Necessity of avoiding making unwise and very divisive choices on female diaconate
The Female Diaconate: Two Cautions May 9, 2024 by: Massimo Nardello
In these notes I would like to offer some theological reflections on two cautions that, in my opinion, should be taken into account in the decision-making process regarding the possible introduction of the ordination of women to the permanent diaconate.
Although I tend to be in agreement with such an option, it seems to me that there are still some open questions of which we must be well aware at this stage of the ecclesial journey, to avoid making unwise and very divisive choices.
.jpg)
In what way is Tradition normative?
A first question concerns the theological problem of Tradition.
As is known, the possibility of ordaining women to the permanent diaconate has been supported by a series of studies, even recent ones, which have shown how in antiquity there existed deacons ordained with the laying on of hands.
We cannot say with certainty that this practice has always been recognized as legitimate by all local Churches, since the very ancient sources available to us shed light only on what happened in some territories and for some periods. In any case, there is no doubt that deacons existed.
At the same time, however, these studies have highlighted how their ministry was not analogous to that of men, but was exclusively related to the female world. Therefore, as is natural, the study of ancient documents does not provide us with data with an irrefutable meaning, but a series of elements that must be interpreted.
At first glance, this interpretation seems like a very simple operation. Today it seems evident that the destination of the ancient female diaconal ministry to women only was motivated by the patriarchal mentality characteristic of the patristic age. This does not change the fact that, in our day, the restoration of that ministry could only occur on equal terms with the male one, and therefore would involve the activation of a ministerial form that has never existed in the Church. Is this legitimate?
To answer this question, it is necessary to clarify, from a theological point of view, how Tradition is normative for the Church. Can we only introduce what has already been present in the past or is there room for change or even creativity? In fact, Tradition has undergone many developments, sometimes even discontinuous, even in the theology of the ordained ministry.
The question, therefore, becomes how to discern the legitimacy of a change in ancient practice. The question is not trivial. Can we, for example, renounce the episcopate, or use other foods than bread and wine in the celebration of the Eucharist in the name of the will of the Spirit? Obviously not.
It is of little use to refer the problem to the Magisterium, since the Pope and the other bishops carry out their service of authoritative discernment of the divine will in an absolutely human way, comparing themselves with the sense of faith of their communities and, in particular, with what emerges from the theological reflection that they choose to frequent. They too, in short, need to understand how Tradition is normative, and to what extent changes can be introduced with respect to what has happened in the past.
Now, in my opinion, contemporary Catholic theology is not able to give a shared answer to this question.
Complicating the issue is the growing incidence of a theological vision that I would define as anthropocentric – not simply anthropological –, according to which, since the human is the recipient of revelation, what emerges as genuine and humanizing from an anthropological context, or from certain cultural instances, must be considered an expression of the face of the God of Jesus Christ and of his will for his Church and for humanity.[1] In the case of the female diaconate, the fact that equality between men and women is a cultural value that is certainly authentic and shared in Western societies – at least, in theory – means that, according to the vision under consideration, the diaconal ordination of women is certainly legitimized.
From this perspective, the question of how Tradition is normative for the life of the Church loses its meaning. The ideas and practices of the past simply become a repertoire from which to draw freely to build a Church, or rather a Christianity, that is shaped by cultural instances. And, since cultures are multiple and different, this approach inevitably leads to a fragmentation of the ecclesial fabric and, in the long run, a breakdown of communion between local Churches.
In reality, if one assumes this anthropocentric foundation of theology, that is, determined primarily by cultural instances, many aspects of the doctrine of faith are compromised. For example, the belief that the bishop of Rome is the successor of Peter, and that, as such, he can exercise his current primatial ministry, no longer holds up. After all, in the New Testament there is never any mention of a bond between the Apostle and the Pope, and recent studies have highlighted how it began to be formalized only around the 4th–5th century.
Even more, on a cultural level, such an authoritative role as that of the pontiff has no justification. In liberal societies, power is delegated by the people and always has a pre-established duration. Therefore, assuming cultural instances as an expression of divine revelation also means ending the ministry of the bishop of Rome as it is configured today, and establishing a democratic regime in the Church.
In short, those who misappropriate the reform demands rightly invoked by Pope Francis to deconstruct the normative value of Tradition should consider that this approach also compromises the authority of the pontiff himself, which has no other theological foundation than in Tradition itself.
Therefore, reflection on the female diaconate cannot be determined primarily by cultural demands, but requires a prior response to the question of how Tradition is normative, that is, how the entire Church, guided by the Pope and the other bishops, can understand what changes it is legitimate to introduce also in its ministerial structure. Only at that point will it be possible to establish that the destination of the deacons of antiquity to the female world alone can be overcome, and offer Catholic women today a diaconal ministry with the same characteristics as the male one.
On the contrary, if such an option were to be developed simply to correspond to cultural demands regarding the equality between men and women based on their presumed theological normativity, female ordination would be founded in a haphazard way and an extremely dangerous and potentially divisive mentality for theology and the life of the Church would be fueled.
The reduction of the diaconal service to the baptismal one
A second question concerns the ministerial identity of the diaconate.
For about thirty years, since I began to deal with the formation of permanent deacons, I have tried to spread the belief that the diaconal ministry is not for service tout court. This phrase may appear problematic, also in consideration of recent magisterial interventions, but obviously it must be well understood.
The theology of the diaconate should start from the premise that baptism, completed by confirmation and nourished by the Eucharist, is a sacramental foundation that is amply sufficient for service within the Church, and also to “awaken” Christian communities, reminding them of their vocation to reach out to those who are far away, to stand with the least, to promote a more humane society and to protect the environment.
On the contrary, to affirm that only the diaconate enables such activity would mean calling into question the theology of baptism, and also going against the evidence. In every community there are non-ordained men and women who, through their charisms and their lifestyle, call everyone to attention to the poor and to care for creation.
If logic still has value in the Church, it is necessary to explain in what sense deacons have the task of “awakening” communities, if in fact other believers can do it simply by virtue of being Christians, sometimes in a better way than those who are ordained.
This problem cannot be solved by scaling down the service capacities that derive from baptism to enhance the diaconal ones. It is much more important to enhance the ministry of all non-ordained baptized people than the permanent diaconate.
Instead, one can resort to a Platonic ecclesiology, affirming that the deacon is conformed to Christ the servant, and therefore calls the community to service simply by the fact of being ordained, regardless of what he actually does. However, we no longer live in a cultural context that can give meaning to an ecclesiology of this type, so today such a vision would be incomprehensible.
Furthermore, the way deacons are employed in parishes and dioceses shows that the service of the threshold, beyond theoretical proclamations, is not really at the heart of their ministry.
Many of them dedicate most of their time to tasks that have nothing to do with proximity to the world of marginalization or those far from the faith. For example, managing an office in the curia, dealing with administration, doing catechism or working in family ministry are activities different from charitable activities or evangelization of those who are not Christians.
Finally, deacons normally have a professional activity that takes place outside the confines of the Church, and until their retirement they can offer a much more limited availability of time than other ecclesial subjects, such as priests, religious and retired volunteers. Even after the end of their working activity, then, health difficulties or family commitments can make them less available for service than other ecclesial figures, perhaps dedicated full time to their community.
The vision that could circumvent all these critical issues is to think of the diaconate not as a function of ecclesial service tout court, but as a ministry of leadership aimed at authoritatively guiding, by virtue of the charisma received with ordination, groups of believers, preferably those who work on the threshold in Christian communities, that is, who care for the poor, the distant and the environment.
In this way, the deacon becomes an icon of Christ the servant not because he is more at the service of others, but because he is the authoritative guide and spokesperson of those baptized who, by personal charisma, more clearly express the extroversion of their ecclesial community.
Such a service, being a form of leadership, may not require much time, even if it still requires theological and pastoral formation far superior to that currently required in our local Churches for candidates for the diaconal ministry.
Now, all this is also very relevant for the female diaconate. In my opinion, if Pope Francis were to decide to authorize it, the probable strong resistance to female leadership in the Catholic Church could push to further level the diaconal service on the baptismal one. Thus both deacons and deacons would have no authoritative role, but would simply be men and women who have distinguished themselves for their service and who have therefore been rewarded with ordination.
This would fundamentally undermine that desired requalification of female subjectivity in the Catholic Church that is expected from the possible ordination of deacons.
This risk makes it necessary to requalify the male diaconate before or during the process of discernment on the possible reactivation of the female diaconate, so that the latter does not also drag the former towards an even weaker ministerial role than the current one, substantially similar to the baptismal one.
This would be a disaster on a pastoral level, also because it would further consolidate the idea that true ecclesial service presupposes the diaconate, and that baptismal ministry is something informal and incomplete.
In reality, it is precisely the non-ordained baptized who are the most abundant and strategic resource that the Church of all times has at its disposal to carry out its mission.
[1] On this point, cf. M. Nardello, La normatività delle Scritture in alcuni elaborazioni teologiche contemporanei (here).
See also
.jpeg)
Comments