This past week I’ve gotten several questions from friends in the Lutheran church, asking me how I feel about a statement that’s come out of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. The statement, while only recently released, does not say anything new. At least, nothing that I can detect, but I suppose it’s interesting in that it comes out of a CDF newly headed by Cardinal Levada (previously of San Francisco). (Remember the immediate past head of the CDF was Cardinal Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict the 16th).

How do I feel about it? Sad, frustrated, annoyed, challenged... and also encouraged. Sad, because it's clearly once again hurt my friends and colleagues in those communities of faith the Vatican recognizes as not "subsisting in" full communion. Frustrated, because of all the things the CDF could be focusing on, it chooses to focus on this right now. Annoyed, because frankly we need to fundamentally rethink what we mean by "church" anyway -- the document actually begins by pointing out how important questions of ecclesiology are in this time -- and this document does very little toward that end. Challenged, because now I need to try and answer my friends, and I feel called on to do so in a way that isn't simply a dismissal.

When the Vatican document Dominus Iesus was released, back in 2000, I remember long conversations with numerous Catholic friends and colleagues, all of whom hoped that it would be one of those documents which simply slipped away into silence, with the church at large ignoring it. I think in some ways that that is indeed what happened, and that's probably why the CDF feels duty-bound to try and reassert its core themes again.

It is important to remember that while the Roman Catholic magisterium teaches in documentary form -- that is, releases doctrine through written documents -- a particular doctrine only lives and breathes if the church at large embodies it. I suspect that that is one reason the CDF is so intent on reiterating this particular doctrine. They do so very bluntly:

"these Communities do not enjoy apostolic succession in the sacrament of Orders, and are, therefore, deprived of a constitutive element of the Church. These ecclesial Communities which, specifically because of the absence of the sacramental priesthood, have not preserved the genuine and integral substance of the Eucharistic Mystery cannot, according to Catholic doctrine, be called “Churches” in the proper sense"

But consider this: there is a growing sense amongst some Roman Catholic communities that "church" emerges in a variety of places and ways, and that a purely male and celibate sacramental priesthood may not be the primary marker of the living body of Christ. Such a sense is very threatening to certain structures of the RC church, and thus must be "cut off at the pass," so to speak. Keep in mind that the more bluntly an institution seeks to enforce a specific position, the more likely it is that there is widespread opposition to it, or at least, that there are powerful alternatives emerging.

I am looking forward to getting back to the states this August, because more women will be ordained in Minnesota (and indeed, there are women being ordained in the coming weeks in New York, as well). These women are deeply committed to the RC community, and hear a very strong call to priesthood. In answering that call they find themselves cut off from -- quite literally, in a few cases, excommunicated from -- the RC church hierarchy. Yet at the same time, they are finding growing numbers of Roman Catholic people gathering with them to celebrate liturgy.

The hierarchy is no doubt feeling threatened by this growing movement, and must find ways to counteract it, without acknowledging its presence. They found out seven years ago, when my mother-in-law was one of the first women ordained, that if they formally excommunicated the women they invited global press coverage. They do not want to call attention to this growing movement, but at the same time they must find ways to renounce it. This document might very well be one of the ways they do so. It certainly clarifies their stance. But in a strange way, it may also be somewhat encouraging to those of us who seek change within the church.

So, while I am sad, annoyed, frustrated and challenged, I am also encouraged.

Some useful links for further reflection:

• Dominus Iesus
• the actual Vatican document in question
• the WCC response
• a response by the presiding bishop of the ELCA