The issue of female diaconate has been effectively deep-sixed by the second commission set up by Francis. The first commission was historical and this one was more theological. The first said, there isn’t conclusive evidence of female diaconate (so… no!).
The conclusions of the second committee were issued to in a letter to Pope Leo, including the votes on the various theses they discussed.
The letter, in sometimes impenetrable Italian, signed by Card. Petrocchi, is found in today’s “Bollettino“. After the breakdown of the voting, there are Final Considerations. To wit (with my emphases and comments):
I add a personal comment after having carefully informed myself (also thanks to the contribution of my collaborators) on the main conceptual trends emerging in the vast material as well as in the texts drafted by the various Commissions.
The body of documentation, compiled by the various successive Commissions, demonstrates an intense theoretical and existential dialectic [sharp disagreement] between two theological orientations (as is also demonstrated by the results of some of the Commissions’ votes). One of them insists that the ordination of the deacon is ” ad ministerium ,” not ” ad sacerdotium “: this factor would open the way to the ordination of deaconesses. The other, however, insists on the unity of the Sacrament of Holy Orders, [affirmed by the Second Vatican Council in Lumen gentium] along with the spousal significance of its three degrees, and rejects the hypothesis of a female diaconate. It also notes that if the admission of women to the first degree of Holy Orders were approved, their exclusion from the other degrees would be inexplicable. [Which is the true goal of those who want deaconettes.]
The pronouncements of these opposing theological “schools” and the lack of convergence on fundamental doctrinal and pastoral polarities motivate, in my opinion, the maintenance of a prudential approach to the issue of women diaconate. This approach should be supported by increasingly well-equipped, global investigations, aimed, with farsighted wisdom, at exploring these ecclesial horizons. [The Italian is hilariously thick, probably because while at the same time as the writer is trying to say “No, women can’t be ordained” out of the other side of his mouth he is saying, “But we should continue to study the question anyway.” Thus, the can has been kicked, which fools nobody.]
In this context, it seems essential, as a prerequisite for further discernment, to encourage a rigorous and broad-based critical examination of the “diaconate itself,” [“Heck! What is ‘diaconate’, anyway?”] that is, of its sacramental “identity” and its ecclesial “mission,” clarifying certain structural and pastoral aspects that are currently not fully defined. In this “diakonia to the truth,” the Church must act with evangelical “parrhesia,” [In other words, “No.”] but also with the necessary freedom of evaluation and transparency of discourse. [So go ahead and keep talking if you want.]
It should also be noted that in many dioceses around the world the ministry of the diaconate does not exist, [That is to say, whether women can be ordained as deacons is a “first world problem”.] and on entire continents this sacramental institution is almost nonexistent. Where it does exist, the activities of deacons often overlap with roles proper to lay ministries or altar servers in the liturgy, raising questions among the People of God about the specific meaning of their ordination. [In other words, do we really need lots of permanent deacons? And if maybe we don’t, why have women doing those things?]
It should also be emphasized that the various Commissions were unanimous in highlighting the need to expand “communal spaces” [whatever that means] so that women can express adequate participation and co-responsibility in the Church’s decision-making bodies, including through the creation of new lay ministries. [Yeah, that’ll really solve the problems the Church faces today.]
At the end of these Considerations, I believe it is important to underline that the Commission insisted on the urgency of valorizing “baptismal diakonia” as the foundation of any ecclesial ministry. [See??!? It’s baptism that counts!]
In this framework, the “Marian dimension” must be ever better understood and developed, as the soul of every “diakonia” in the Church and in humanity. [NB: Mary was not chosen by her Son or the Apostles to be a priest or a deacon.]
So, even while kicking the can down the road another time, the Commission has pretty much said, “Nope, it shouldn’t be done. Imprudent. Too confusing. Not really an issue in most of the world. But keep talking if you want. Meanwhile, baptism means we should serve each other!”
