(LifeSiteNews) — The study commission on the question of women’s ordination concludes, on the one hand, that the possibility of admitting women to the diaconate (as part of the sacrament of ordination) must be ruled out, but at the same time that it is not possible to “make a definitive judgment, as in the case of priestly ordination.”^[1]

This makes little sense. It is all too obvious that, despite the historical findings, the aim is to keep the issue alive and the question open. The church feminists who aspire to the priesthood and already wear fantasy stoles are nevertheless dissatisfied.

READ: Vatican refuses to form ‘definitive judgment’ on women deacons

Ever since John Paul II closed this can forever with Ordinatio sacerdotalis (1994), they have been trying to open it again. Although it has been claimed in many places that the historical models in the Church’s past cannot be normative for the practice of the Church in our time, the study commissions have so far only re-examined history again and again, ultimately arriving at the same conclusions that have been available for decades. Tragedy or comedy? Probably both! The deaconesses of that time were different from the deacons of their time and were in fact culturally conditioned.^[2]

Contrary to Sr. Linda Poch, who is presented as a papal advisor, the rejection of women’s ordination (and consequently also of women’s diaconate) is not culturally conditioned, but infallible, timeless doctrine. The latter protects the deeper ecclesiological connections in this question (Christ-man-bridegroom; Church-woman-bride), which are true and unchanging for all times and cultures. Even Pope Francis, who not without intention set up the latest study commissions on this subject, recognized these connections (cf. his references to the Marian and Petrine principles; cf. Hans Urs von Balthasar). The commission, consisting of five men and five women, was therefore already clear in 2021 that for this reason the historical diaconate was not a simple female equivalent of the male diaconate and apparently had no sacramental character.^[3]

So even if history does not provide any basis for a sacramental diaconate for women, the question is nevertheless declared open for theological reasons. It must be clarified by the Magisterium. “However, this is likely to be a difficult undertaking in view of theological divergences and a lack of consensus,” comments Mario Trifunovic.^[4]

READ: German Catholic bishops’ new document on ‘sexual diversity’ in schools signals deep spiritual crisis

As the reactions to the Magisterium in 1994 (Ordinatio sacerdotalis) have shown, the recourse to the Magisterium recommended by the study commission is therefore double-edged. The unteachable remain unteachable despite the Magisterium’s decision. Why did the study commission include this twist in its findings despite the clear evidence? To ensure that we enter another round on this issue under different circumstances.

This reminds me a little of the fable of the hedgehog and the hare on the racecourse. It shows an absurd race due to the hedgehog’s trickery and, in the end, an exhausted hare. Is the next milestone a sui generis women’s diaconate: a deaconess without ordination, but with liturgical benediction? Perhaps such a “deaconess” will be permitted and seen as progress in synodal cooperation. If men and women, ordained and non-ordained, ultimately (then; already now) do the same thing in practice, the former because of their ordination, the latter because of blessings and special exemptions (e.g., baptisms; preaching; leading), then we have arrived at sacramental dystopia.

Some see this as the overcoming of clericalism, others as the new synodality, the togetherness. Neither understands what sacrament means. In Switzerland, we have had this for a long time. Call it what you will!