Question:
Two of the most controversial topics that arose from the Synod on Synodality, in terms of the debate they generated, were the role of women in the Church and the Church’s approach to the LGBTQ+ community. What were your reflections on the discussion of these two topics and how will you address them now in your new role as pope?Response from Pope Leo XIV:
In a synodal manner. For most people, there is certainly the understanding that the role of women in the Church must continue to develop. I think in that sense there was a positive response. I hope to follow in the footsteps of Francis, including the appointment of women to some leadership roles, at different levels, in the life of the Church, recognizing their gifts and their contribution in many ways.The issue becomes controversial when the specific question about ordination is raised. The synod had spoken specifically about the ordination, perhaps, of women deacons, which has been a question that has been studied for many years. There have been different commissions appointed by various popes to say: what can we do about it? I think it will continue to be a problem. For the moment, I have no intention of changing the Church’s teaching on the subject. I think there are some prior questions that must be asked.
Just a small example. Earlier this year, when the Jubilee for permanent deacons was held, obviously all men, their wives were also present. I had the catechesis one day with a fairly large group of English-speaking permanent deacons. The English language is one of the groups where they are best represented, because there are parts of the world that never really promoted the permanent diaconate, and that, in itself, became a question: why would we talk about ordaining women to the diaconate if this itself is still not properly understood and has not been adequately developed and promoted within the Church? And what are the reasons for that? So, although I think there was significant inspiration at the time of the Council when the permanent diaconate was reinstated, it has not become, in many parts of the world, what I believe some people thought it would be. Therefore, I think there are some questions that must be asked around that topic.
I also wonder, in terms of a comment I made in one of the press conferences I participated in during the synod, in terms of what has often been identified as clericalism in the current structures of the Church: would we simply want to invite women to become clericalized, and what has that really resolved? Perhaps there are many things that need to be examined and developed at this moment before we can really get to asking the other questions.
That’s how I see things at the moment. Certainly, I am willing to continue listening to people. There are these study groups, like the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, which continue to examine the theological background, the history, of some of those questions, and we will walk with that and see what comes of it.
The most striking point of the response is the expression: “For the moment, I have no intention of changing the Church’s teaching on the subject”. In a politician, the phrase is understood: the decision is postponed, the door is left open to a future change. But in a Pope, said in the context of doctrine, it encloses a conceptual error.
That way of speaking suggests that the Church’s teaching is something available, revisable according to circumstances and the will of the pontiff. That is, as if there were no deposit of faith transmitted, but a papal program that can be updated with each successor.
Tradition teaches that the Pope is not the owner of the faith, but its guarantor. He cannot say “for the moment” regarding definitive truths. The apostolic letter Ordinatio Sacerdotalis (1994) by St. John Paul II settled the issue of women’s ordination with a definitive formula: the Church has in no way the faculty to confer it. It is not a matter available.
The problem with “for the moment” is that it introduces contingency where there should be certainty, expectation of change where clarity should reign.
Pastoral Consequences
- The faithful perceive that what is doctrine today may cease to be tomorrow.
- Pressure groups read the phrase as a “not yet” that legitimizes their campaigns.
- Magisterial authority is presented as a mutable program, and not as the firm rock of Peter.
The issue is not semantic, it is ecclesiological. The Pope is not called to administer a doctrinal agenda “for the moment,” but to safeguard the deposit received. When he speaks of teaching as if it depended on his personal and temporal decision, he transmits an erroneous vision of the Petrine ministry.
The Church does not need political ambiguity, but the clarity of the Gospel: “Yes, yes; no, no”. Anything else—and especially from the mouth of Peter—comes from confusion.