Three things in particular caught my eye this morning. Two of them are connected with each other and they ring of good common sense and faith. The other clanks of delusional blather.
First, at LifeSite we read finally the news made public that Candace Owens has formally become a Catholic. It seems she did this at the Brompton Oratory in London, a good choice. As a convert myself, I welcome this great news. We knew about it here in Rome for a while, but she had the right to announce it in her way and in her timeline.
Connect to this good news is an interview at the UK’s Catholic Herald (for which I wrote for quite sometime before they… changed) with entrepreneur George Farmer, aka Candace Owen’s husband. He is a revert. I was struck by his description of reversion, which paralleled mine in a way.
There was a conversion of the head and the conversion of the heart.
Of course that never stops, does it?
Finally, at LifeSite, there’s a stomach-turning piece about a German auxiliary bishop deeply involved in the homosexualist agenda who just “commissioned” 13 German women as “deacons in the spirit” after completing a 3-year diaconal training program with the “Women’s Diaconate Network”.
It seems also that the head of the German bishops conference “issued a special message of congratulations to the women who completed the course.”
The fact is that, while priesthood is what bishops and priests have, and diaconate is not a priestly order, diaconate is, nevertheless, one of the Orders of Holy Orders, which is considered as one sacrament in three orders as the Second Vatican Council’s Lumen gentium affirms. The unity of the sacrament of Holy Orders is explained in detail in the Catechism of the Catholic Church. HERE
The sacrament of Holy Orders is one sacrament, not three distinct sacraments.
St. Pope John Paul in Ordinatio sacerdotalis reaffirmed (he did not teach something new) that only men can be admitted to Holy Orders and that the Church does not have the authority to change that. Following Ordinatio sacerdotalis the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith clarified that what John Paul had reaffirmed was, in itself, the Church’s infallible teaching.
Since Holy Orders is one sacrament and not three, then none of the orders can be conferred upon women.
It is really sad that some people still push this rock up the hill.
Loading ...
Wonderful news about Candace Owens and George Farmer.
Thank you for continually pointing out that Holy Orders is one Sacrament. I would also add that the Sacrament is only received once, not twice. As a deacon, it has always bothered me when people say things like, “the real goal of these people is women priests,” as if to say that would be worse than women deacons. Any “ordination” of a woman is not possible and therefore equally reprehensible. Watching these people push that rock up a hill is making me tired.
What is it that changed about the Catholic Herald?
Interesting interview by George Farmer. (If only the faithful could be more precise in decrying of the modern world: there are really many, a great many things wrong with it, but the possibly slightly exaggerated applause for stars is among the very minor problems at worst, and certainly there simply is not any idolatry – the word is a precise term for a precise and very dangerous and heinous sin, not just an expletive – with Taylor Swift being the object of worship happening. Sorry for the digression.)
As for the Germans, well, alas, the issue with them is that they are always being so very German. “We want women priests!” “No, you can’t have women priests and we’ll dogmatize the ancient teaching that you can’t have them.” “The dogma doesn’t expressly mention any order below priesthood: we want women deacons!”
Most people, whether pro or con, misunderstand the history and practice of the female diaconate. The deaconess was a separate order from the deacon. They performed some of the same functions, but were not the same. It was also mostly, if not entirely, an Eastern phenomenon, and never took serious hold in the West. The original edition of my essay on the subject was published in the Arlington Catholic Herald, and eventually appeared in the EWTN Online Library. I humbly submit that it is free of any moral or doctrinal error.
Deaconess: A Rose By Any Other Name
Dear Dcn PB,
I don’t see how the reality can be described differently than by saying that the one sacrament of Holy Orders is received when someone is ordained to the deaconate as well as when he is to the priesthood (or consecrated as bishop); which logically implies, is received several times. One sacrament, several receptions. (After all, the Eucharist is one sacrament which has very many receptions, so why not.) Probably we would then speak best of one sacramental character which is changed – that is to say, enhanced; a deacon does not cease to be a deacon when he becomes a priest – with each receptions.
>>people say things like, “the real goal of these people is women priests,” as if to say that would be worse than women deacons.
But they would be worse. My apologies: I did not say women deacons were acceptable. They aren’t. But the “equal” in “equally reprehensible” is, I am sorry to say, wrong too.
The lesser reason for that is that deacons do not symbolize Christ the male Bridegroom of the Church as much as priests when celebrating Mass do. But do not get me wrong: It still is one sacrament; it still does mean women are excluded. But that is one reason women deacons would be less bad (but still bad).
The other and bigger is what I criticized above in my fellow-Germans: It is, for all practical effects, a dogma (well, the papally-attested infallible ordinary magisterium about a catholic truth, not the extraordinary papal magisterium about a matter of faith – but as I said: for all practical effects a dogma) that there cannot be women priests. That there also can’t be women deacons is merely the obvious conclusion of that drawn by orthodox Catholics who know their sacramentology. The Church wisely keeps her dogmas as precise and small as possible.
(Just as it is not a dogma that our Lady died before her Assumption. It is the unanimous teaching of the Church fathers and expressly said in pre-dogmatic liturgical propers; but the dogma as such only concerns her assumption and leaves the question whether she died before open. The dogma as such leaves it open; but that doesn’t mean it is open. The Church wisely keeps her dogmas as precise and small as possible.)
Now when those Germans think “we may obey dogmas, but ‘it’s not a dogma’ means let it be according to our whim”, they are obviously wrong. But they are still right about one detail: It is worse to deny a dogma than a mere obvious certainty.
Alas, those men pushing for ordaining women. STILL trying to get women to do all the work. My mother warned me about this trend in the corporate world too. “Once men find out a woman can do the job, then…the women will do the job”.
Like Adam in the Garden, men not doing their job is a root cause of societal ills.
THAT, and these pushers forget that women don’t have the Man Parts to do certain jobs, any more than a woman can inseminate a pregnancy. You can pretend all day [yea there’s a lot of that going on now] but a man is a man, and a woman is woman. This doesn’t make any more sense than declaring that these women are frogs. They are not frogs nor are they men.
Ever try to change the mind of that particular strain of hardheaded Germans? That characteristic can be a blessing or a curse. I wonder, were those who floated desperately outside the ark as God closed its door…what nationality do you s’pose they were? [okay just kidding about this last crack…me with my German maiden name]
Fr.Z sez: It is really sad that some people still push this rock up the hill.
Reminds one of Sisyphus, or perhaps a dung beetle.
(^__^)
— Guy
I wonder what’s going on with these women. Don’t they know that the greatest example of womanhood is Our Blessed Virgin Mary. Who is more powerful? Who is more honored and respected? WHO IS MORE HUMBLE?
Scary about the women. What I mean is this: it would be disheartening enough just to find out that a bishop was going to do this business with “commissioning” them. But what is truly frightening is what that 3 years in the Women’s Ordination Network school must have done to (and with) them. I can’t guess how weird, wacky, and disgusting the content of the classes must have been, but it was probably exceeded by any “practicum” in liturgical “events” of some stripe – or many stripes, most likely. Take 3 women already twisted to think they can be ordained and that they can force the Church by making demands, and that the Church is the sort of thing that ought to cave in to such demands. Then add 3 years of even uglier edu-destruction. Shivers is what I get.
The German grind continues. It is in their nature.
Not to detract from anything Imrahill said, but
well, the papally-attested infallible ordinary magisterium about a catholic truth, not the extraordinary papal magisterium about a matter of faith
Actually, there are a lot of good Catholic theologians and canon lawyers and others (and me) who think it actually WAS extraordinary papal magisterium about a matter of faith – that it fulfilled all of the criteria that Vatican I indicated (and Vatican II re-affirmed) about papal extraordinary definitions. I suspect (and this is little better than mere speculation) that JPII initially meant to go about the issue by papally attesting that the ordinary magisterium had infallibly taught it, but (a) Paul VI had really done that already in Inter Insigniores (1976), and did it pretty well, too, so JPII doing it again wasn’t going to change the state of the issue. And (b) when JPII included in OS the phrases like “remove all doubt” and “confirm the brethren”, he slipped into precisely the intention and language that invokes the specifically papal charism that can remove all doubt and confirms the brethren: Papal infallibility.
“George Farmer, aka Candace Owen’s husband. He is a revert”
If I’m reading the interview correctly, first a convert, then a revert, or semi-revert, since he never left the Catholic Church after his conversion.