proper title, hiding behind noms de plume, or attacking him publicly. They include those who are just as “ready for an end to the off-the-cuff remarks and interviews and insults and stunts” as yourself. (Wanna guess why I would know that?) There is a right way and a wrong way to address these matters. You have the opportunity within this venue to make a choice. One of them is in the comments, by a man much wiser than I.

Steve D. - August 4, 2016

Occasional foot in mouth issues??

Unbelievable…

David L Alexander - August 4, 2016

“Unbelievable.” Your failure to be more specific? I quite agree.

Steve D. - August 4, 2016

Go away, you sanctimonious troll.

David L Alexander - August 4, 2016

Excuse me, but I’ve been a pretty active participant in this discussion. My having a viewpoint that might seem contrarian does not make me a troll. But if name-calling is the best you can do, well, if you look up the definition of a troll, it wouldn’t necessarily apply to me. Now, you can say I’m “provocative” only to the extent that I hold a different view, but not as an end in itself. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_troll


Sorry comments are closed for this entry

%d bloggers like this: