This is the view of Dr Joe Grayland, theologian, author and parish priest of three parishes in Palmerston North, New Zealand.

He questions whether we need another form of the clergy. - Originally reported 31 May 2021

Grayland made the comments, Thursday, during Flashes of Insight - Women Deacons in the Catholic Church, a conversation with Dr Phyllis Zagano, Emeritus Professor of New Testament at the Ecole Biblique, Justin Taylor and hosted by Emeritus Professor of Historical Theology at the University of Nottingham Thomas O'Loughlin.

Grayland asks if the Church actually needs permanent male or female deacons.

If it does, he suggests we need to change the understanding projected by the transitional diaconate modelled in seminaries.

Grayland says he works with eight women across the three parishes; they serve the community, they work full time, but none are ordained.

We might need more priests, but Grayland says the last thing we need is an expanded clerical class, the permanent diaconate.

It is not a perspective Zagano shares.

Zagano is an internationally recognised scholar, prolific writer and advocate for women deacons.

She says that if anyone wants to be a deacon to get power, they have other issues.

The ministry of the deacon is one of service, she says.

Zagano says it is important to have a specialised view of ministry and that the diaconate should not be limited to in-house Church functions.

Zagano says the office of the deacon is distinct from the function of deacons.

Deacons hold the same office, but their ministry of service would be expressed differently, she said.

She says that if people want to go to confession, they see a priest, and if they go for food, counselling or spiritual direction, deacons can offer the service.

If our prime concern is not to expand the clerical class, why ordain anyone, she asks.

She however noted that if the Church were to reintroduce deacons, there is a question around whether they would be installed or ordained.

Zagano says there is no doubt that women were deacons in the Early Church.

It is a point that Taylor, who works on some of the earliest evidence the Church has, agrees with.

Taylor says that it is clear from both scripture and the documents from the first thousand years that women were deacons.

When the Early Church spoke of deacons, there was no distinction made between male or female.

Taylor says that referencing deacons, men or women, the Early Church saw deacons as officeholders and not just functionaries.

Questioned by O'Loughlin about the future, Grayland says that women's ministry should not be seen as a threat to male in ministry.

He commented when looking at the evidence if the Church is going to have women deacons, the church needs to popularise it as part of the Church evolving.

He says that reflecting on what Zagano and Taylor have discussed; the Church needs to understand that the development of women's diaconate is not a straight-line trajectory but an evolution.

Grayland says he hopes our Church's understanding of women's ministry and women's diaconate will change but wonders why we do not have women deacons now.

Zagano agrees and says we must not go forth in political discussion but with a spirit of discernment.

She says that a wise bishop once wrote to her and says this about discernment.

"Discernment is not an organizational technique, and it's not a passing fashion, but it's an interior attitude rooted in an act of faith."

"Discernment is the method and at the same time the goal."

"It's based on the belief that God is at work in the history of the world in the events of life and the people we meet and who speak to us."

"This is why we are called to listen to what the Spirit suggests to us with often unpredictable ways and directions."

"As one might assume, he's a Jesuit bishop," she says.

Zagano concludes by saying it is important that theologians listen to the People of God and for the People of God to make their needs known.

In a spirit of discernment, Zagano is convinced that if the People of God make their needs known, they will not be denied.

As to the future, Zagano says that we need a genuine discerning discussion, a prayerful discussion, to move to a future where the Church will restore the tradition of women in ministry and the diaconate.

"I stood there in the Church and didn't know what to do. I was listening to this lament in a very public place. I wanted to leave, but then I thought I would be seen to be a perpetrator or outed as a victim. So, I sat down and spent the rest of the Mass angry…," said one man, who wrote to me.

The man says he felt used, adding, "I am so sick of apologies; they are just another form of victimisation."

This is the first of a series of stories I received following my initial piece in CathNews.

A nurse also wrote, recalling that at the end of the Mass, she and the other reader sat with the reader asked to lead the lament—without any preparation—and processed what it all meant.

"A truly professional organisation would have offered support to anyone in the congregation impacted by abuse because you never know who is sitting there and what they are experiencing, but there was nothing."

Another person wrote: "The Sunday Mass is no longer a safe place when I am made guilty of the sins of paedophiles, and church leaders who have not led."

A younger person recounted the experience of being "personally blamed for the crimes that others did in my country" during her grandparent's generation.

"To me, the lament does the same, and I know that others also were upset; I just wonder how those who were abused felt?"

Communications blunder

"They did old-form communications, focusing mainly on content rather than modern messaging that also considers the impact," wrote a communications professional.

Nowadays, there is also more than one channel to deliver a suitable message.

Given that most Catholics no longer regularly attend Sunday Mass, using the Mass as a key communications channel is designed for the village; it is pre-digital and shows that if the bishops receive communication advice, the advisors must up their game.

The response I received to my original piece from clergy has been supportive.

Several wrote expressing their distaste for what they had to do and how they had to do it. Some expressed surprise that no network of support was offered.

Having received the material before Sunday Mass, one priest offered pastoral feedback to his bishop on the content and strategy, but the priest says his advice was not taken.

Other priests also wrote saying they modified the lament or ignored it all together.

Sunday Mass

Sunday Mass is a space where the divine and the human meet, a place beyond the pragmatic.

Understanding the nature of liturgical rites and how they function theologically is the work of liturgical theologians, not a dive into the esoteric.

Using a biblical lament during a Sunday Mass is never appropriate.

Biblical laments are placed within penitential services as part of the healing process.

Accordingly, penitential laments change in their structure, language and purpose according to who is lamenting and what is being lamented:

• I lament that I have done this,
• I lament that others have done this to me,
• We lament that we as a people and nation have done this.

Laments should not be used as a cheap ‘apologetic hocus-pocus'.

It also appears that the bishops' liturgical advisors and theologians must up their game.

Representative or actual guilt and accountability

In making these comments, distinguishing between representative guilt, actual guilt and accountability must be more carefully considered.

How do the current group of bishops, congregational leaders and school leaders/Boards carry the representative guilt and accountability for their predecessors' lapses in moral judgment when they do not carry the actual guilt or personal accountability?

Is it reasonable to project representative guilt or accountability onto the general population with little knowledge of what went on, who have had no part in decision-making and those without agency?

The reality of abuse will be the defining historical term of this period of the Church.

Institutional abuse must be addressed on many levels because it is primarily a human reality; and it is through addressing human needs, decision-making and the human experience of being abused that the institution can find a new way of operating.

An approach to moving forward

In order for everyone to move forward with their lives I'd like to suggest three conversations may be appropriate:

• ask survivors what an authentic act of penance or repentance would look like;
• ask survivors and parishioners what a genuine act of restitution for survivors might look like;
• ask survivors, parishioners, and perpetrators what a healing form of public reconciliation might look like.

In these conversations, a synodal approach to the reality of abuse might uncover and communicate more than an apology ever can.

Importantly, these conversations must not be forced on survivors, Sunday Mass-goers, or perpetrators; they should not be seen as conversations that solve the problem so everyone can move on.

Healing

The function of the Royal Commission was to listen, judge, and act by making recommendations. The Royal Commission helps by exposing issues but cannot heal because it is a legal instrument, not a theological one.

Similarly, political reform will only change the functions around abuse prevention, not abuse's ontology.

In contrast, the Christian Church possesses the tools to address abuse beyond legality and functional prevention, and the Church must offer more than a change in the management of abuse prevention.

The Church must forge new pathways to healing and reconciliation by applying the theological truths of faith, hope, and love through our sacramental system and the mercy of the Gospel.

The way forward for Christians is ultimately theological and liturgical because that is how we frame and understand salvation, life, death, meaning and purpose.

Similarly, a radical (from the roots) reform of the exercise of authority in the church needs to be addressed theologically if the experience and complexity of institutional abuse are to be transformative of institutional leadership.

• Dr Joe Grayland is an assistant lecturer in the Department of Liturgy at the University of Wuerzburg (Germany). He has also been a priest of the Catholic Diocese of Palmerston North (New Zealand) for more than 30 years.

In a letter that needed to be short, it is hard to know what language the bishops could have used to make their apology more comprehensive than it is.

Certainly, the apology needed to acknowledge, above all, Church leaders' own failures for inadequate handling of offenders and inadequate support for victims/survivors.

But as leaders, it also fell to them to apologise, as far as possible, for all offending within the Church.

In their own way, I think the bishops were trying to do all this, while acknowledging that "words alone can never replace what was stolen and can never fully restore that which was destroyed."

Responsibility and abuse

But when Joe claims that the bishops fail to take "full responsibility" he seems to mean "sole responsibility," because he says that, "through the apology and the lament", Sunday congregations were being "co-opted into sharing responsibility for their leaders' actions" and called to "become complicit in the leaders' sins".

Surely, the apology needed to encompass the failures of bishops, priests, religious and laity, because anything less would not have respected what victims/survivors have been telling us.

Joe's claim that using the occasion of a Sunday Mass was itself "a subtle form of abuse", and that it had "no rightful place in the Sunday liturgy" is surely unrealistic.

Real life

This was not the time for esoteric distinctions between laments, symbols of shame, public and private repentance, etc. Liturgy has to be incarnate in real life!

Real life includes: the right of victims/survivors and the Catholic people to hear the apology as directly as possible and not just via public media.

In real life, the time when most Catholics gather is at Sunday Masses. In the course of every year, special causes are occasionally featured without prejudice to the Sunday's primary meaning.

In real life, a letter that needs to be short is never going to say everything that everybody wants it to say.

And in real life, most sexual offending occurs in homes or among relatives, and most vocations to priesthood and religious life come from homes. The apology and the lament were an occasion for all of us.

I think our congregations would have been pleased to hear the bishops' apology, and appreciated the opportunity to participate in a form of communal lament, and would have recognised the need for it to be on a Sunday.

• Copy supplied
• Bishop Peter Cullinane (pictured) is Bishop Emeritus, Diocese of Palmerston North.

The inability to take full responsibility for these decisions has been a constant complaint of survivors and victims of abuse.

However, in this action, the episcopal and religious leaders commit a liturgical abuse of the Sunday Assembly by calling them to become complicit in the leaders' sins.

The majority of Mass-going Catholics—laity and clergy alike—are not complicit in the hierarchy's (bishops, congregational leaders, and functionaries) failures of moral judgment, nor have most of them perpetrated crimes of abuse against victims within the Church.

Nonetheless, they are co-opted, through the apology and lament, into sharing responsibility for their leaders' actions.

Consistently, victims and survivors of abuse have complained that their voices have not been heard and that they have been ignored or minimised.

Last Sunday, the voice of the liturgical assembly—and each believer's right to participate without coercion in the Mass—was added to the number of those who have suffered at the hands of a leadership that seems incapable of real change.

The Litany of Lament

The Litany of Lament used during the Mass was a subtle form of abuse because it demands that the Sunday Assembly participate in an act of repentance that has no rightful place in the Sunday liturgy.

Positioned either in the middle of the Liturgy of the Word (in place of the homily), it disrupts the focus on Scripture.

Placed at the end of Mass, it undermines the Assembly's commissioning for evangelisation. If deemed necessary (which is questionable), it should have been integrated into the Preparation Rites as a Penitential Rite, where corporate sin is acknowledged and forgiven.

However, placing this form of litany with its antiphonal structure and form of words in place of the Penitential Rite would be inappropriate because the Penitential Rite's structure and theology are qualitatively different from the Rite of Penance and Reconciliation, from which the Litany of Lament has been derived.

A Litany of Lament

The litany of lament used on Sunday is a biblical form of prayer used by individuals and communities when they are overwhelmed by exhaustion, confusion, numbness, or despair due to their actions.

Its purpose is to process grief in God's presence, not, as the bishops erroneously suggested, to "channel anger" or "rekindle our thirst for justice in an unjust world."

Litanies of lament function differently depending on whether they are a lament of repentance or penance.

A lament of repentance is used before a lament of penance, but both are used by individuals who have directly sinned to process their grief at their decisions and actions as they kneel at the feet of those they have sinned against.

Penitents use these types of litanies before they receive individual absolution.

These litanies are not for bystanders

Using these forms of litanies in a penitential service makes sense.

Using them in the Sunday Mass—without a clear understanding of what the litany is supposed to achieve—shows that those responsible for this do not understand the nature of forgiveness in the Eucharistic liturgy or the nature of reconciliation in the Sacrament of Penance and Reconciliation, where restitution and a firm commitment to change are essential.

Symbols of shame and repentance

Biblical acts of lamentation are accompanied by symbols and gestures of shame—rituals such as rending garments, sitting in ashes, or walking barefoot through the city.

These practices articulate repentance that comes through penance.

Potent symbols speak louder than apologies, which have become hollow acts of avoidance. Symbolic acts of repentance might include tearing episcopal garments and mitres or breaking episcopal staffs.

Penance might show Church leaders sitting humbly on the ground outside each cathedral in front of survivors and the wider Catholic community, publicly asking for forgiveness. They would wait in silence until survivors and the baptised community were prepared to offer forgiveness.

Such profound acts of penance, followed by visible restitution, could culminate in a public sacramental reconciliation.

Given the depth of sin and the severity of the crimes, symbolic actions must resonate with the ontological violence inflicted to address the shame honestly.

Public sin, public reconciliation

Failures in moral judgement and crimes against innocents demand rigorous theological reflection.

The Church's ancient tradition of public forgiveness for public sins offers a framework for this reflection. It recognises how sin and crime corrode not just the individual but the broader community of the Church and society.

Public sins, such as moral failings or abuse, require public acknowledgement and forgiveness because they are experienced and known publicly.

The processes of restitution, forgiveness, and reconciliation must also unfold publicly. Within the Church, this is liturgical and ultimately sacramental.

The scandal of abuse has deeply shamed the Body of Christ.

Addressing this shame requires a healing process that names it explicitly and offers it to the Father through Christ.

Without such an approach, shame and violence will continue to burden the entire community.

Healing the communion of the Church is imperative because victims and perpetrators alike are members of the Body of Christ.

• Dr Joe Grayland is currently an assistant lecturer in the Department of Liturgy, University of Wuerzburg (Germany). He is priest of the Catholic Diocese of Palmerston North (New Zealand) for nearly 30 years.

This deficiency is starkly highlighted in paragraphs 26-28 of the Synod's Final Document.

The document equates Eucharistic and synodal assemblies as manifestations of Christ's presence and the Spirit's unifying work.

It also highlights "listening" as a common trait in both.

This creates a flawed equivalence that must be addressed before any working group defines the "celebratory styles that make visible the face of a synodal Church."

This simplification risks diminishing the depth of liturgical rites.

It can obscure their true ritual essence and misinterpret their theological meaning.

While linking synodality with the liturgy is invaluable, such parallels risk reducing the unique purposes of each.

The Eucharist is the focal point of sacramental unity and divine encounter, whereas synodal gatherings are primarily deliberative, geared towards consensus and the governance of ecclesial life.

Treating them as equivalents risks blurring their distinct theological identities, diminishing their respective roles as the lived expression of

• prayerful faith (liturgy) and
• the organisational manifestation of faith in action (mission and management).

Moreover, practical challenges, such as the diverse cultural interpretations of synodality and its application to liturgical practice, remain inadequately explored.

Responding to the "signs of the times" within a liturgical context means prioritising the centrality of the assembly meeting for worship (Synaxis).

It is the Synaxis that informs and underpins the synodal processes, not the other way around.

The liturgy derives its meaning from its direct relation to the Paschal Mystery, serving as its memorial in a liturgical context.

Unlike the synodal process, the liturgical Synaxis uniquely represents and re-presents this Mystery. So it is troubling, though not unexpected, that liturgical theologians are conspicuously absent from the synodal dialogue.

Consequently, significant sacramental and liturgical questions remain neglected, approached only from tangential perspectives.

This oversight occurs when auxiliary theological disciplines and Canon Law, a non-theological field, marginalise the primary discipline of liturgical theology.

The synodal discussions commendably focused on dialogue, inclusivity, and governance reform, have largely sidestepped the liturgy despite its pivotal role in Catholic life.

This sidestepping can be attributed to several factors.

The synodal agenda primarily addresses structural and cultural challenges within the Church, such as clericalism and lay participation.

These efforts are necessary for cultivating an inclusive Church that listens to and integrates the experiences of all its members, especially those who feel alienated.

Within this framework, liturgy often becomes a secondary concern, perceived merely as ritual or ceremonial, with little attention given to its deeper theological dimensions rooted in baptismal ontology.

Moreover, liturgical discourse is inherently contentious.

Decades of "liturgy wars" over issues such as the use of Latin, lay participation, and other practices have sown division between traditionalist and progressive camps.

This contentious history makes many Church leaders hesitant to reopen discussions that could reignite conflict and detract from the Synod's wider objectives of unity and reform.

The liturgy, firmly anchored in tradition and doctrine, presents a complex area for reform.

The Eucharist, as the "source and summit" of Christian life, is integral to Catholic identity. Therefore, conversations around liturgical change touch upon fundamental theological beliefs and ecclesial authority.

The spectre of perceived challenges to doctrine makes some prelates wary of undertaking such discussions, fearing potential disquiet among the faithful.

There are also voices within the Church who believe synodality, by influencing the values of unity and inclusivity in governance, will naturally extend these values into the liturgy without requiring direct liturgical reform.

This perspective avoids more profound theological questions of baptismal ontology, sidestepping the liturgical implications of issues like the ordination of women or blessings of non-canonical unions.

While the Synod's Final Document calls for the liturgy to embody the synodal principles of dialogue and inclusivity, it overlooks the pressing reality many parishes face: an "eucharistic and sacramental famine."

Even as synodal efforts remain focused on governance and pastoral strategies, the central Synaxis—the heart of ecclesial life—weakens under the weight of scarcity.

Many communities endure prolonged periods without access to sacramental celebrations due to an entrenched prioritisation of celibacy over Eucharistic necessity.

This imbalance has led to a phenomenon where clergy from Africa and Asia are brought in to sustain sacramental life, a practice that increasingly resembles a form of "reverse colonisation" with significant consequences already emerging.

In such a landscape, the liturgy is often appropriated as a stopgap solution, a practice born out of necessity when leadership fails to address these pressing realities adequately.

Addressing this issue is vital, for without a robust Synaxis, there will inevitably be no meaningful synodos.

• Dr Joe Grayland is priest of the Catholic Diocese of Palmerston North (New Zealand) for nearly 30 years. He is currently an assistant lecturer in the Department of Liturgy, University of Wuerzburg (Germany).
• A version of this opinion piece originally appeared on La Croix International.

Currently on sabbatical and lecturing at the University of Tübingen, he is recognised for his expertise in liturgy and sacramental theology.

Grayland's new role at Würzburg includes teaching, research and pastoral responsibilities at the faculty church in the centre of the city.

The news of his appointment was announced by Bishop John Adams of Palmerston North in a letter to the parishioners of Our Lady of Lourdes where Grayland served as parish priest.

Initially expected back in New Zealand in early August, Adams told parishioners Grayland's new opportunity required an immediate decision.

"I do believe that this is a good and fruitful use of his talents" wrote Adams.

Adams told parishioners that he has written to the Bishop of Wurzburg giving Grayland his permission to fulfil his priestly obligations in the Wurzburg diocese.

"I am expecting that Fr Joe will be away from our diocese for a number of years" he added.

International involvement

Grayland is an internationally published author known for his work on the Covid-19 "liturgical lockdown" and navigating Catholicism in a secular country.

His recent publications include articles in the Australian Journal of Liturgy and the Australian Journal of Pastoral Liturgy. He also regularly contributes to La Croix International and CathNews NZ.

Since arriving in Germany last October, Grayland has been appointed to an international group writing a continental commentary on Sacrosanctum Concilium.

The group met recently at the Vatican and is managed by two esteemed professors, Stephan Winter and Martin Stuflesser.

Grayland is in the Oceania - Australia - Asian writing group and the commentary is in English and German.

Closer to home, Grayland was an expert witness at the Australian Royal Commission into the abuse of minors, where he authored a briefing paper on the theology of reconciliation.

As well as his expert witness involvement, alongside Professor Thomas O'Loughlin, he co-hosts the globally acclaimed online discussion channel, Flashes of Insight, which features prominent international figures including Dr Phyllis Zagano, Dr Justin Taylor, Dr James Alison, Dr Margit Echol, Dr Carmel Pilcher, Dr Paul Zulehner, Archbishop Mark Coleridge and Cardinal John Dew.

During his sabbatical, Grayland has also contributed to the German Bishops Conference's international discussions on synodal theology.

Missed in Palmerston North

In Palmerston North, Grayland served as Vicar Forane, Consultor and parish priest of the Cathedral parish, Our Lady of Lourdes, and St Mary's Foxton.

He managed these roles during the pandemic, handling the complexities of church closures and government-imposed restrictions.

"We shall return", a buoyant Fr Glen Tattersall said at the final Traditional Latin Mass at St Patrick's Cathedral in Melbourne on Wednesday evening.

The Australian reports the Cathedral was packed for the Mass - it estimated there was a congregation of around 850 people.

"They came in business suits, in strollers, on trams and in fluoro tradie gear. Most were rugged up in heavy coats against the Melbourne winter which did not dim the spirit of the cathedral lit with candlelight and optimism" reports Tess Livingston in The Australian.

Melbourne Archbishop Peter Comensoli sat in the Sanctuary, but did not address the crowd.

On Monday Comensoli received the news that the Vatican had denied his request to hold the Traditional Latin Mass at Melbourne's St Patrick's Cathedral.

The decision from the Dicastery for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments was published on Monday on the news portal "Zenit".

"While we recognise that Mass according to the Missale Romanum of 1962 has been celebrated in the Cathedral Church for some time, we are nonetheless constrained to deny this request" the response stated.

The Vatican stated that liturgies in a bishop's church should serve as a model for the entire diocese.

"It does not seem appropriate for the antecedent liturgy to be celebrated in the place that should serve as an example for the liturgical life of the entire diocese" said the statement.

The Dicastery's Secretary, Bishop Vittorio Francesco Viola, signed the response.

Viola emphasised that "The Cathedral is the first place where the celebration of the liturgy must use the current liturgical books, which form the unique expression of the lex orandi of the Roman Rite".

Lex orandi refers to what is prayed.

It is often used in conjunction with lex credendi which together translated from the Latin means: "the law of what is prayed [is] the law of what is believed".

It is also sometimes expanded as lex orandi, lex credendi, lex vivendi, which again translated from the Latin means "the law of what is prayed [is] what is believed [is] the law of what is lived".

Congregation at St Patrick's Melbourne final old rite Latin Mass

Latin Mass restrictions

While the cathedral request was denied, the Vatican allowed the Traditional Latin Mass to be celebrated at Saint Michael and Saint Philip parishes in Melbourne for two years.

After this period, Comensoli must seek renewed permission from the Vatican to continue these services.

The Vatican suggested that a contemporary form of the Mass could be celebrated in Latin at the cathedral for the group favouring the Traditional Latin Mass, potentially using the same altar as the pre-conciliar form.

Archbishop Comensoli's request, made in June 2023, came in the wake of Pope Francis's 2021 Motu Proprio "Traditionis custodes" ("Guardians of the Tradition"). This publication restricted the celebration of the Traditional Latin Mass.

The rules were further tightened in February 2023, mandating that bishops need the Holy See's permission to authorise such Masses in parish churches.

Sources

Katholisch

Zenit

The Australian

CathNews New Zealand

Joe Grayland - What's the point of having deacons

You've written a lot about the diaconate and women as deacons.

So I'm going to start because, coming with a little bit of a parish priest appreciation, it's like, why do I need a deacon?

What I need is an assistant priest.

So, why do we need deacons?

Why do we have them at all?

What's the purpose and the point?

Phyllis Zagano

Well, you know, that is the situation the Church was in since the 12th century.

And I think the Church found itself devoid of the diaconate when the priests, mostly the priests in Rome, but priests in other places in Europe, were getting more and more annoyed that the fellow who was going to be elected as bishop was a deacon.

And so when we talk about the diaconate, we're talking about many, many different things.

We talk about the diaconate today, I have the same question.

What good is the diaconate?

Why would anybody want to be a deacon, particularly a woman?

Why would a woman want to be a deacon?

And why would a parish priest want to have a deacon?

Well, if you can't have an assistant priest, if you're not knitting one in the basement these days, you're well off to have a deacon.

But I don't think that's the only reason to have a deacon. When we think of the diaconate as it is, it's about its liturgical functions.

The deacon can do the wedding, the deacon can do the baptism, the deacon can do the funeral.

The diaconate to me is really bringing the Gospel in action to the people of God.

So it's the deacon, really historically, who managed the Church's charity.

And if we really recover the diaconate today, I think the deacon would be the one to help get the checkbook out of the pastor's hands and spread the wealth around, take care of the poor.

I really think that that's what it's about, evangelisation and taking care of the poor.

Joe Grayland - So what about transitional deacons?

Okay, so what do you think then about transitional deacons?

Do they have a point in your opinion?

Phyllis Zagano

Well, there's one diaconate and the diaconate is still a stage on the way to priesthood.

But when we think of what they call improperly, actually, the transitional diaconate, as opposed to the improperly called permanent diaconate, when we think of the diaconate as a stage on the way to priesthood, it is, I think, a necessary training ground for priests.

But I don't know that it's necessary at all, really.

Many people have written on this. I really haven't written that much about it, but a lot of people have said there's no reason to ordain anyone a deacon before that person's ordained a priest.

So, it's what we do.

It's our custom now.

It is confusing.

I don't like the term transitional deacon any more than I like the term permanent deacon.

But it's what we have.

And I don't think it's going to change.

Joe Grayland - Why bother about deacons?

Where does your love and interest for the diaconate come from?

What's influenced you over the years to even bother with the whole thing, given how difficult it can be?

Phyllis Zagano

Well, how difficult the whole Church can be.

I think the love is the love of the Gospel.

And the job of the deacon is to preach the Gospel, to spread the Gospel, to bring, as William Deitwig says, "drag the ambo to the streets."

And I just found myself in a situation, a position when I was finishing my doctorate actually, of learning about the diaconate, learning that there had been women in the diaconate, and marching myself into the local seminary and telling them I wanted to study to be a deacon.

And I stayed there for about a year, taking courses, mostly part-time.

But the encouragement came from the Papal Nuncio to the United States, actually.

When I was at the seminary, there were a couple of fellows who were not what we call lifers.

They had finished college and were just starting their graduate studies there.

Everybody else in the seminary had been in the system for eight or ten years.

And they said, "Well, the Nuncio's coming. How's your Cassock and Sash?" - which I didn't have.

So I wore a yellow pantsuit.

Joe Grayland: And they saw you coming!

Phyllis Zagano: They kind of noticed me.

We sat not in the chapel, but in the refectory. My friends set me on the end so that when the Nuncio and the bishop walked by, it was really hard to miss.

And the bishop, who knew me; the bishop had played basketball with my father.

The bishop looked down and said, "Phyllis, what are you doing here?"

I said, "I'm studying".

So soon enough, a lovely young priest came to me and said, "The Nuncio would like to see you in the front hall."

So I went.

And it was Archbishop Jadot, and he interviewed me for 20 minutes about a vocation to the diaconate.

And he said, "Don't quit."

And so, you know, then I went, I finished my doctorate, I was teaching, I was working for John Cardinal O'Connor.

I actually got a request before I started working for O'Connor as Archbishop of New York. I actually worked first in the military archdiocese.

I got a request from the director of vocations for the Archdiocese of New York that this Vicar General of the Military Ordinariate, as it was at the time, John O'Connor, wanted to know how to get more women in chaplaincy in the military.

So I said, "Tell him to ordain us."

And she came back and said, "He wants a longer answer."

So I wrote a big paper.

And I gave an equivalency of military rank and structure, particularly Navy rank and structure, talking about enlisted and warrant grades and officer grades, and the way that a warrant grade could be established for the diaconate.

The diaconate was certainly a ministry that the Catholic chaplaincies could use in the American military.

So he asked to see me, and I went in, and of course the fight was on.

And he encouraged me, he outlined with me my first book, Holy Saturday.

He told me that he would get it to the Pope.

I said, "Oh, you don't know the Pope."

Well, he did, and he ended up as the Archbishop of New York, and I worked for him.

So I just continued the studies, continued my own work, but also continued interest, training as a spiritual director, working where I could in chaplaincies and church-related entities.

Joe Grayland - Woman suing the Church

I wonder whether you've heard about the 62-year-old woman in Belgium who's suing the church, the Belgian church, because they won't allow her to become a diaconess.

Do you think, there's lots of things going on there.

Do you think it's a matter of justice?

Would you agree with what she's doing?

You know, even though I'm not asking you to understand everything, you know, you probably don't know her personally, but do you think the idea is good, or is it a waste of time?

Phyllis Zagano

Is it a matter of justice that she do this? Well, justice for whom?

You know, the question, if it's justice for the Church, if the Church deserves the ministry of women and its diaconate, then the conversation needs to be concluded in a positive manner.

It has been suggested to me to sue in ecclesiastical court, the restrictions against women and the diaconate.

It's not something I've pursued, certainly, or even studied.

But I would say she's not asking to be a diaconess, she's asking to be a deacon, unless she is in the Eastern tradition.

And I will tell you that on May 2nd of this year in Harare, Zimbabwe, the Greek Orthodox Archbishop of Africa ordained a woman a diaconess.

And so there is a movement, particularly now with our older cousins, explaining that this is truly a sacramental ministry to which women can be called.

So I don't know anything about what's going on in Belgium.

It's interesting, but I don't find going to the courts helpful in really in most any controversy.

Joe Grayland - Was the woman ordained a deacon

I want to come to an example I was reading as well of the woman who was ordained a deacon.

So, some questions were raised in the German media, the Catholic media, here in Germany, and the questions were really: Was it right or worthwhile for one part of an Orthodox communion to operate without having consulted the rest?

So that's one question.

But more specifically for the diaconate is, in what manner or form was this woman ordained?

So is it a sacerdotial thing that she's received?

Is it a laying on of hands?

Is it an institution?

What words would we use in the Roman church, if you like, or in the Western world to describe what happened to her in terms of ritual?

And also to describe, would we use the word ontological change in terms of...

I know, yes, I can see your heads going, God help us.

But it is a real problem, which you actually address in your book.

But it's that concept of, was she ontologically changed?

Did the ritual provide that ontological ritualiszation?

What happened there?

Phyllis Zagano

I'm not going to get into the ontological debate, but I will tell you, I've seen photographs of the ordination.

She had the laying on of hands inside the iconostasis.

The ritual was the ordination ritual for the Orthodox church.

It's part of the section, or Harare is part of the Patriarchate of Alexandria, which agreed, and also with the agreement, as I understand it, of His All Holiness Bartholomew.

So, it was not so much a departure that it may have been presented in the German papers.

Maybe four or five years ago, there was another ordination in another part of Africa.

And that was more likely an ordination to the subdiaconate, which is still a major order.

But the women there, the five women there, three religious and two lay people or vice versa, were ordained.

And the intent of the bishop at that time was to ordain them to the diaconate, not to the subdiaconate.

However, American money interests said that if he did that, they would pull their money from him.

So it was a subdiaconal ordination, and that's all I know about that.

But I will say that the one in Harare, and I haven't spoken, an American named Dr Carrie Frost was there.

I've spoken to her before, but not since.

She was there to witness it, and she was assuring me that it would be a liturgically correct Greek Orthodox ordination, which is to a major order, and that the woman would be considered a member of the clergy and a deacon.

She wanted me to know there are women deacons in Bulgaria.

There are women deacons in certain places of the Orthodox world that we really don't hear about, and they do proclaim the Gospel.

And they're not all women religious.

And this particular woman is not a religious.

She will be what might be termed a social service deacon.

She's not a monastic deacon.

She'll be out there working with the people, and that was the intent of the bishop, the ordaining bishop.

That's what he said he wanted.

Joe Grayland - The Gospel with hands and feet

So he wanted in many ways then to go back to the roots that you talked about at the beginning of our conversation, that taking the checkbook away from the pastor, I think, was the phrase you used, but getting out there and being part of that social outreach of the church, you know, where the Gospel actually has feet and hands and an intention beyond a proclamation within the liturgy or a homily without reality behind it.

I think it's interesting, don't you think, that if Orthodoxy moves in this way, do you think it makes it easier for Roman Catholicism to follow on?

Do we need them to take the lead rather than the Anglicans?

Phyllis Zagano

Well, I'll tell you, years ago, one woman, a Greek Orthodox woman, spoke with His All Holiness in Constantinople, and he said, well, you know, we don't want to get ahead of the Romans on this.

And another woman I know, a great funder actually in Boston, spoke to Cardinal Sean O'Malley, and he said, well, we don't want to get ahead of the Orthodox on this.

And, of course, three women speaking together said, we could figure this out pretty easily, boys.

I think it's helpful that the Orthodox are reclaiming their tradition.

And the most important thing is that you use the word "sacerdotal ordination," the diaconal ordination is not a sacerdotal ordination.

Pope Benedict XVI, with omnium in mentum in 2009, really echoed the words of the catechism, which had been promulgated, what, in 1983, that basically the diaconate is not the priesthood.

And we see this in Lumen Gentium 29.

We see it in many, many places, that the diaconate is clearly not part of the priesthood, which really rebounds to your question about the so-called transitional and permanent diaconates.

The diaconate is part of holy orders, but it's not part of the priesthood.

And to get that through, the minds that govern the decisions in the Church, I think is the most important barrier that we must overcome.

There is no need, no reason, to assume that an individual ordained as a deacon will actually become a priest.

However, with the work of Gresham in the codification of the Cursus Honorum, at the time you could not be ordained a deacon unless you were, for the most part, going to be ordained a priest.

That's really where the problem is, and it's eight, nine centuries old.

So it's a steep hill to climb.

And I think it's a question of a greater understanding that's needed in the church on both sides of the altar rail on what exactly is the diaconate and how can the diaconate be part of the circle.

Joe Grayland - Catholic Social teaching, Synodality and Women

I want to move the circle on a little bit.

Your recent book, Just Church, was a fascinating read: Catholic Social Teachings, Synodality, and Women.

Why did you put those three elements together?

Phyllis Zagano

Well, the book actually came out a little while ago.

It was completed before the most recent meeting of the Synod.

Catholic Social Teaching, I found an interesting way to enter how women have been discussed in the church.

And of course, I was interested in the way the Synod would be and is discussing the questions relative to women in the church.

So, I just felt there'd be a one, two, or three step, and we first have to understand what Catholic Social Teaching is.

We can take a look at how Catholic Social Teaching has spoken about women, which I do.

Then we can try to understand what is Synodality, and then see how these two concepts have affected the discussion about women in the church and how they might affect the discussion going forward.

The last time we spoke, three years ago, I think, on this program, and at the time I read a letter from someone who I said was a bishop, who I knew, actually was a Jesuit bishop.

Well, actually, I didn't tell you it was from the Pope.

And what he wrote to me, now he wrote me this in 2020.

So, this is one year before the Synod was announced.

And he talks about discernment.

He thanks me for my work and how relevant it is to the question of discernment.

And I'll read you the paragraph that I read on your program three years ago.

"Discernment is not an organisational technique and not even a passing fashion, but it is an interior attitude rooted in an act of faith.

"Discernment is the method and at the same time the goal that we propose.

"It is based on the belief that God is at work in the history of the world, in the events of life, in the people we meet and speak to us.

"This is why we are called to listen to what the Spirit suggests to us with often unpredictable ways and directions."

And he goes on to talk a little bit more about that.

But I don't even think I got it.

I don't think I understood what he was saying in 2020.

And I think we are all trying to grasp.

And I think, you know, I'm trained as an Ignatian director.

Why didn't I get it?

I had been told that the Holy Father was waiting to hear the voice of the Spirit on the question of women in the diaconate.

I think genuinely, and going back to the book, genuinely, that is what I was setting up, and that is what is happening.

Joe Grayland - Taking the Gospel to the streets

We see that Catholic social teaching has taken the Gospel to the streets.

We see a growing understanding of what is synodality, what is discernment.

And now we can take a look at the question of women.

Do we need deacons, such as you asked?

Do we need women deacons, such as you suggest?

These are things to be discerned and carefully discerned.

Can I just go back to some things in your book.

On page 25, you talk a little bit about the UN and what they've been up trying to do.

And you say, not in your words, but in mine, that the Church remains at odds with a lot of these sort of statements.

You know, that we've got, you don't say this so much, but we've got all of this language, all of this intentional language around the place of women and the place and families and everything like this.

But when it comes down to it, maybe the point is that lay people cooperate with power, but they don't share it.

This is an example that comes out of the Australian Plenary Council, you know, and their vote on the diaconate for women.

And I'm just wondering whether, again, another quote from page nine, which I thought was really cool, ontological equality, while also admitting hierarchical subordination.

And so, taken out of context, you know, which is the perfect thing for an interviewer to do, taken out of context, putting all of those things together.

What do you think is the big problem, not the problem, or the challenge that the Church is facing in terms of laity being involved and being included, being activated, but more particularly in terms of women being included?

And then I suppose it comes down to the very particular question around women in the deaconate, which I think is very particular.

But could you take us back up out of the roots, to the top of the grass, and give us an overall view of where you see the Church being at odds with the reality of the world in which many Western Christian Catholic women live?

Phyllis Zagano

Well, you know, Joe, I think the Church will always be at odds with the world as it is typified.

I've just been invited to debate at the Cambridge Union in the UK that feminism is incompatible with religion.

And I wrote them back and said, please define your terms, because if you're talking about feminism that is pro-abortion, etc., of course, if you're talking about feminism that says, no, excuse me, women can do jobs just as men can do, and there's really no restriction, well then, no, it's not.

And in fact, that is something that the Church is, that religion needs to support.

When you talk about authority in the Church, and you reference the term cooperate, I know you were thinking about Canon 129, which was actually written by Joseph Ratzinger, with the exception of one comma.

It went straight into the 1983 Code of Canon Law, that basically lay people can cooperate but not share in governance.

And that is where the tension lies.

And in fact, in terms of the somewhat significant advances that Pope Francis has made in terms of giving women position in the Curia, it's still management, not ministry.

The jobs are ancillary to the spreading of the gospel, not that they're not necessary, but they don't include women at the altar, they don't include women at the ambo, they don't include women in an official capacity, I think, managing the Church's charity.

Except, you know, it's certainly legally, there are ways to do it.

But I think when we, and they certainly don't include women as single judges, you have to be a cleric to be a single judge in a canonical trial.

So there are things that a cleric, and I was just reading this morning, discussions about how the woman deacon of history has always been considered a cleric.

Joe Grayland: There are certain things that are necessary, clerical status is necessary.

Now, does that also imply power?

Phyllis Zagano: Not necessarily.

You know, if you think of power in terms of authority, the woman who is the abbess in history may also have been a deacon, most likely was.

She has ultimate authority in her abbey and her abbey territories.

That authority is also given over to her by the members of her community.

So if we move back to the 21st century, and we find the authority that rests in the episcopacy, it is still given over by the people.

The authority to the bishop is given over by his priests and deacons, and the authority of the people of God is similarly given over.

I don't know, I was asked the other day about power and women asking to be deacons so they could have power.

And my answer is simply that if you're looking to be ordained to have power, you probably want to do something else.

But isn't that the problem?

Well, yeah, it is a problem, but you won't get much or any.

And certainly an individual who comes to be a deacon, just because he or she can't be a priest or a bishop, they'll be shown the door.

I mean, they're just two separate questions.

But again, let's return to the circle.

If we think about the way that a community can discern, and I know that the Australian meeting was not last summer, but the year before, I think it was, was contentious.

And I am aware that 18 Australian bishops voted down the original wording that included women deacons, and I think only five voted it down and one kind of abstained when they reworded it.

But there was still some admission that the people in that assembly did have some power to change things.

I have been described a couple of times as quite interested in the meeting. After tea time, two bishops stood with the rest of the people who refused to sit down or take their seats.

And I've talked to a couple of the bishops who were there.

And, you know, sometimes in families, discussions get tough, and I think this was one of them.

Joe Grayland - Women deacons a sign of a just Church

Why would you suggest that the deaconate for women would be a sign of a just church?

Would it be a sign of the end of discrimination?

Would it be a sign of a theological movement?

Would it be a sign of coming back to the original source?

Phyllis Zagano

You know, Mary Magdalene, for instance, proclaimed the resurrection?

Well, again, I said this before: the question of justice, it's not so much justice for me, and I want this job.

It's more justice for the people of God in a couple of different directions.

First of all, and I've said this quite often until the Holy Father has a woman proclaiming the gospel in St Peter's at a Mass he celebrates, the church really doesn't have the right to say women are to be recognised as equal and to be held as equally human to men.

I mean, it's as simple as that.

I've been told by officials of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, which is now the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, I've been told that women cannot image Christ.

I said, watch me. And I wrote a book about it.

You know, that women cannot image Christ is silly.

It's a silliness that is restricted to naive fiscalism.

If you think that only a man on this planet can represent in any way the love and beauty of the risen Christ...

And I think that (women representing the image of Christ) is the justice the church needs.

The church in justice needs to have the whole gospel proclaimed.

The church in justice needs to have all its people ministered to and ministered to as they need to be ministered to.

You know, the Holy Father, and twice I've heard him say this, once in a commission meeting and again in public, or actually first in public, to the International Unions of Superiors General.

He said, you know, he had spoken with an expert, a scholar of Syrian history, who told him that when a woman accused her husband of beating her, she would go to the woman deacon who would examine the bruises and then give testimony to the bishop.

Well, that to me says so much.

The bishop affirmed the testimony of a woman and probably did something about it.

I mean, it's almost an annulment, you know.

And so when you move to the present, when there is a single judge, the single judge is not going to be a woman.

So you will not have a woman going into us for an annulment, telling a single judge who would then give testimony basically to the bishop that there is reason for an annulment.

And that to me, I debated American Professor Sarah Butler at a seminary in Philadelphia years ago.

And she said, oh, women deacons only minister to other women.

I said, well, who ministers to women today?

I mean, even if you restrict the work of women deacons to other women, so what?

Joe Grayland - Cultural beliefs about women

Well, it takes us back to the original, as I mentioned, Mary of Magdala.

And the whole question that is subcutaneous there is about somebody proclaiming a truth when they are considered before the law to be incapable of proclaiming truth.

Yet when the Christian church takes it on, as you've just said, and a woman testifies for another woman in front of a bishop and the bishop does it, then you begin to see that there is a tradition that women are truth tellers within the church.

An uncomfortable tradition, possibly.

Phyllis Zagano

You know, that comes in collision, I think, with a lot of cultural beliefs about women.

I walked out of Mass the other day with a 82-year-old woman, religious, and I told her something that maybe she could mention to the pastor.

She said, well, he's not going to listen to us.

And the influence, well, the implication was he's a man and we're not.

And that's quite true.

And you do find that the stained glass ceiling does exist in other traditions who have ordained women to the diaconate and to priesthood, certainly in the Anglican communion.

Although there are more and more Anglican women bishops, not that I'm arguing for either Anglican bishops or priests, but there is the cultural problem of the way men in the world relate to women in the world.

And as I alluded to or said earlier, until the pope stands up and says, you know, that women are trustworthy enough to proclaim the gospel, even to preach, I don't think the church has the right.

And I will blame the church.

I will blame the church for female genital mutilation.

I'll blame the church for dowry burnings.

I'll blame the church for menstruation huts.

I'll blame the church for wife beating.

There are many instances around the world where women are really badly treated and denigrated and looked down upon.

And you don't know this.

I've suffered it myself.

You know, I love to go to places where they have no idea who I am and they treat me like I'm a dimwit.

I mean, you just laugh because it's so, it's so sad, really.

Joe Grayland - Synods affirm women's diaconate as sign of hope

Recently, you may be aware that in Austria the synodal process there has affirmed the decision of the women's diaconate as a sign of hope.

But, and here in Germany the same, and in various other places it's come through the synodal process.

However, on the other side of it, we've seen other people like Cardinal Sara and others in Africa talking very strongly against these Western European colonial ideas, with introducing the thing that I would describe as an African exceptionalism.

Where in sub-Saharan Africa, you know, the exception is that gay people can be mutilated, burnt, raped, and then killed.

It's perfectly okay for the African episcopate to accept that.

Possibly because they've got some other problems they think are much more important.

Like having to face down Islam, for instance, or as a scholar friend of mine who's in Tübingen at the moment from Nairobi has been informing me of the movement of young people back to the pre-colonial worship forms and understandings of God.

That's a context.

My point is this.

Is it possible that the push for women deacons, equality of women, to not accept, you know, the arguments of the menstruation huts and all the rest of it, is a thoroughly European, North American, white person, I don't know how you describe it.

It's become very difficult to describe.

But it's sort of our argument, but it's not an argument of the global South, which is also a sort of a silly sort of term, because the global South doesn't include places like Australia and New Zealand.

I mean, you know, from all of your travels, what do you think it's just, do you think we're the only ones really interested in it?

Or, you know, is it European, North American exceptionalism to have women or want women or need them?

Phyllis Zagano

Well, European, but probably not Italy, North American, but also Australia and South America and Central America.

I sat at a table with Wilfred Nepier in South Africa, the retired cardinal, who told me that he objected to my pushing Western ideas down his throat.

I said, well, no one's pushing anything down anybody's throat.

If your territory does not need or wish for women in the diaconate, it will not have it.

It's as simple as that.

If Austria and Germany find that the diaconate can include women and the church can accept it, and there is a need for it, then that's what it is.

I sat at a table with the bishops of Cambodia and Thailand, and I asked them about women in the diaconate.

They said, we wouldn't care, male or female, we need the help, number one, but you know what, we don't have enough educated people to make them deacons.

That was, I think, before the Holy Father invited the church to include women as acolytes and lectors.

I can see where, for example, in Cambodia and Thailand, formally training and installing women and men as lectors and acolytes would be a wonderful expansion of the church's ministry.

I think that the cultures that can accept the ordination of women will, and the cultures that cannot may move to have a greater understanding of the equality of women as human beings.

Even if they do not include women in their own diaconates, if they have diaconates at all, I think it could still be helpful as an example of the way women can and should be recognized and respected.

I'm certain that if, not actually if, when it rolls out, it'll be the same as the diaconate was rolled out after the Second Vatican Council.

That is, Episcopal conferences would need to decide if they would include women in their own diaconates, and Rome would approve their requests.

And then it would go back, and the Episcopal conferences would simply say to their bishops, individual bishops would make their own decisions about what they need in their diocese.

And one would hope, with an increase in synodality, that the bishop's decision could be a more synodal decision, and less of an individual "I'm in charge" decision, which the church suffers in too many places still.

Joe Grayland - Census fidei

Maybe there are other things going through your head and you would like to give us a sentence or some sort of phrase just to wrap up maybe the loose ends of this conversation.

Something that occurs to you that I haven't asked that I should have asked, or a point that you'd just like to emphasise before we wrap up.

Phyllis Zagano

Well, I think the thing I would like to emphasize is that the work of the church, the mission, you know, the synod talks about communion, mission, and participation.

As the dogmatic constitution of the church teaches, we must be in communion on matters of faith and morals.

You know, the census fidei is there, and it's very important.

The mission of the church to me is to spread the gospel and to act on the gospel of Jesus Christ.

And participation is who gets to do what.

And I think that's where we are in terms of figuring it out as we go along in our different cultures.

You know, Joe, you're in Germany. Others are listening in New Zealand, in Australia.

I'm in the United States.

Everybody has a different situation.

But if that situation and if that conversation has the gospel at its centre, I think that's where we will progress as human beings, certainly, and as Christians.

• This is a transcript of a conversation between Phyllis Zagano and Joe Grayland on the topic of the diaconate. The text has been edited in parts for flow.
• Phyllis Zagano is American author and academic. She has written and spoken on the role of women in the Roman Catholic Church and is an advocate for the ordination of women as deacons. She is a researcher and adjunct professor a Hofstra University. Her latest book is "Just Church: Catholic Social Teaching, Synodality, and Women".

This group's actions have them being accused of

• operating as a law unto themselves,
• disrespecting Church authority, and
• flouting diocesan oversight.

Their actions underscore the concerns that led Pope Francis to issue his Apostolic Letter Traditionis custodes and its accompanying letter to bishops on 16 July 2021.

After extensive consultation with bishops, Pope Francis discerned a troubling pattern among many adherents of the pre-conciliar rites: a rejection of the Church and its institutions.

The rejection was in favour of a so-called "true Church."

This notion, rooted in a mythical ideal, fosters division and undermines ecclesial communion.

The crux of the issue can be traced back to Pope Benedict XVI's Apostolic Letter, Summorum Pontificum,

Benedict introduced the concept of "extraordinary" and "ordinary" expressions coexisting within the Roman Rite with this letter.

Benedict XVI intended to harmonise these expressions without undermining the liturgical reforms.

However, his actions led to unintended consequences, deepening divisions under the guise of a "reform of the reform."

Regrettably, Benedict's initiative inadvertently nurtured a sector within the Church.

Allowing both rites often lacks a comprehensive grasp of their respective understanding of Church.

In many cases, the assumption that these groups adhered to the binding character of Vatican Council II and remained faithful to the Pope and Bishops was misplaced.

In response, Pope Francis, informed by the bishops' experiences, issued Traditiones Custodes.

This document and his explanatory letter emphasised the need to continuously pursue church communion, a cornerstone of his papal duty to preserve unity.

Consequently, Francis revoked Summorum pontificum, nullifying the concept of ordinary and extraordinary forms and affirming the liturgical books promulgated by Saint Paul VI and Saint John Paul II as the sole expression of the Roman Rite's lex orandi.

Diocesan bishop's role modified

The restrictions on the pre-conciliar rites, now subject to the local bishop's authorisation, were further clarified in a Rescript to Traditiones custodes (20 February 2023).

This document reserved certain dispensations to the Apostolic See, including using parish churches for the 1962 Missal and permissions for priests ordained post-Traditionis custodes to celebrate using this Missal.

The Apostolic Visitation by Bishop Emeritus Robert McGuckin to the Diocese of Christchurch is a testament to the pervasive issues in this diocese and potentially in others.

This situation highlights the necessity of Pope Francis's decision to address a liturgically divided Church where fringe groups, unchecked, pose a risk of scandal.

The Pope's directive underscores the diocesan bishop's role as moderator, promoter, and guardian of the liturgical life of their Church.

It is imperative that bishops actively oversee priests who contravene the Rescript of Traditiones custodes and that Metropolitan Archbishops monitor the conduct of their suffragan bishops.

This ensures adherence to the call for unity within Traditiones custodes.

Christchurch - key questions

The Christchurch case presents two critical questions.

• Firstly, who are the bishops and priests with written permission from the Holy See to celebrate the pre-conciliar rites?

Their identities should be transparently communicated to all the baptised in a synodal manner.

• Secondly, who moderates groups not conforming to Traditiones custodes, ensuring compliance with its liturgical theology and principles?

As "Guardians of the tradition," bishops are responsible for preventing liturgical abuses, including unauthorised celebrations of the abrogated rites.

The Church's unity and integrity depend on their vigilant stewardship and adherence to the directives set forth in Traditiones custodes.

• Dr Joe Grayland is currently a visiting professor at the University of Tübingen (Germany). He has been a priest of the Diocese of Palmerston North for nearly thirty years.
• His latest book is: Catholics. Prayer, Belief and Diversity in a Secular Context (Te Hepara Pai, 2021).https://www.amazon.com.au/Catholics-Prayer-Diversity-Secular-Context/dp/0473513382

Albert Einstein wrote ‘the stupid need order; the genius masters chaos.' A sympathetic translation could be ‘while the majority need an ordered world, a genius is needed to master a chaotic one'.

The genius can see beyond the current chaotic circumstances by seeing the order in the chaos.

Chaos is not new.

There has never been a time of perfect order devoid of chaos in the human heart, politics, or the Church.

Nowhere is a life lived without chaos of some kind or another.

Chaos is visited on people often unexpectedly.

Consider the people of Ukraine, where one day there is freedom, safety and prosperity and (literally) the next day there is warfare, violence, fear, subjugation and destitution. In the space of twenty-four hours, life goes from ordered to chaotic, and people move from being masters of their destiny to being pawns in it.

Where we encounter chaos, we also encounter finitude, the experience of being at the limit of our ability to control or even understand what is happening around us.

Chaos rips order from our lives, and we are left stumbling for meaning and searching for sense.

In this situation, it is easy to feel that one is alone and God has "left the building."

At this time, we often search for certainty and latch on to small certainties—like the light switch working—in the hope of regaining our foothold on the ultimate certainty that God still exists and that ones life has not become a meaningless caricature of what went before.

When chaos strikes, we look for a new worldview.

Usually, we build it on a division between two things that are—or are represented—opposed, a dichotomy. We strengthen the dichotomy with dualistic binaries like right or wrong, good or bad, secular or religious.

For the dichotomy to work, we must maintain an absolute division between our worldview and the opposing one.

So, we contrast the spiritual, sacred world and person with the secular, profane world and person.

We treat these worlds as absolutely opposed to each other.

We must because the opposition maintains our identity as a "religious" or "secular" person. We know we operate this way when we use the word "or".

People are in or out, good or bad, right or wrong.

The word or defines relationships when we have forgotten the word 'and'.

The word 'and' helps us relate in non-binary ways: he is right and wrong; they are good and evil; they are inside and outside the family.

Consequently, it begins to dawn that we do not live in a world or a church of complete order or absolute chaos; instead, we live in a world of chaos and order, in a Church of order and chaos.

A Church of certainty to a Church of chaos

We once had a Church of certainties.

It was a place people went to know the truth and experience the infinitude of God. Magisterium, ritual, sacraments and priesthood were all parts of the structure of certainty that created holiness, goodness, moral certitude and eternal reward.

The minor chaos of one's own life was taken up into the certainty of being in the presence of God by being in the Church.

God and Church were the known entities; deified, sacred, holy, undefiled, inerrant, offering a sacred language and symbols that could be repeated confidently because the Church told us this was so.

Our confidence came from an organisational structure that kept us safe.

Then, the Church that promised it would never change, changed.

For many, it changed "overnight", taking away the assurances of faith and the prohibitions that framed and gave value to their faith expressions, piety, prayer, and most importantly, their sacrifices.

I remember interviewing people in 1996 for a book on the changes following Vatican II. They had courageously given up meat on Fridays, fasted from midnight on Saturday, conceived more children than they wanted, gone to Mass every Sunday and Holy Day, obeyed the clergy out of a sense of fear, and lived in fear of damnation and sin that might keep them from their ultimate solace, the beatific vision.

I have vivid memories of my parents and their friends in the 1970s debating if they should attend the garden wedding of those who chose not to marry in the church building as distinct from those who chose not to marry in the Church.

The second could not be tolerated; the first begged more questions and discussion.

As time has evolved, these people now attend their grandchildren and great-grandchildren's weddings outside the Church (in both senses) and do it with a certain sense of comfort.

They attend their gay grandchildren's marriages and welcome the birth of their grandchildren conceived by in-vitro fertilisation without—for the most part—a nod or a wink towards the Church's teaching or prohibitions.

Many live as the "sole Catholic" in their non-church-going Catholic family, and an increasing number of them are buried by their baptised, non-church-going and non-church-interested children.

At their funerals, we see the gulf between what they would want and could "do" liturgically and what their children and grandchildren can "deliver".

It is a stark reminder that baptism has an anthropological dimension that is too easily forgotten.

At funerals, what the Church needs to "say" about death and what the family needs to "say" about it can lead to conflict where we encounter the distinction between capacity (understand the task) and capability (do the task).

We rightly presume that Church-going people have both the capacity and the capability to worship liturgically, using the signs and symbols of the sacramental economy.

However, this is not always true.

In the modern funeral, we encounter people for whom our presumption of capacity and capability is invalid, so we need to adapt.

We need to find the 'and' between what is understood about the task and the task itself.

While this might look like chaos, capacity and capability are related; we seek the relationship that gives meaning and voice to the meanings of death that the church and the individuals (family) need to express.

Irrelevantism: God, teaching and teachers

Over time, God, the Church's teachings and teachers have become "irrelevant" for many in Catholicism's Western Churches.

The geography of the irrelevancy of God, the teachings and the teachers is complex and related to many movements within Western Christianity, Western thought and social change.

It is a crisis of belief in the message, the structure that underpins it and the messenger.

One recent correspondent, a church-going member of Palmerston Cathedral parish, wrote in response to a homily that treated the Synod, the role of parishes and the general lack of participation in the synod process:

Just for the record, I did participate in a Synod group out of which we submitted our thoughts.

I was reluctant because I'm pretty much over the Catholic Church (specifically priests with their sense of entitlement and feeling drowned in the sea of patriarchy), and I do not believe the Synod will bring about any change; however, I contributed.

I would suggest that, like me, many fail to see the point of exercising energy on yet another think tank that will inevitably go nowhere.

The stiff introduction to the Synod felt unapproachable, and there was a sense of "warning" to the faithful not to sway onto topics that might conflict with the "direction" of the Holy Spirit.

Condescending to say the least.

We never felt liberated by the process, that's for sure.

"Irrelvantism" goes much broader than the Church, and the Church is prey to it in wider secular society.

The roots of this in New Zealand are multiple, historical and complex.

They include the historical desire to liberate society and politics from the institutions of Western religion and, more recently, to retore indigenous pre-Christian ideas of God to their pre-colonial prominence.

The Western Enlightenment's historical and social experience has changed western Catholicism and has challenged "the Church of certainties;" and dealing with this is a critical issue for contemporary Catholics.

From certainty to chaos and order

For many "Western Catholics", the synodal process brings old and new grievances to the fore. The grievances show we have more work to retain members, recruit them back, restore trust, and open new pathways.

While some want a return to certainty, many more want to know how to live a life of faith—trusting in God—while living in a chaotic world and a chaotic church.

The mother of the gay child wants to be able to attend her child's wedding and go to Mass on Sunday and hear her decision affirmed.

How does this happen without changing dogmatic positions?

The person who loves the 1962 missal wants to be able to go to Mass and experience the transcendence of God in the liturgy through silence and chant.

How does this happen without having two competing liturgical rites and opposing theologies of the Church?

The new migrant Catholic wants to practice their devotional form of Catholicism in their new Church and see their cultural Catholicism taken seriously.

How does this happen without them creating a culturally defined religious community?

The antidote is to remember: nothing in this world is perfect; no person is perfect; you are not perfect! Instead, we are called to live a realistic Catholicism that is certain of God in the chaos of its human community and rejoices in a chaotic world in which God is present.

We, the Church, need to do this through a mature engagement with the world from a community of mature people who believe, live and pray in the "real world"; an authentic adult Church; the authentic sacramental conversation partner immersed in a chaotic world that is also God's playground.

Where there is order in chaos, there is chaos in order! Embrace it!

• Joe Grayland is a theologian and a priest of the Diocese of Palmerston North. His latest book is: Liturgical Lockdown. Covid and the Absence of the Laity (Te Hepara Pai, 2020).
• Written for CathNews. First published in La Croix International.

Although themes such as child abuse, clericalism, and priestly formation are emerging internationally, these issues do not drive local synodal processes with the same intensity or to the same degree.

A synodal process is a local event as much as an international one. It is shaped by local issues, politics, theological imperatives and ecclesial needs, and the consultation feedback reflects this.

The overall response to the synod process and the emerging themes from the consultation in Palmerston North Diocese illustrate our context and frame our experience of synodality.

In Australia, for example, the responses of the Royal Commission and the Australian Government to the commission's report on institutional sex abuse have been formative of the Australian Church's approach to the synodal process, its emerging themes, and Catholics' participation.

In Germany, the issue of child abuse has similarly driven responses to the Synodal Way.

Here, voices for change have become stronger due to the intense focus on the clerical abuse of children and power illustrated in the recent reports from the archdioceses of Cologne and Munich.

In Palmerston North Diocese, the synodal process shows a desire for "things to change".

A consensus of issues is emerging:

(1) the collapse of the institutional Church structures and the emerging neo-missionary Church and what this means for parishes and pastoral ministry, (2) the struggle between hierarchy and welcome and what this says around exclusion and inclusion of people and (3) the actual level of participation in the synodal process which is very low and indicative of a larger problem of engagement and communication.

End of the institutional Church and the neo-missionary Church

The collapse of the nineteenth-century missionary Church's institutional structures is due to the rapid decline in the number of church attendees and indigenous clergy.

In Palmerston North diocese, we have 24 priests aged between 30 and 85 located in 13 central parishes actively serving 51 parishes and small rural communities.

Although the pastoral context calls for increased lay formation, lay ministry and lay-parish management, we import seminarians and international clergy from Southeast Asia.

While international clergy provide a functional sacramental ministry, they also contribute to the process of "neo-missionization", resulting in many local, indigenous communities being further alienated.

The collapse of a functioning indigenous priesthood brings the loss of an immersed presbyterial ministry that leaves many people without easy recourse to a consistent liturgical life and sacramental ministry that is culturally in tune with them.

Where there is no immersed presbyterate or functional international priesthood, a significant theological change occurs in the local community.

The loss is not just the absence of a functioning and culturally aware liturgical and sacramental life; it also changes how local communities view themselves theologically.

The theological change begins with the absence of Sunday Mass.

Sunday Mass, once the hallmark of Catholic identity, is replaced with a Liturgy of Word with Communion.

This "work-around" creates a new "town ecclesiology" where the "theology of the local community" as distinct from the "theology of the Church community gathered on Sunday" takes precedence over everything.

The "town ecclesiology" places the local community ahead of the notion that Sunday Mass (Eucharist) is the central gathering of the Christian community and constitutive to our identity as Catholic Christians.

Instead, local Catholics see their local Sunday gathering as more important than gathering for Mass.

Consequently, where individuals and families travel 50 kilometers for shopping on Friday, they will not travel the same distance for Mass on Sunday, preferring instead to foster their local community.

As a result, the democratization of the local community is seen as a "healthier" or more necessary adaption that is more sustainable in the long run than joining the hierarchical gathering of the larger Sunday community presided over by a priest.

However, this situation needs to be seen in its larger context of a consistent preferment for celibate, male priesthood at the cost of the Eucharistic assembly.

Hierarchy and welcome: two competing concepts

The most consistent and powerful emerging trend from our diocesan consultation is the demand for greater inclusion of the GLBTQI+ community.

Welcoming this diverse community is symbolic of welcoming many other people already excluded by the Church's institutional structures, theological positions and liturgical practice.

New Zealand has a dual Church system of parishes and State Integrated Catholic Schools. The schools are the means through which most Catholics (Sunday practicing and non-practicing) encounter Catholicism. This unique arrangement tends to create competition between parishes and schools.

Catholic schools are seen by many as places where all are welcomed. Here, faith is nurtured through engagement with families and children. Schools meet people "where they are" and nurture them.

The schools offer a way of prayer, faith engagement and social action that is open, accessible to young people, and relevant to contemporary culture.

Parishes, by contrast, are seen as the places where "faith goes to die". They are bastions of conformity to Church rules and regulations and are they not moving with the times. Parishes limit welcome through demands that everyone should "do as we (parishes and priests) teach".

Hierarchy is a "black word" for many because it symbolizes oppression. It excludes people from being welcomed into all aspects of church life. Hierarchy excludes people from participation in the liturgy (even if they are not initiated) and sets up barriers to full participation in ministry.

The argument goes: if the liturgical hierarchy and the Church's theological hierarchical thinking could be changed, then how we currently "do" parish, liturgy and priesthood will change for the better.

Thus, "welcome" is the antidote to all forms of generational, gender and ministry exclusion. Its removal or softening will result in a better led, better managed, more authentic, and more credible Church.

Clericalism is a synodal concern aligned to hierarchical structures. Though directed mainly at the ordained, it is also occasionally levelled at the laity and religious in positions of authority. The issue is the mentality that drives "clerical" decision-making.

Clericalism is experienced by many, especially those connected with schools and young people, in liturgical practice.

They argue that priests when inviting a young person to participate in the Sunday Mass should ask the young person: what they want to read; when they want to read it; and how they would like to read it, not present them with a lectionary and say "read this at that time"; liturgy is the great divide between the rulers and the ruled.

The idea of "welcome" is symbolic of a substantial movement in the theological values of participants and a more significant movement in a reformed understanding of Catholic theology and practice.

Welcome signifies more than creating a welcoming environment at Mass or greeting someone at the door; welcome is the code word for a significant shift in popular theological, liturgical and ecclesial culture.

Welcome means including cultural perspectives, indigenous languages, ancient indigenous art and prayer forms, and more.

Welcome is the anthesis of hierarchy.

Communication is another form of welcome and inclusion, neither of which the Church does well; thus, the Church is not seen as evangelising.

Church communication is "one way" from the "pulpit to the pews".

It is not climate-conscious, youth conscious, transparent, diverse and equal; therefore, it is seen as judgmental, lacking compassion and hostile to many who are welcomed in every other social context.

Therefore, welcoming individuals who are welcomed in secular society but excluded from Church society is offered as the antidote for an organization mired in its exclusivist mindset.

Welcome and inclusion reflect and summarize firmly held secular values that challenge many of the Church's current theologies of the priesthood, sexual morality, relationship theology and social engagement.

Change along the line of inclusion and welcome are seen by many contemporary Catholics as the way forward to a more authentic and credible Church. The view is simple: society catechizes the Church, and it is time to listen.

The actual level of participation in the synodal process

The hidden driver of New Zealand's synodal process is the non-participation of most Catholics.

The process began in October 2019 and was extended through March 2022. In the diocese of Palmerston North (51,345 affiliated Catholics, 7255 Sunday Mass-goers), only 230 submissions were received from individuals and groups. This equates to 3.17% of the Mass-going population or 0.44% of the affiliated Catholics.

In our parish survey, The Synod and You (Kotahi Ano Newsletter, May 2022) sent to 610 subscribers, 184 (30.16%) people responded to the question did you attend a synod meeting?

Of the 184 people, 63.04% said they had not participated in a synodal meeting during the consultation phase.

The reasons for their non-participation are because they were (1) unsure of the process, (2) did not see its value, or (3) did not like the meeting format.

Strikingly, both those who did not attend a synod group and those who did agree that the synodal process would not reach Catholics outside the Church or parish.

In this, they all agreed that the process was flawed. Like the diocesan survey, most respondents were ethnic European women over 70 years of age.

This is another acute indicator of who is engaged with parish and Church life and invested in the synodal process.

What insight does the flawed synodal process offer?

We stand at the threshold of change.

There are many significant issues at stake here: the transition from an immersed presbyterial ministry to a functional neo-missionary priesthood; the transition from a reformation-responsive Church to a technological, globalized Church; the transition from hierarchy to welcome.

Transitus is the hallmark of the Easter experience. If we look at the transitions, the Church has already negotiated from our Hebrew origins to the present day, we can take courage.

However, there is a sting in that tail. Those transitions were made in a highly divided and theological contested Church. We, too, must be prepared for more division and separation within the Western, Latin Church.

Queen Elizabeth II has said: "Change has become a constant; managing it has become an expanding discipline. The way we embrace it defines our future."

However flawed it is, the synodal process is one of the steps on that journey.

• Dr Joe Grayland is a theologian and a priest of the Diocese of Palmerston North. His latest book is: Liturgical Lockdown. Covid and the Absence of the Laity (Te Hepara Pai, 2020).

They '"let rip" at the Germans.

The Sweden, Denmark, Finland, Norway and Iceland Church leaders' letter is an excellent example of one group of bishops seeing the synodal process as another country's "problem."

The Synodal Path "must be seen against the backdrop of the concrete situation in Germany", the Scandinavian bishops argue, because it gives the reason for the "felt demand/need for change".

How else could this be?

Should the German bishops reply to their episcopal confreres about the problems in the Nordic countries?

The Scandinavian bishops want to put themselves on the map and distance themselves from the "German problem".

Their letter begins in a condescending manner that continues throughout as if they bring a depth of learning and insight that is lacking in the German Church.

At the outset, they acknowledge their historical reliance on Germany from the Post-Reformation period, neatly forgetting their much earlier reliance on Germanic Christians.

They also acknowledge their financial dependence on the German Church, which they continue to enjoy.

An attempt to avoid the real challenges and issues

The "immense challenges" facing the Church, according to the Scandinavian bishops, are global and "overpowering" — challenges they wish to "negotiate" or "approach" in faithfulness to Christ.

"Avoid" might have been a more accurate sentiment. The implication of negotiating rather than confronting or addressing is clear, and it sets the overall tone of the bishops' letter.

Although they see the "felt demand for change" in Germany as the hub of the German problem, the issues raised by the Synodal Path are not "purely" or exclusively German.

The Scandinavians acknowledge that the issues raised by the Germans are "overpowering, global challenges for the Church", but as the bishops of the Nordic countries, they take issue with them. They only acknowledge ecclesial sexual abuse as a matter of justice and a Christian imperative.

The implication is that the other issues of priestly life-forms, such as celibacy and formation, the place of women in the Church (ordination and governance), and a broader understanding of sexuality are not matters of justice or Christian imperative for them.

The Scandinavians address sexual abuse with the now hackneyed episcopal condemnations.

They address this issue from the point of justice and Christian imperative because it is the "safe" issue. Safe, because everyone agrees that something should be done, and every bishop wants to be seen to be doing something.

The primary reason for their condemnation is not the ecclesial sin committed against believers but their concern for the continuing believability of the Church.

"Dangerous topics"

Again, they put the institution and the structures that created the sin first. But later in their letter, they seem to want to protect the same structures.

The other issues such as clerical life and formation, women in the Church and teaching on sexuality are treated differently, probably because they demand proactive change rather than reactive apologies.

The problem with these issues — for the Scandinavians — is they touch on the immutability of teaching and, at the same time, reflect the Zeitgeist or spirit of the age. They are "dangerous topics" that should be avoided.

Consequently, the search for answers to these issues needs to be pulled aside and reviewed by the unchangeable elements.

Clearly, the Nordic bishops have not found a dogmatic or Zeitgeist objection to ecclesial sexual abuse.

Given this context, they conclude that the "direction, methodology and content" of the Synodal Path are worrisome.

They accuse the Germans of being driven by "process thinking" and the desire for structural Church change without clearly outlining Prozessdenken and why structural change is problematic.

As a result, both process thinking and structural change are presented negatively because they reduce reform in the Church to a project.

Implicit is the notion that reform is neither structural nor human by design when applied to the Church.

The argument is that Church does change differently from every other human institution. Where the Church becomes an object of human change, it is no longer the subject of God's salvific will.

"Process thinking" and a richer theological debate

Process-thinking is an end-to-end process, that is non-hierarchical in its structure.

According to the Nordic bishops, non-hierarchical thinking threatens the non-changeable sources of Scripture, Tradition, and the Magisterium, and must therefore be eliminated.

The danger of process-thinking is that it can break down sacred theological silos and open discrete theological categories to investigation and scrutiny.

But on the positive side, process-thinking can enable a richer theological debate, better theology and Church structures, thus optimizing Church life.

Concretely, this means having laypeople sitting beside bishops making decisions in a fundamental "equality of equals."

Some would argue that this is a model of the early Church, while others would disagree.

By contrast, the Scandinavian bishops appear to want to disempower the image or metaphor of the People of God. They write that this is "only one of the images with which the living Tradition describes the Church".

That's true, but it is a crucial image or metaphor of the Second Vatican Council's Dogmatic Constitution on the Church.

A Church with passive members

The Scandinavian bishops suggest three other images should be used to describe the Church

• Corpus mysterium
• Bride of Christ and
• Mediatrix of graces.

These are more passive and receptive than they are active and dynamic.

The curious metaphor of the Church as the "mediatrix of graces" is a reference I have not found in the Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC).

They might be meaning that the Church "is like a sacrament" (CCC 775) and "as a sacrament, the Church is Christ's instrument" (CCC 776). If so, their theology is unclear and needs greater precision.

Having not paid sufficient attention to the Dogmatic Constitution on the Church, the bishops have missed other vital images of the Church that Pope Francis has used explicitly and implicitly.

These include the Church as sheepfold and Christ as the shepherd; the Church as God's farm or field and God the heavenly farmer; the Church as building; the Church as Pilgrim People; and the Church as Body, for whom the "one mediator is Christ" (Lumen Gentium 6-8).

I believe the Scandinavians are correct to say that the Church "cannot be merely defined by the visible community".

But neither can it be defined without it.

For some, addressing the day's issues might be a capitulation to the current Zeitgeist. Still, for others, this is "reading the signs of the times".

The type of Catholic the Scandinavian bishops appeal to—and want the German bishops to hear—are those who sit quietly in their parishes with a strong sense of sacramental mystery.

These people "carry and set" the life of parishes and communities. They are not people who engage in questionnaires and debates, the bishops say, to defend them.

There is a "quietest" element to this type of person and a sense that the person who keeps his or her head firmly in the snow is the true type of Catholic.

Radical conversion and a radical image of God

But are these the people with whom Pope Francis wants us to communicate? His message is more outward-focused, asking us to engage with the sheep who have left the farm.

Consequently, the reference to Lumen Gentium 9 is double-edged.

How does the Church, in Christ's name, "approach the world and be its sure hope and source of salvation" if it does not also engage with the questions and push-back of the people of this age? Is it sufficient to live the ad intra life of the Church in peace and serenity by ignoring the ad extra "mess" we call human society?

The Scandinavian bishops then return to the "German problem" and the crisis of the German Church and its potential for renewal.

Condescendingly, they remember the dead saints, the past German theologians, and the humble and obscure German missionaries as examples of the life-giving patrimony of rich blessing for the Church in Germany.

Although they write of the need for radical conversion, they seem to want to avoid radical conversion that isn't spiritualised.

They misunderstand that the image of the People of God is a radical image of God, not of the people!

In this image, God is not the property of the people, but the people are the chosen of God.

Regarding the mission of the Church, the Scandinavians have forgotten that the Church — the People of God — are called to be salt and light for the world through living immersed in the world.

People sitting safely at home not participating in the life of the Church cannot be the synodal image of Scandinavian Catholicism the bishops wish to promote, can they?

The Scandinavian bishops should send another letter apologizing to the German Church.

They could explain why they are so frightened of facing the world's reality and why they want to hide from key contemporary questions.

Joe Grayland is a theologian and a priest of the Diocese of Palmerston North. His latest book is: Liturgical Lockdown. Covid and the Absence of the Laity. (Te Hepara Pai, 2021).

We are all dealing with Covid—no one is excluded from this experience.

We know the grief of these times; those with secure incomes have had greater security, while those without this have suffered more.

Grief can emerge as feelings of hopelessness, resignation and anger.

However, now is a time for honesty and resilience.

When we can't see the path ahead, and our goals are frustrated, it is easy to lose hope in the future and in ourselves.

Resilience is the capacity to recover quickly from difficulties.

It is the ability to spring back into shape.

It is a courageous virtue we see in those living and dealing with layer-upon-layer of grief.

We have choices about how we encounter these times; we have a choice to be hope-filled or not.

Hope provides a positive vision for the day and for the future.

Hope is a motivational desire to keep moving forwards. It is an optimistic state of mind. Hope can help us emerge from distressing and even tragic situations with a sense of purpose.

Hope builds resilience

Without hope, our mental and physical health can deteriorate.

Exercise, sensible eating, limited booze and good friends are all part of the jigsaw of hope-filled living.

People with high levels of hope have better physical and mental health, and are a tonic for those who are struggling.

Without hope, life becomes a lonely, isolated experience.

Hope gives a sense of personal meaning—particularly now—more extensive than what we own, where we work, what we think politically, what we have lost.

In fact, too much emphasis on these passing things can create social isolation.

On the other hand, Advent is a time to look at what gives value and brings life.

Goals

Advent is a time to review or modify your goals.

We all need realistic goals that fit the "new normal", and we need to consider the pathway and the required changes to achieve them.

For example, you might want a big overseas family holiday, but now you'll have to settle for a holiday in a nearby caravan park.

Embrace it!

Let go of the expectations that bind and bring anxiety and enjoy the simple.

It is time to let go of 2021.

Essential values

As if we need reminding now is a time to pivot in a way that focuses on our essential values, such as family, friendship and community.

It's a time to step out of ourselves; to recall and care for the needs of others.

It is a time to find new expressions that open up a world of hope and possibilities because they are new, different and challenging; a self-centred view of the world serves no one.

Sharing hope; being grateful

Hope is an invitation to step out of yourself and your own concerns and consider the needs of the bigger world in which you participate as a Christian-Catholic citizen.

Here is a thought.

It might be worthwhile driving up onto a high hill or mountain, getting out of your car and looking around at the vast, wonderful world you are living in and giving thanks.

And when there, look down from your mountain height and see the smallness of the city or town you live in and the smallness of the place where you work.

Then look at the infinite sky and the horizon and be grateful.

Gratitude is the heart of the Christian Eucharist.

Thanksgiving is central to our faith and at the heart of all our sacraments and liturgy.

As we stand with Christ before the Father, we stand as a community of grateful people, people called from darkness, anxiety and fear into God's life-giving light.

Gratitude mixes with hope to strengthen faith and increase charity. These are theological virtues, not sentimental ideas.

Without a robust theology of life a Christian community becomes just another social agency that will eventually fail.

Being a person of hope is the call of the Christian today.

Our ability to hope is not dependent on our vaccination status—we go much deeper than that.

Hope centred in Christ

Fear has the capacity to undo us and confuse our thinking reducing it to a mind-numbing daily sameness.

The Hebrew People believed and held their hope through the experiences of betrayal, warfare, exile, seemingly pointless meandering in the desert and oppression.

They waited, in hope, for times of joy, peace and well-being.

Christ, who stands before the Father, is the source of our strength, our spirit, our hope and our resilience.

Advent hope helps us navigate life's uncertainty with some clarity.

• Dr Joe Grayland is a theologian and a priest of the Diocese of Palmerston North. His latest book is titled: Catholics. Prayer, Belief and Diversity in a Secular Context (Te Hepara Pai, 2020).

The pandemic experience is reforming and reconfiguring our presumptions of contemporary life and liturgical practice and community.

The constraints imposed through social lockdown have reframed our church life and will influence how we "do" church for years to come.

For Catholics, the experience of Covid is both a social and liturgical one.

We have experienced the loss of our presumed access to the sacred physical space, whether that space is a park, a church, a home visit, or a café and, we have suffered the loss of access to our friends and families, to funerals and overseas travel, employment and income.

The liturgical loss at the heart of the experience of Covid has been the loss of our mediated sacramental system, and the loss of the physical presence of the Church gathered in the sacred gathering we call Mass.

On 3 December, the Government's new Covid Traffic Light system comes into effect.

This system distinguishes between vaccine passport holders and non-holders as a regulatory system for attending social gatherings.

Beginning on 3 December, every public gathering at any level will be distinguished by the vaccination status of the people attending. The number of attendants will be determined by the vaccination status of the people attending.

The system has three gathering levels: Red, Orange, and Green. As applied to churches these are

Red
Face coverings encouraged
Using vaccine certificates - 100 people based on 1m distancing.
Not using vaccine certificates 25 people can gather based on 1m distancing.

Orange
Face coverings encouraged
Using vaccine certificates - unlimited numbers of people with vaccine certificates.
Not using vaccine certificates - 50 people can gather based on 1m distancing.

Green
Using vaccine certificates - unlimited numbers of people with vaccine certificates.
Not using vaccine certificates 100 people can gather based on 1m distancing.

These are the parameters stated by the Government; they are not theological principles or liturgical directives.

Liturgical Language

The language used by the Traffic Light system is not appropriate for the Church.

Referring to the Sacred Liturgy as a "vaccinated mass" or "unvaccinated mass" reduces it to an external scientific, political or medical event.

The Mass is not defined by an individual's vaccination status; however, an individual's admittance to the Mass and other sacramental gatherings and funerals will be because these are public gatherings.

It is better to speak of "vaccinated congregations" or congregants and "unvaccinated congregations" and congregants.

This clearly shows that the responsibility for attendance, and the congregation's composition, lies with each congregation member and is an adult approach to worship; each individual congregant must make an ethical choice for their vaccination status and accept their responsibilities towards others.

"Vaccinated congregation" and "unvaccinated congregation" places the onus for the opening of churches and for the worthy celebration of sacraments on the congregation and not on the presider nor diocese.

The vaccination status of the congregation or congregant is the central factor.

To speak of a "vaccinated" or "unvaccinated Mass" is unhelpful because it gives theological and liturgical credence to a term that does not deserve it, and it would wrongly introduce words into the sacramental and liturgical language that are divisive and potentially harmful to the Body of Christ.

Each person attending Mass or a sacramental rite has the personal and ethical responsibility to attend according to the State legal mandate and not bring harm or scandal to the congregation by defying the mandate for their own personal reasons—this includes priests.

We all have a moral duty to care for the most vulnerable, especially children who are not vaccinated and those who cannot be vaccinated.

In this, we see the social contract we share with each other in our liberal, representative democracy; the safety of the most vulnerable relies on the generosity of the majority.

The classification of church services as public gatherings makes them—during Covid—health and safety risks for all who attend, including an ageing clergy.

We must avoid approaching the Mass, the celebration of the sacraments, and the ministerial priesthood transactionally.

This means we should not approach the Mass, the sacraments or priestly ministry as personal possessions, or worse, as political tools to be weaponised; an utterly selfish point of view is not a Christian point of view.

Social Contract - Church Contract

Just as there is a Social Contract, there is also a Church Contract.

In an adult church, adults take responsibility for their behaviours.

In an adult Christian Church, we care for the children, the widows and the orphans by providing alternatives and where there is a need, we respond to it with generosity, love and forbearance.

So it is reasonable and good to provide a Sunday Mass for those who have chosen—in good conscience—not to be vaccinated.

At appropriate levels of safety is also reasonable and good to enable vaccinated congregants to attend Mass without limits.

The Church has always provided sacraments to its own who could not attend the general Sunday Eucharist, such as hospital patients.

In the Acts of the Apostles, the Early Church instituted the Seven to care for the Hellenist Christians (6:1-7).

It resolved the problem through respect for the leadership of the Apostles, concern for those in need and offered a solution of care.

The Sacred Liturgy

The Sacred Liturgy, or the Mass, is the central liturgical rite of the Catholic Church.

It is not a political tool or a sacred weapon to be used violently.

In Sacrosanctum Concilium, the Second Vatican Council's Decree on the Liturgy, the Church describes the Sacred Liturgy as the "source and summit of the Christian life" and "an exercise of the priestly office of Christ that is preeminent in the all the actions of the Church" (SC7).

In the Sacred Liturgy of the Eucharist, "the sanctification of men and women is given expression in symbols perceptible by the senses and is carried out in ways appropriate to each of them (symbols).

"In it (the Mass), complete and definitive public worship is performed by the mystical body of Jesus Christ, that is, by the Head and his members."

The Sacred Liturgy reveals the Church to herself; it makes the Church—us—who we are.

It is more than just a pious action, a personal devotion, or a thing to be done.

The law of prayer, lex orandi, is more than a regulator of rites, symbols or songs. The law of prayer guides how we pray together in public because the Sacred Liturgy does not belong to any individual believer—priest, bishop, or layperson.

It is not a personal, pious, or cultural possession.

Consequently, the regulation of the Sacred Liturgy and the other sacramental rites belongs to the conference of bishops, the local bishop, and the pope.

Liturgical-sacramental rites have significant meaning in and of themselves.

They do not rely on the State for their meaning.

When their celebration is impeded, contradicted, prohibited, or made more difficult by the State, they do not lose their meaning.

Sacramental-liturgical rites symbolise a greater reality than the current political or medical context.

At the same time, we must avoid approaching the Mass and the sacrament as magical experiences that are immune from the actual circumstances in which they are celebrated.

We must avoid turning the priest, particularly those over 70, into a sacred magician who does not need to take care not to be infected. Ignoring the reality of the circumstances in which the Mass and the sacraments are celebrated reduces them to magic.

It forgets there is no imperative that a sacramental-liturgical rite must be celebrated in every circumstance—except baptism in a case of emergency.

Sacramental-liturgical rites do not have to be celebrated at any cost and in any circumstance.

The sanctification of the world lies at the heart of the necessity of the Sacred Liturgy.

Thus, the Church cannot just give up on its celebration of the Mass in ordinary circumstances, but the Church must consider other factors in extraordinary circumstances.

Remaining unified

Sadly, there is no getting away from the fact that the distinction between vaccine passport holders and non-vaccine passport holders is painful for the People of God and separates the Body of Christ.

The reasons for this distinction are epidemiological and political, not theological nor do they originate from the bishops.

How we deal with this as adult citizens and Catholics will define us.

Referring to some as "vaccinated believers" and others as "non-vaccinated believers" is simply wrong.

Similarly, defining, describing or defending the Sacred liturgy as a "vaccinated or non-vaccinated Mass" is also wrong.

Vaccinated and non-vaccinated Catholics can receive the sacraments if they receive them according to the liturgical laws. The complexity is that they cannot receive them together in the same liturgical space once the Traffic Light system exists.

Where needed, the Mass and the sacraments should be offered to those who are unvaccinated separately from those who are vaccinated.

In larger communities, it is rare for the parish to gather physically as one; we already distinguish through liturgical styles such as choral, guitar and youth masses, we also make distinctions on the basis of time, such as 7am, 9am, 11am and 5pm.

Although the vaccinated / unvaccinated distinction is different because it is mandated by the external agency of the Government, if we all behave with honour, act with a social conscience, and be respectful of Sacred Liturgy, we can maintain the unity of the Body of Christ in a difficult time.

• Joe Grayland is a theologian and a priest of the Diocese of Palmerston North. His latest book is titled: Catholics. Prayer, Belief and Diversity in a Secular Context (Te Hepara Pai, 2020).

Context

The Catholic mission to Aotearoa New Zealand was established in 1838 by French missionaries for Maori, the Tangata Whenua. From 1840 on, the impact of Irish, Scots, and English immigrants changed the mission's outlook. By 1870 the mission had become an Irish settler church that by 1877 had a church school system. Throughout the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, Eurocentric colonial frameworks of worship and ecclesiology formed structures and attitudes, which we are now shedding. Since the 1970s, we have been rediscovering the ancient language and tradition of Te Reo Maori. We have become a bi-cultural and tri-lingual nation, and the Church has been changed through these strong, social forces. This is true for many churches of the previous English Empire, which is now the Commonwealth of Nations.

Enculturation

Enculturation is a complex but not an ‘unanswered question' as Fr Reese suggests; it is an ongoing discovery. Two points of difference between the churches of Aotearoa New Zealand the United States, apart from the size, wealth, and international influence, are the indigenous voice and the exercise of patriotism. When I was a visiting scholar at Notre Dame University in 2000, I was asked to preside at Eucharist in the basilica. I would have readily accepted but for one thing, the United States National flag in the sanctuary. The flag, I explained, is a nationalist emblem which, at that time, was an international symbol of oppression and militarism.

Along with the Vatican flag on the other side of the sanctuary, I explained that baptism into Christ and not into the United States or the Vatican should mark liturgical buildings. Needless to say, the flags were not removed, and I did not preside. National flags in churches seem to say: "here's proof we belong" and reflect the need for social acceptance.

In Aotearoa New Zealand, nationalism of another sort is seen in civic religion when it co-opts Christian prayer forms to create civic religion for its own ends. Our challenge—and wherever ancient pre-European traditions are re-emerging from under the gloss of imposed European cultural catholicisms—is to discern if there is a theological difference between the ancient rituals and theologies of pre-missionary Aotearoa and the Roman liturgical rites that trace their origins to Indo-European pagan rites, Byzantine vesture, inter-Germanic tribal conflicts, and medieval European society. This is a liturgical problem that needs to be discussed in creative detail.

Justifying one set of rites as sacred and the other as in need of evangelisation is difficult. While the Gospel is accepted as the Word that critiques human society, it is delivered in very strong social-cultural wrappings. As indigenous language and cultural expression re-emerge, liturgical practices and rites must be capable of sometimes rapid adaptation. The demand to reform colonialist, Eurocentric concepts of God has an immediate impact on liturgical texts, rituals, and architecture.

In our parish, we begin the Easter Vigil at 5 am, not only because the rites direct that it should take place during the night, but because the ritual of Maori life begins at dawn with Karakia (prayer) that addresses God, the people, and the day in the Mihi Whakatau or speech of greeting.

Liturgical enculturation challenges us to encounter the voice of the First Peoples and the Latin liturgical tradition. Authentic enculturation moves us beyond nationalism to deeper, more profound expressions of our shared humanity than nationalism can provide.

I would offer this as a key element of the conversation into which Fr Reese is welcoming us.

Ministry

Fr Reese raises the question of clergy shortage on the one hand and the availability of lay ministers on the other. I think his references to reconciliation and anointing are red herrings because these sacraments are related to presbyterial ministry and the forgiveness of sin, which are not, essentially, gender-specific. Perhaps the point he is raising is how sacramental ministry—and its theology—is too often used in the construct of power and exclusion?

The way we use sacramental rites to demarcate people, places, and rights flow over into the discussion of liturgical practice. Sacramental rites are ritual constructs that did not fall from heaven; they have evolved over time through multiple influences, not all of which are Gospel-based. Our contemporary scarcity of presbyterial ministers is not a liturgical problem; it is an ecclesial one. The liturgical rite of ordination does not create the theology of priesthood; it reflects it; it reflects the concepts of power and authority and their delegation to legitimated recipients. In this, it is not a liturgical problem.

The liturgical question concerning the shortage of presbyters is the—pre-Covid—commodification and international trafficking of clergy and seminarians. A priest from Africa is commodified when he is used by his own diocese as a source of international income and commodified by his host diocese when he is used as a stop-gap solution for a reality they refuse to face. The commodification of clergy is indicative of a deeper functionalist understanding of presbyterial ministry—dislocated from context—where a ritualistic approach to worship is operative (through a legitimated person), often at the expense of parishioners. The liturgical problem is: the local community is inhibited from worshipping to the fullest extent of its baptismal call because their gathering is not driven by the value of their full, conscious, and active participation but by their own commodification.

Globalisation

The impact of globalisation is observable in competing cultural catholicisms. Cultural catholicisms that are based on popular religiosity are challenged by more rational catholicisms and vice versa. As a result, established cultural catholicisms are left feeling battered, and "new" cultural catholicisms feel unwanted. Where piety ends and superstition begins is often hard to judge in many cultural catholicisms. Where popular religion is too heavily used worship is compromised because culture is used as a proxy for salvation and ritualism is too easily confused for liturgy.

Dealing with cultural catholicism transmission while fostering unity within a parish is the daily reality of many pastors. We know that parishes do not change; parishioners do. Nothing is static and dealing with change is exhausting. For the most part, we have to work out for ourselves what to do next.

Diversity in worship is a hallmark of our contemporary experience. A topic for Fr Reese's conversation is whether the single presumptive Latin Rite is ended—replaced by many local rites in the catholicity of the "Western Church"—and if this justifies creating new rites and Eucharistic Prayers that are expressive of their Local Church's, languages, and customs?

Eucharistic Prayer

The ancient tradition of "praying as best as one can" is long gone, and the reason for this lies in an over-reliance on the notion of illicit and licit ways of praying.

I do not believe we need more Eucharistic Prayers, as Fr Reese suggests, but we do need prayers written in the language of the Local Church. The nonsense of the Swiss Eucharistic Prayers being translated from German into Latin, only to be translated back into German, is indicative of the problem we face. This ecclesial problem is also a liturgical one. Fr Reese has identified a key problem for liturgical prayer that bears greater discussion: if the liturgical prayer of the assembly is not ‘transformative of the community' then it is inauthentic.

Translations

Fr Reese's comments are totally in order. The present English translation is barely English! It has all the hallmarks of an ideological, Stalinist approach to language that defines a period of Church and liturgical history. Into this period of history goes Summorum Pontificum and its explanatory note. They are indicative of what happens when the relationship between lex orandi and lex credendi becomes politicised. Those who celebrate both the ordinary and extraordinary forms do so, only, because they understand the ecclesiology of neither. This not a liturgical problem, but it is exploited liturgically.

The key issue with the translation is not the translation itself but the process of its creation. The bullying by large, powerful, wealthy episcopal conferences and individuals is part of the story, as is the acquiesce by smaller, poorer, and less skilled episcopates. The translation is an example of theopolitics, not liturgy.

Kiss of Peace and Fermentum

The first was discussed during the pontificate of Benedict XVI with a view to moving it before the preparation rites. Because its original place in the Roman rite was more likely before communion (though is not absolutely clear) the decision was to keep it there. I think the Fermentum is a superseded sign of union. A richer sign would be the sharing of the Eucharist itself and a new Good Friday service designed to bring all Christian communities together.

Ecumenism

Practical ecumenism is already operative. In the German parishes where I ministered pre-covid there were weekly religious services—alternatively Lutheran and Catholic—in local rest homes and in specific communities. In the rest homes, all the residents attended and received communion, irrespective of their baptismal denomination. These octogenarians seemed to be quite pleased with this arrangement; it is only priests—like me—that got a little unsettled. Laity leading clergy and changing the Church and liturgy is not new; I rather think it is the norm. How ecumenism is understood depends on how baptism is understood.

Next phase

A second phase needs a language change. "Liturgy", for too many people, means ritual entertainment, which is incapable of leading to full, conscious, active participation in God's saving work, or Leitourgia. Liturgy is entertainment when equated to nice singing, beautiful artistry, snappy vestments, clouds of incense, super homilies or traditional sermons, eucharistic piety, and cool or conservative presiders. Most of our "liturgical arguments" are over this "stuff" and we debate elements that are essentially ritualistic, functionalist and consumerist. As a result, our worship is transactional and not transformative, just like our ecclesiology. Where ecclesiology and liturgy do not grow out of Leitourgia, Martyria and Diakonia, we only have rituals.

The profundity of leitourgia forces us below the veneer of ritual prancing, pointy hats and all that silly stuff that passes for "liturgy" to the place that enables worship to be "God-service" (service-of-God, service-by-God, service-to-God).

• Dr Joe Grayland is a theologian and a priest of the Diocese of Palmerston North. His latest book is titled: Catholics. Prayer, Belief and Diversity in a Secular Context (Te Hepara Pai, 2020).

A weekly ‘must-read' for informed Catholics, the Letter shapes and unravels the burning issues of the day in the Vatican and the Church.

The conversation on synodality offers more than "flashes" and raises important questions for the Church to consider, wrote Letter author Robert Mickens.

Referring to an hour-long conversation hosted by Dr Joe Grayland of Palmerston North between Cardinal John Dew, (Wellington), Archbishop Mark Coleridge (Brisbane) and Professor Thomas O'Loughlin (Nottingham), Mickens says it was "well worth the time" and "went quickly."

"All four of these priests offered more than just "flashes" of insight regarding synodality. They also raised important questions about this new and not always clear path the Jesuit pope has pushed the Church to embark upon," he wrote.

Speaking with CathNews from Sydney, one of the originators of "Flashes of Insight", Michael Kelly SJ, is pleased Flashes of Insight influenced Mickens sufficiently to highlight it in his Letter from Rome.

"Against a backdrop of a synod in Germany and media talk about schism, La Croix International editor Robert Mickens obviously saw value in the Flashes of Insight conversation," Kelly said.

"It (Flashes of Insight) is an obvious outcome of what the technology allows us to do when realizing value out of what is a global Catholic community," he said.

Kelly said that "people all over the world have different insights into the same events and Flashes of Insight appreciates this difference in its assessment in things we actually share."

While this type of technology has been around for several years it is only recently being more universally embraced, Kelly said.

He acknowledges it is ‘early days' for Flashes of Insight but is hopeful.

Calling it a great opportunity he says starting something afresh is fraught.

"I have some appreciation of how difficult it is to start something locally, let alone virtually but we've got the technology."

"Jesus used a technology of his time, a boat, and went out on the water to address the crowds from a better vantage point."

"We've got the internet and a range of new tools."

"It's about the mission and we're giving it a crack."

Kelly is particularly hopeful that those who engage in the process, either by participating in the conversations, joining the audience, watching, and or commenting, will benefit.

He hopes people might also share Flashes of Insight.

Inviting people to join the conversation, Kelly said Flashes of Insight is dialogue rather than a formal didactic approach.

"I've been rather encouraged, and particularly surprised how much more unworriedly critical a vast number of people, including cardinals and bishops have been".

He's calling the Vatican's same-sex blessing statement "a shot in the foot".

James Alison spoke with Professor Thomas O'Loughlin, Fr Michael Kelly SJ, hosted by Dr Joe Grayland on Flashes of Insight.

He characterised the Vatican's document as a dialogue that is failing to be dialogical.

Alison says the Vatican's statement is an attempt to shut down ‘horizontal conversation' between people by introducing a ‘vertical directive'.

The Vatican is trying to place a trump card he claims.

"It is essentially saying you can't have this discussion because I'm, right".

In this way, the Vatican's same sex blessing statement is attempting to introduce a ‘vertical absolutism into a horizontal discussion'.

One of the issues at play making this dialogue difficult is the question of authority when it comes to Natural Law, Alison noted.

"I am assuming there is a good understanding" but it must be ‘delivered to us horizontally, as something reasonable to understand' he said.

Alison says it is difficult when people hold on to a particular understanding of Natural Law that is no longer reasonable to everybody's reason.

Professor Thomas O'Loughlin picked up on a false understanding of Natural Law that equates Natural Law with a law of physics, such as the Law of Gravity.

O'Loughlin points out that Natural Law is not a perfectly deductive system but an ‘ordinance of reason' that helps us ‘make sense of reality around us' he said.

Fr Kelly said that part of the problem with the Vatican's same sex blessing statement is the process of having an answer and searching for question to fit it.

James Alison and Pope Francis

James Alison is known for his firm but patient insistence on truthfulness in matters gay as an ordinary part of basic Christianity, and for his pastoral outreach in the same sphere.

‘In trouble' for his pastoral outreach, the Congregation for the Clergy dismissed him from the clerical state, forbidding him from teaching, preaching, or presiding.

However, on 2 July 2017, Pope Francis called Alison directly telling him, "I want you to walk with deep interior freedom, following the Spirit of Jesus. And I give you the power of the keys".

Alison understood from this that Pope Francis did not perceive the congregation's decision as binding; that he treated him as a priest giving him universal jurisdiction to hear confessions and preach, the two faculties traditionally associated with the power of the keys.

Alison noted that this was how Pope Francis had acted towards those he appointed as "Mercy Priests" During the 2016 Jubilee of Mercy.

This is the first of three conversations with James Alison at Flashes of Insight.

Flashes of Insight is a video conversation that began as a way of reflecting on Church liturgy during COVID.

To get part two and part three of these conversations and more, please either "Subscribe" on YouTube, or if you would like to part of a live audience in the future, sign up at Flashes of Insight.

On the basis of its understanding, the CDF concluded that the Church cannot officially bless people in same-gender unions that approximate marriage.

The Magisterium teaches that homosexuality is a ‘disordered nature' and classifies homosexual lovemaking as ‘intrinsically disordered' [CCC:2357].

In the Catechism, ordered nature reflects God's creation of male and female human beings who are made for each other.

This principle could be described as exclusively heterosexual.

The magisterial understanding of sexuality is derived from this principle. Sexuality ‘concerns affectivity, the capacity to love and to procreate', creating the ‘aptitude for forming bonds of communion with others' [CCC:2332] and is ‘ordered to the conjugal love of a man and a woman' [CCC:2360].

The Magisterium's understanding of creation and sexuality is heavily criticised for being binary and considered outdated.

Many suggest that sexuality differentiates itself between sexual attraction, physical attraction, and emotional attraction and is not essentially related to procreation or the capacity to love.

The strongest critics of the Responsum accuse the CDF of ignoring the last 100 -plus years of research into human sexuality. They argue that maintaining the theology of ‘disordered nature' on the assumption that the ‘psychological genesis [of homosexuality] remains largely unexplained' [CCC: 2357] is incorrect.

Critics argue that a necessary distinction between sexual orientations and sexualities is required and that one should see sexuality as given, diverse and personal.

The desire to bless same-sex unions challenges the Magisterium's binary view of creation and sexuality and reveals the essential question; on what basis can one say that a person's nature is ‘intrinsically disordered', their lovemaking a ‘grave depravity', and still bring them into union with Christ?

Asking if the Church can bless same-sex unions puts into question the CDF's use of the primary sources on which the magisterial teaching is built; its interpretation of scripture and the presumption that the "natural law" is fully known and not itself subject to growth in understanding.

This starting point is critical for how we understand a blessing given to a couple sharing the same gender.

It brings us back to the larger perspective:

• what is the nature and place of homosexuality and homosexual lovemaking in the order of creation?
• how does homosexuality and lovemaking participate in the "blessing of God? and
• if sexuality a blessing of God, then how it is defined, and by whom it is defined is critical.

The Blessing

The debate concerning the blessing is, by comparison, a sidebar.

It is important only because the theological pathway from blessing to ecclesial act and sacramental—that resembles a sacrament—is full of potholes.

To make this clearer I will distinguish between a blessing and a benediction.

A blessing (noun) is a request to God to care for someone or something, it is also an act to make someone, or oneself, happy.

A benediction (noun) combines the Latin words bene meaning well and dicere to say Benedicere: to wish well and is to say something good to another as a prayer, invocation, or dedication.

According to the Catechism [1078ff], blessing is in the nature of God; the whole of God's work is blessing and while everything and everyone who exists is also a blessing of God, the whole of the created order needs salvation because it is fallen.

The Catechism states that the dignity of each individual person is rooted in his, or her creation in the image and likeness of God (1700, 1702).

Blessing, as we commonly use it, is a prayer for God's favour or the dedication of an individual or object and parents bless their heterosexual and homosexual children all the time, long before any heterosexual or homosexual tendencies become manifest, and priests bless water, oil, and wedding rings.

However, there has to be more to a blessing to turn it from natural water into holy water.

That "more" is the power of the ordained who makes the benediction; this is the basis of resemblance.

The additional "power" of the priest's benediction is seen where parishioners ask Father to bless their candles, dogs, and cars, because his benediction is recognised as qualitatively different from their own.

What makes one a blessing and other a benediction is

• the nature of reciprocity—who has the capacity to give and receive a blessing;
• the priest acting with the power of ordination in the name of the Church; and
• the intention of the blessing and its resemblance to a sacrament.

Some suggest parents blessing their homosexual child on their child's wedding day is possible.

While laypeople may preside at some blessings ‘the more a blessing concerns ecclesial and sacramental life, the more is its administration reserved to the ordained ministry (bishops, priests or deacons)' [CCC1669].

A benediction is a sacramental when it is received by a person who has the capacity to receive it—reciprocity—or when it is given to an object that will be used in sacred rites, such as a baptismal font.

When an ordained man gives a benediction, the benediction is implicitly reliant on the power of the priesthood.

The Responsum acknowledges that a benediction for an individual with homosexual inclinations remains licit as for example in a religious profession, which affirms a woman or man in their non-sacramental chosen lifestyle.

However, a benediction is not permitted for two people (hetero - or homosexual) entering a "marriage-like state" because the state resembles the sacrament of matrimony and the benediction would resemble the nuptial blessing.

According to the Responsum's explanatory note, a benediction cannot be given to people whose relationship is not ‘objectively and positively ordered to receive and express grace according to the designs of God inscribed in creation and fully revealed by Christ the Lord'.

To do this is to ‘bless sin'.

At this level there is no distinction between couples on the basis of their sexual preference; neither can be given a benediction.

The issue for the same-sex couple is not their singularity as gay people but the nature of their relationship, and within it, their lovemaking.

Because their loving making is considered ‘intrinsically disordered' their relationship is seriously at fault.

At this point we return, again, to consider the theological reciprocity between nature, sexuality, and acts of lovemaking.

The CDF concludes that when a sacramental resembles a sacrament a benediction cannot be given by the Church's minister because the blessing moves from being "just" a blessing to an ‘ecclesial liturgical action', or an act of the Church, that invokes the priesthood of Christ, and God—in Christ—can not bless sin.

Sacramentals are ‘sacred signs that bear a resemblance to the sacraments [because] they signify effects, particularly of a spiritual nature, which are obtained through the intercession of the Church' for people who are ‘disposed to receive the chief effects of the sacraments' (Sacrosanctum Concilium 60).

This definition draws together the connections between the recipient's disposition, the church's prayer, and the Church's minister.

Together, these form a single unit that brings a sacramental into the orbit of a sacrament.

Critically, the Catechism [1670] states: ‘sacramentals do not confer the grace of the Holy Spirit in the way that the sacraments do' but through them, believers are prepared through the Church's prayer ‘to received grace' and disposed ‘to cooperate with' grace.

It also states that sacramentals ‘derive from the baptismal priesthood' and ‘every baptised person is called to be a blessing and bless'.

There are three points to note:

• that a benediction is not a sacrament,
• benedictions dispose; and
• benedictions are related to baptism.

What is not made explicit in the Responsum is the role of baptism in the reception of a benediction.

Some theologians argue that when two baptised individuals enter a same-sex union they already possess the theological capacity to receive a benediction just as baptised heterosexual couples receive the nuptial blessing.

Some suggest that because the Church's minister is a witness to the matrimony, and not the minister of it, in a similar way he has the capacity to impart a benediction in the name of the Church on a same-sex couple. This is especially the case if the couple are not intending a sacramental union.

Christian sacraments are sacred signs instituted by Christ to give grace and to save, and the sacrament of baptism is a celebration of God's sanctifying presence, transforming people and human experience.

Baptism is not reliant on, or referent to, a person's sexuality—however, this is understood.

Every baptised person enjoys the purification from sin, new birth in the Holy Spirit and incorporation into the Body of Christ.

All baptised persons receive a sacramental character that consecrates them for Christian worship, enabling them to participate in the sacred liturgy, to serve God and ‘to exercise their baptismal priesthood by witness of holy lives and practical charity [Lumen Gentium 10].

Proponents of benedictions for same-gender couples argue that baptism is the legitimate basis for the blessing of baptised same-gender partners.

They point out that the nature, purpose, intention, and use of any benediction must correspond to the nature and effects of baptism.

They argue that because a person with homosexual tendencies, created in God's image and likeness, can be baptised—receiving the effects and grace of the sacrament and incorporation into the Body of Christ—that person possesses the theological capacity to receive the Church's benediction in virtue of their baptism, and not in virtue of the power of an ordained minister.

Where this argument is accepted, refusing two baptised people of the same-sex, who live lives of faith, a benediction when they are choosing and intending a life-long relationship, that is not intended to be sacramental matrimony, is not possible, it is required.

At this point the argument for a benediction of same-sex union moves in a pastoral direction, suggesting that if the Church were to bless same-sex unions then it would remove the pain and suffering from the lives of some of its own members.

It is argued that the Church, by openly acknowledging and blessing such unions, would be seen to affirm the baptismal call of its members to live—in public—stable relationships of mutual and lasting fidelity.

Those who disagree see here the first step towards extending the sacrament of matrimony to same-sex couples. This concern cannot be avoided.

The sacramental character of matrimony and the resemblance of a civil union to it is an inaccurate use of resemblance.

The resemblance of a sacramental benediction to a sacrament seems to imply a resemblance to either the character of the sacrament or to its Eucharistic Prayer, however, this is not outlined in the Responsum but is, nonetheless, critical to the debate.

Relying on the theological character of matrimony as the basis for denying benedictions to same-gender couples is risky given this sacrament's history and unique sacramental character.

In matrimony, the couple are both the ministers and the recipients of the sacrament—based on their baptism—and the church's minister is the witnesses.

Similarly, the concern with ‘a certain imitation or analogue of the nuptial blessing' is also problematic given that blessing's history and liturgical purpose.

The nuptial blessing's context is the Mass, coming after the Our Father and before the couple receives communion together.

The structure of the blessing is clearly a benediction and not a Eucharist Prayer—it does not confer the sacrament—because ‘it is ordinarily understood that the spouses, as ministers of Christ's grace, mutually confer upon each other the sacrament of Matrimony by expressing their consent before the Church' [CCC:1623].

The Church's minister ‘assists' at the marriage and receives the spousal consent and blesses in the name of the Church, thus making it (matrimony) an ecclesial act.

On the basis of this understanding, many conclude that the denial of a benediction for a baptised couple who share the same gender, based on the benediction's resemblance to the nuptial benediction in the liturgy of matrimony, is unwarranted.

Lastly, the Responsum states that ‘the Church does not have, and cannot have, the power to bless unions of persons of the same sex in the sense intended' but, Sacrosanctum Concilium 79—a higher teaching authority—suggests this might not be the whole story.

"The sacramentals are to undergo a revision which takes into account the primary principle of enabling the faithful to participate intelligently, actively, and easily; the circumstances of our own days must also be considered.

"When rituals are revised, as laid down in Art. 63, new sacramentals may also be added as the need for these becomes apparent.

"Reserved blessings shall be very few; reservations shall be in favour of bishops or ordinaries.

"Let provision be made that some sacramentals, at least in special circumstances and at the discretion of the ordinary, may be administered by qualified laypersons."

• Dr Joe Grayland is a theologian and a priest of the Diocese of Palmerston North. His latest book is titled: Catholics. Prayer, Belief and Diversity in a Secular Context (Te Hepara Pai, 2020).

Christensen explains that successful companies are those that can meet not only their customers' current needs but anticipate their future ones too.

Disruptive innovators - disruptors - are more likely to displace established companies, even when they are small and have relatively fewer resources.

According to Christensen, a disruptor often begins by either attracting the dominant businesses' less-demanding customers or by creating an entirely new market.

Disruption creates both a new market and a new "value network".

"Innovation" describes the ways companies find to enhance their customer's experience, so the customer knows they are valued and cared for.

The customer experiences the value of belonging to the "family" of the company and the experiential value of belonging to the "community of customers" keeps them faithful and attracts others.

The business world speaks well of leaders who are "movers and shakers", disruptors because they achieve what others cannot - change.

In church circles, change leaders are often vilified because they challenge the established, sacred cows.

The application of disruptive-innovation to our current experience of liturgical practice helps us see why the fundamental presumption of liturgy as a communitarian event, where the ritual elements of a priest, people, Sunday, church, music, eucharistic prayer and communion that once made sense, no longer do.

The disruption to the concept of community has created innovative forms of worship; forms that no longer presume the use of all or most of the ritual elements of catholic worship.

Liturgical disruption: What it looks like

Let's consider what liturgical disruption is by looking at the world around us.

In the world of taxis, Uber is described as a disruptor, but this might not be entirely accurate. While Uber has challenged the taxi business it hasn't moved the concept of personal transport in a radically new direction.

When we look at the movie industry and Netflix, we see a different effect.

I first discovered Netflix while living in the United States when DVDs were delivered to our homes. I remember thinking why would I do this when I can walk to the local video shop?

Now, I watch streamed movies and news programmes in a variety of languages from across the world.

Initially, Netflix didn't disrupt the supply of movies - video shops continued to exist.

However, Netflix capitalised on the advent of the internet and disrupted the fundamental behaviours of movie watching people around the world.

The disruption of customer behaviours matched with innovations in customer services has seen the growth of the Netflix community (customer base) and the death of the local video shop's customer base.

The death of video shops and the morphing of cinema's into bars and cafes with movies attached, to survive, is indicative of the disruption-innovation needed to survive significant behavioural change.

Applying these considerations, I suggest that the proliferation of online masses is not the key disruptor - it is more Uber than Netflix.

Online masses predate COVID and the sheer volume of them now should not distract us. The volume is not the key disruptor because it has not brought a change in foundational behaviours.

The transference of the mass' performance-based ritual from the sanctuary to the screen did not disrupt already existing liturgical behaviours; priests did what they normally do - perform the rituals - and believers did what they normally do - watch the rituals being performed.

Thus, the ritual behaviours didn't change because the already dominant operative, behaviours were not disrupted.

The behavioural disruption came with the inability to recreate the physical presence of the community and physical participation in the shared eucharistic meal - even to the point where concelebrating presbyters uses separate chalices and individually consecrated host rather than sharing these elements.

If anything, the online mass has unwittingly contributed to the liturgical disruption of the physical liturgical community by taking the viewer from the pew to the couch.

The disruption-innovation of the liturgical community

Liturgical life during COVID offers three considerations of disruption-innovation:

First, habitual worshipping practices have been disrupted and behaviours that have been central to liturgical and parish life have radically changed.

With safety defining liturgical behaviours believers are more prepared to stay away from church gatherings, to pray at home, or even celebrate a "lay Eucharist" with family instead of going to Mass.

Second, online masses and worship groups have innovated choice; as a colleague suggested online ‘worship has become promiscuous.'

The dynamic of choice is not new - for example, in my experience people move between parish masses based on a variety of reasons such as a convenience, the liturgical style of the mass, or the music.

Now the choice includes legitimately worshipping at home.

While the church (corner video shop) is the place to find "spiritual communion" our attention is now turning to the innovation of the "domestic church" and home worship as the new locus of authentic liturgical prayer.

Third, and most importantly, the behaviours of the physical liturgical community have been radically disrupted and innovated. Community is a threat (disruption) as well as something we want (innovation).

While believers can search the web for a community, they can feel safe in, this is not always the case for physical community.

Profound disruption to liturgical behaviour has come through social and physical distancing, wearing masks, communion from behind a screen, prohibitions on singing, restricted numbers, and closed churches.

These have altered our behaviours and changed the way we experience the liturgical community; they have changed our shared understandings of the community itself.

When we stand in the car park, chatting after mass, we realise implicitly that our physical behaviours inside the church say; "worship and church community are dangerous and it's safer not to participate".

The foundational disruption to the physical community has changed our liturgical behaviours, and, therefore, our experience of prayer itself, which the phrase lex orandi, lex credendi summaries: we pray (orandi) what we believe (credendi).

Because we are a community who pray what we believe and who bring our belief to prayer, the disruption of prayer will have an impact on the belief.

When we pray online and reduce Mass to spiritual communion for the viewer the potential danger is to extenuate the clerical aspect of Mass and formalise visual participation as "sufficient" for belief.

When a family prays a "lay eucharist" at home they exclude the presbyterial ministry. In both instances, the disruption to the community has changed our behaviours and along with it our presumptions of authentic liturgical prayer and ministry.

The foundational disruption to the communitarian aspect of lex orandi/lex credendi will show itself in accommodations to "liturgical masks" and "liturgical distancing".

Such accommodations have the potential to move the physical celebration of liturgy from "we" to "I", thereby returning worship to a privatised, or self-isolated ritual action.

Thus, the most significant disruption to liturgy is the disruption of the physical community and the most important innovation to the liturgy are the new ways of being a liturgical community.

I suggest, the disruption-innovation to communal prayer (lex orandi), will likely impact not only the church's communitarian framework but also its presumptions of authentic ministry.

Liturgical innovation - future changes

The disruption-innovation of the COVID-liturgical period can only be sketched.

Liturgical history shows that naming disruptors is not easy because liturgy evolves over a longer timeframe and generally does not anticipate social and cultural shifts, it reflects them.

However, liturgy's formal struggles with adaptation and innovation are always related to changes in behaviours and theological contexts.

If we are to benefit from the disruption-innovation to the community we are creating, I suggest understanding this current change will require a more sophisticated concept of the church as people in God and worship as people in God at prayer.

It will require a higher level of ecclesial leadership and a much higher calibre of liturgical leadership and insight than we have seen recently from Vatican departments.

The disruption to the physical community is greater than online, virtual worship and the effects on who we worship with, who we are as Christian people and, ultimately where we belong, remain to be considered.

• Joe Grayland is a theologian and a priest of the Diocese of Palmerston North. His latest book is titled: Catholics. Prayer, Belief and Diversity in a Secular Context (Te Hepara Pai, 2020).
• Article first published in La Croix International. Republished with the author's permission.

The comments are from Thomas O'Loughlin, emeritus professor of Historical Theology at the University of Nottingham and Director of Studia Traditionis Theologiae.

"There are some things Zoom and YouTube just won't do because real experiences are whole human experiences," O'Loughlin said.

"Can you send an apple by email?" he asked.

He says he will accept doing Mass online when people give up going out to dine with others and when people dine alone at home with pre-packaged food and say it is as rich an experience as it is eating and drinking with friends.

People wanting to have Mass on their TV or computer at home and priests supplying it sounds a warning about the real nature of the community, he said.

"Eucharist makes little sense without a community."

Challenging the meeting, O'Loughlin posed the question as to whether the Church had stopped being a real community and is being reduced to religious ideology.

He sounded a warning that we may be reducing the Eucharist to just getting communion, almost makes it a commodity!

O'Loughlin said the Church has a wealth of spirituality it can call on during COVID-19 lockdown and questioned why we opted for the "summit" experience.

He says he agrees that Mass is the summit of Christian prayer but suggested perhaps the Church has forgotten the hinterland.

O'Loughlin said that the Liturgy of the Hours, shared prayer, Lectio Divina, prayer together and scripture study we just some of the examples from the Church's spiritual tradition that respects the characteristics of the liturgy and that are easily adapted to a virtual environment.

"Why did we pick on something so physical such as eating and drinking?" O'Loughlin asked.

Spiritual Communion

Questioned on whether it was appropriate to use the readings of the day and make a "spiritual communion," O'Loughlin sounded a stern warning.

He observed that spiritual communion came from the time when only priests received communion and was developed by the heretical Jansenists to a point were nuns were not seen as worthy of physically receiving communion.

Spiritual communion "is tied up with notions of unworthiness and impurity" and it is a part of a moral theology we left long ago, he said.

Flashes of Insight

O'Loughlin made the comments in an international conversation hosted by CathNews on Zoom and as part of its "Flashes of Insight" series produced in association with La-Croix International.

Host of the conversation, Dr Joseph Grayland, Director of Liturgy in the Palmerston North Diocese, New Zealand, says the idea for "Let's Talk Liturgy" came about due to the disruption to worship brought about through the global COVID-19 pandemic.

Grayland says the COVID-19 pandemic has impacted laity and clergy alike.

"For many people, the online Mass, viewed from the living room was sufficient, they didn't have to go out and it fulfilled the need for Sunday Mass."

"The priests also liked doing this because it was readily identifiable as part of their mission".

Labelling online video Mass as a form of clericalism, Grayland says there are real concerns around the passive, observer approach and the personal nature of the "priest's Mass."

Flashes of Insight - Let's Talk Liturgy is, therefore, an opportunity for people to discuss and consider the nature of liturgy in an international context.

Over 80 people from the UK, Australia, the Pacific are involved in the conversation.

The second round of conversations continued last evening and at least one more round is planned.

Watch "Can you send an apple by email".