Aug 15, '12 6:00 am
The Leadership Conference of Women Religious has begun talks with the archbishop tasked with its reform, but says it will not make fundamental changes to its expression of consecrated religious life, reports the Catholic News Agency.http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/cathnews/RSS/~4/o36b5pdzyoA
Aug 15, '12 6:00 am
Of course none of us know the specifics of the dialogue. However I think it was Cardinal Burke who said last week that if there weren’t changes to the items at issue then the group would have to be officially abolished ( I guess that means declared non-Catholic). What the LCWR would do then who can say, they don’t seem to regard themselves as Catholic the way I see it. They might try to survive on their own and see how many of the various religious orders will stay with them.
I wish they would tell the public what are these nun’s beliefs? And I think it high-time that women deacons made a comeback!
I do not think the LCWR is not going to back down…too much ego involved; and, like some recent “Rock Star” priests on TV. have come to think they are bigger than the Bishops, or even the Vatican. And like the “Rock Star” priests, they will soon pass into obscurity once the church dismisses them. Clearly, these nuns have forgotten their vow of obedience-real or implied.
The fact is, that if the LCWR is dissolved by the church, and individual nuns are put under sanction by the church, these women have no place to go. What are they going to do, become Episcopalians?
As for women Deacons, considering that becoming a Deacon is a step towards the priesthood, I seriously doubt it. Not after JP II’s pronouncement about womans priests.
Regardless what may or may have not been regarding women Deacons in the historical past, permitting them today would not only cause confusion amongst the laity but would add one more hinderance to union with the Orthodox Church in the future.
Having women deacons will not pose a threat to the priesthood. Most male deacons remain deacons mostly because they are married. Women are involved in a lot of the Mass anyway why shouldn’t they have an official title if they are already there anyway?
I can’t remember where, but think there’s a blurb on Catholic Answers Apologetics page about female deacons.
There have never been female deacons in the Church, period. Christ was a male, he chose all males as his Apostles and deacons. And Christ was no respector of persons, if he had wanted women in the ordained clergy he would have chosen them irregardless of the culture of the times. Besides, this is not the issue. We are dealing here with willfull disobedience. The bishops did not cause it, nor did the Church. This is something that has been going on since the sixties and was, no doubt, bubbling away under the surfact before then. And it is not the first time in the history of the Church that there was need of reform of religious orders, male and female. Even within the ranks of the hierarchy there has been, from time to time, a need for reform. Indeed that is basically what lead to all the councils but especially the Council of Trent. It is just part of human nature to be disobedient, to go after the " forbidden fruit. "
Making a comeback from where? The fictitious fantasies of historical revisionists?
Historically, there were deaconess, but those were not female deacons.
We have two different topics going on here. I don’t specifically know what these nuns are advocating for so I can’t say I am for them either. As for deacons, Phoebe was mentioned as diakonos so yes there were female deacons. Nothing unbiblical about it. And no Jesus could not have chosen female apostles because it was a male-dominated society at that time, no one would have listened to his message.
The Son of Man has to conform to social norms? Odd, I don’t remember dining with lepers, prostitutes, or tax collectors or claiming he would destroy the Temple and rebuild it in 3 days being all that popular, or common.
If you don’t know what the nuns are advocating, why are you posting in this thread? Start another thread in a different category regarding your Phoebe=deacon claim.
In much the same would have been impossible for Him to engage in conversation with Samaritan women at wells, as that too was a sociological taboo? Is that what you are trying say??
From the article:
“During its recent national assembly, the group instructed its board members “to articulate its belief that religious life, as it is lived by the women religious who comprise LCWR, is an authentic expression of this life that must not be compromised,” the conference of sisters said in a statement on Monday.”
I have no idea what statements like that mean.
(As for deacons, the diaconate is an ordained ministry and thus not open to women. That will not be open for discussion.)
She was referred to that as role, not title. Diakonos simply means servant and that is how she was referred to as.
There is no historical documentation that the Church has ever offered Holy Orders to women.
Wow I thought they would be nice people here but I see that they aren’t. Just some people who want to hold on to things that with careful study can’t be considered true.
Well consider how shocked they were with that! Imagine if Jesus had chosen a female disciple!
You guys need to read Phyllis Zagano who has made an excellent case for female deacons!
And telling someone that the topic is not open for discussion is rude and untrue. Yes it is open for discussion because some have written about it like Zagano. I could understand if you said not on this particular thread.
Just because I’m calling you out for diverting the thread topic doesn’t mean I’m not nice.
The forum has rules about staying on-topic. It’s why I suggested a new thread in a different forum, say apologetics, or something more appropriate.
People would be more than happy to discuss it there, charitably, in its own appropriate thread. It’s not fair to the OT to divert.
Maybe I should play a moderator on TV?
OK. Sorry for diverting the topic. Not much to discuss though about the nuns when they haven’t discussed what they are advocating for.
You can find a ton of threads in this forum on that topic:
Its been a contentious subject.
Sorry, my phrasing was too broad in using the terms “not up for discussion.” The issue has been discussed and will no doubt continue to be discussed. And women certainly could have an official title. But as an ordained ministry, I’m sure that it will simply never happen. My reasons are better summarized at this link.