M. G.

Hysell Deaf Candidates to Holy Orders:

Impediment or Opportunity?

Newman Theological College

Edmonton, Alberta, Canada

Deaf Candidates to Holy Orders:

Impediment or Opportunity?

M. G. Hysell, M.A., M.Th. (Cand.)

Submitted to
Revd. Fr. Roger Keeler, J.C.D.
MPS-565: Introduction to Canon Law

10 April, Winter Semester 2008

Revised 18 April 2008

© 2008 All rights reserved

1
 M. G. Hysell Deaf Candidates to Holy Orders:
Impediment or Opportunity?

Introduction

On 1 January 2008, Fr. Edward McNamara, professor of sacred liturgy at the Legion of Christ’s

Regina Apostolorum University in Rome received the following question from a certain “M.D”

in Belleville, Ontario: “Will there ever be a day when the deaf will be allowed to enter convents,

monasteries, for the religious life? When all Catholic churches will have American Sign

Language and closed-captioning available for the Mass? I believe even the deaf are equal before

God and should be equal before the Church.”1

In many ways, the question is an astonishing one. In Canada, the Sisters of Our Lady of

Seven Dolors was founded in 1851 by the Sisters Providence as a vowed religious community

for Deaf2 Catholic women. Toward the end of the nineteenth century, La Piccola Missione per i

Sordomuti was founded by the Servant of God Fr. Guiseppe Gualdani; the congregation received

papal approbation in 1913. In 1927, the Clerics of St. Viator founded an Oblate branch for Deaf

men with a vocation to the religious brotherhood. Recently, in Spain, a group of Deaf monks,

following the Rule of St. Benedict, Monjes sordos de Effatha.

In 1997, H.Em. John Cardinal O’Connor, in consultation with the Congregation for

Catholic Education (then presided by Pio Cardinal Laghi) formally established the DePaul

House of Studies for Deaf Seminarians at 375 Park Avenue in Yonkers, New York, as a house of

residence for Deaf candidates to ministerial orders. Common life, the celebration of the sacred

1
On the Web at http://www.zenit.org/article-21400?l=english, accessed 11 January 2008.
2
The distinction between “deaf” and “Deaf” is one of ‘handicap’ and ‘culture,’ respectively. A deaf person is
someone who experiences a significant range of hearing loss (at the lower three levels—moderate, severe, and
profound), distinguished from ‘hard-of-hearing,’ and may or may not know sign language. In other words, deafness
is more or less a medical classification. The designation Deaf, on the other hand, refers to the culture of people who
share the common experience of deafness either by parentage, personal hearing loss, or even enculturation into the
Deaf community (e.g. sign language interpreters). While a deaf person may either be Oralist, use manually coded
English, ‘Total Communication’ (= speaking and signing at the same time), she may not necessarily identify with
Deaf culture. On the other hand, all Deaf people are deaf. It is important to be aware that the Deaf culture, in
addition to its own language (which varies from country to country), has its own mores, forms of entertainment, and
social milieu.

2
 M. G. Hysell Deaf Candidates to Holy Orders:
Impediment or Opportunity?

liturgy, and recreation would take place at the DePaul House but the seminarians would

commute to St. Joseph’s Seminary (Dunwoodie) for classes, retreats, and formation.3 During the

same time, the Director, V. Revd.. Thomas Coughlin, was in the process of founding a religious

community of Deaf men under the patronage of the Order of Preachers. In 2002, the DePaul

House relocated to San Francisco, becoming attached to St. Patrick’s Seminary and University.

Then, in 2007, the DePaul House relocated again to San Antonio, Texas, at the invitation of

Archbishop José Gomez and the Oblate School of Theology. Obviously, the question posed by

M.D. to Fr. McNamara is a dated one.

In responding to M.D.’s query, Fr. McNamara maneuvered around the more crucial

questions of impediments, suitability, and defects. As one commentator observed, “Fr..

McNamara was clearly writing out of his depth on this topic. He gave a well-meaning, off-the-

top-of-his-head answer to the questions posed to him without displaying familiarity with the

relevant Church documents…”4 Dr. Edward Peters, professor of Canon law at Sacred Heart

Major Seminary in Detroit, offered a devastating critique5 of not only Fr. McNamara’s handling

of the question, but also his apparent lack of expertise in citing the appropriate canons to answer

M.D.

Two issues must be raised in regard to M.D.’s question: whether deafness can be

considered a kind of poor physical health such that it constitutes an irregularity or impediment to

3
See H.Em. John Cardinal O’Connor, “The Possibility of Becoming Priests,” on the Web at
http://www.cny.org/archive/cv/cv031298.htm, accessed 10 April 2008.
4
On the Web at http://jimmyakin.typepad.com/defensor_fidei/2008/01/deaf-people-and.html, accessed 9 April
2008.
5
On the Web at http://www.canonlaw.info/2008/01/to-best-accomodate-deaf-begin-by.html, accessed 4 April
2008.

3
 M. G. Hysell Deaf Candidates to Holy Orders:
Impediment or Opportunity?

the reception of Holy Orders and whether the non-verbal language of a Deaf minister6 allows for

a lawful presidency of the sacred liturgy.

Deaf Candidates for Ministerial Orders

Can a Deaf man be ordained to one of the three major orders? In the 1983 Code of Canon law,

several sections are devoted to the prerequisites to ministerial ordination. In Book III, Part I,

Title VI (cc. 1008-1054), After describing the sacrament of Holy Orders in cc. 1008, 1009, the

Code proceeds to outline the “Celebration and Minister of Ordination” in chapter 1 (cc. 1010-

1023), “Those to be Ordained” in chapter 2 (cc. 1024-1053), and finally “The Notation and

Testimonial of Ordination Conferred” in chapter 3 (cc. 1053, 1054).

Of special interest to our present discussion is found in chapter 2 of the above (Bk. III, Pt.

I, Tit. VI, Ch. 2), which is subdivided into four articles: “Requirements in Those to be

Ordained” (art. 1; cc. 1026-1031), “The Prerequisites for Ordination” (art. 2; cc. 1033-1039),

“Irregularities and Other Impediments” (art. 3; 1040-1049), and “The Required Documents and

Investigation” (art. 4, cc. 1050-1052).

Assuming that the prerequisites for ordination have been met (cc. 1033-1039), the

question must be raised whether hearing loss or deafness is considered to be an impediment to

Orders. “To confer the presbyteral or diaconal orders licitly, it is required that the candidate…is

prevented by no irregularity and no impediment…” (c. 1025 §1). While the Code of Canon law

does not directly describe an “impediment,” it is generally understood to be something that

“impedes” or prevents an act from taking place. Previously it was used more in reference to the

sacrament of matrimony and the preferred term in relation to the reception of Holy Orders was

“irregularity,” a term retained in the 1983 Code. However, article 3 of the same chapter outlines

6
In this essay, I will always use the term “minister” in the sense of a deacon, presbyter, or bishop. i.e., a sacred
minister as defined by c. 1009 §1, even though lectors, acolytes, and Lay Ecclesial Ministers have equal right to the
designation.

4
 M. G. Hysell Deaf Candidates to Holy Orders:
Impediment or Opportunity?

the specific “Irregularities and Other Impediments” (cc. 1040-1049). “Those affected by any

impediment, whether perpetual, in which is called an irregularity, or simple, are prevented from

receiving orders. The only impediments incurred, however, are those contained in the following

canons (e.g. 1041ff).” Thus the question at hand refers to the reception of ministerial ordination.

The condition of d/Deafness, especially the use of a nonverbal language, will be discussed in the

next section.7

Canon 1041 º1 through º6 considers the following to be irregularities for receiving

ministerial orders: a man who—

1. after consultation with appropriate experts, a candidate is considered to have a psychic

illness that renders him “unqualified to fulfill the ministry properly”;
2. has committed a “delict” of apostasy, heresy, or schism;
3. has attempted matrimony (whether civil or sacramental) while being impeded by another
bond;
4. has committed “voluntary homicide” or cooperated in procuring an abortion, whether
formally or materially;
5. has committed mutilation to himself or to another maliciously or has attempted suicide;
6. has illicitly presided at a rite reserved to another rank (such as an ordination, reserved to a
bishop).

Canons 1042 º1 through º3 then discusses the simple impediments to the sacrament of Holy

Orders: a man who—

1. has a wife, unless he is “legitimately destined” to the permanent diaconate;

2. has exercised an “office or administration” prohibited by the norms of cc. 285, 286;
3. has recently received the sacraments of Christian Initiation, defined as a “neophyte.”

After obliging the faithful to disclose any known impediments of any candidates prior to the

sacrament of Holy Orders to their ordinary or pastor prior to ordination (c. 1043), the Code

proceeds to discuss irregularities “for the exercise of orders already received” (c. 1044 §1,

emphasis added). Such irregularities are considered to be an illegitimate reception of orders

7
Cf. R. L. KASLYN, “The Sacrament of Orders: Irregularities and Impediments—An Overview,” in The Jurist,
62 (2002), 1 and 2. Unfortunately vol. 62 of The Jurist is missing from Newman Theological College library and I
was unable to access this article. Another good overview of irregularities and impediments can be found in J.
HUELS, “Candidates for Ordination,” in The Pastoral Companion, Quincy, IL, Franciscan Press, 1997, pp. 167-169.

5
 M. G. Hysell Deaf Candidates to Holy Orders:
Impediment or Opportunity?

while “affected by an irregularity” (c. 1044 §1, º1), one who has committed a public delict of

apostasy, schism, or heresy (º2, 3); as for impediments after the reception of orders, they are

again outlined as one who has received the sacrament illegitimately (c. 1045 §2 º1) or is

“affected by amentia or some other psychic illness (º2).

In all of the above canons, only “psychic illness” comes close to defining any medical

condition as an impediment to the reception of Holy Orders. Thus hearing loss is not counted

among either the impediments or irregularities to Orders.

Positively, Canon law requires that the candidate to Holy Orders be of sound doctrine,

possess genuine piety and good morals, be able to carry out the apostolate, and a “properly

executed inquiry about his state of physical and psychic health” (c. 1051 º1). There is nothing

about hearing loss that would suggest that the norms of c. 1051 would be violated, unless one

were to raise the objection that hearing-loss constitutes an issue of ill-health.8

Deaf Men Among the Sacred Ministers

Canon law defines Orders as follows: “By divine institution, the sacrament of orders establishes

some among the Christian faithful as sacred ministers through an indelible character which

marks them. They are consecrated and designated, each according to his grade, to nourish the

people of God, fulfilling in the person of Christ the Head the functions of teaching, sanctifying,

and governing” (c. 1008). Curiously, the Code refrains from any language that would make

sacred ministers appear to be ‘sacramental vending machines.’ The three powers of the Church,

namely teaching, sanctifying, and governing, are shared by the members of the hierarchy.

However, the reader of the Code should be attentive to the fact that the sacrament of Holy Orders

falls under Book IV, “The Sanctifying Office of the Church.”

8
Hearing loss or deafness, medically speaking, is an ‘impairment’ and not an ‘illness.’ As such it would not
fall under the category of “physical health” mentioned in c. 1051.

6
 M. G. Hysell Deaf Candidates to Holy Orders:
Impediment or Opportunity?

The question that is usually on the minds of people who ask whether a d/Deaf person can

be ordained to the sacred ministry is whether they can sufficiently speak the forms required in

the celebration of the sacraments. In other words, does the inability to verbalize sacramental

forms constitute an impediment? For example, if a d/Deaf presbyter, fulfilling all other

prerequisites for presiding at Mass, signs the equivalent of “This is My Body,” is there true

change from the substance of bread to the substance of Christ’s Sacred Body? The same

question can be raised with respect to the forms of the other sacraments, whether it be “I baptize

you…” or “I absolve you…” In this respect, the office of a presbyter must be distinguished from

his faculty of presiding at the Eucharist. In fact, the ordination of a presbyter and the conferral of

Eucharistic faculties take place at separate moments during the Mass of Ordination.9 Although it

is lost upon English readers of curial documents, a distinction is always made between a

presbyter and a sacerdos; both are usually translated simply as “priests,” which is erroneous.10

Curiously, the Code says nothing about the forms of the sacraments (cf. CIC, Bk IV, Pt.

I). In this case, one must turn to other kinds of liturgical law, especially the General Instruction

on the Roman Missal. In the section titled “The Manner of Speaking the Eucharistic Prayer” (nn.

216-218), there is nothing to suggest the neo-scholastic opinion that enunciating the Institution

Narrative correctly achieves the effect of ‘transubstantiation.’11 In fact, the emphasis in terms of

“speaking” is for the benefit of the syntaxis, gathered to receive the Word and Sacrament

9
This does not mean, however, that the minister of ordination is able to ordain a candidate without sacramental
faculties.
10
It has been observed, however, that St Thomas Aquinas uses the two terms interchangeably in his theological
works. The word “priest” is etymologically derived from “presbyter”; there is no English cognate for the Latin
sacerdos. Other Romance languages, however, have preserved the distinction.
11
The liturgical revival that took place immediately prior to the Second Vatican Council placed emphasis on the
fourfold action of the Eucharist corresponding to the four actions performed by Christ at the Last Supper: “While
they were eating, he took a loaf of bread, and after blessing it he broke it and gave it to them…” (Mk 14:22, NRSV).
These actions correspond to the Preparation of the Altar and the Gifts (“took”), the Eucharistic anaphora
(“blessed”/“gave thanks” according to the Lucan/Pauline tradition), the Faction Rite (“broke”), and the Communion
(“gave”). The whole action of “blessing” or “giving thanks” is fulfilled by the entirety of the Eucharistic anaphora
and not simply the ‘words of consecration.’

7
 M. G. Hysell Deaf Candidates to Holy Orders:
Impediment or Opportunity?

(G.I.R.M., n. 218).12 On 25 January 1974, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith offered

a “Declaration on the Meaning of Translations of Sacramental Formulae,” and decreed that it

was necessary “…that the essential formulae of the sacramental rites render faithfully the

original sense of the Latin ‘typical text.’13 Even the curial document Liturgiam authenticam,

which deals directly with questions of the translations of liturgical books, is scarcely interested

with questions of ‘validity’; instead, it seeks to reinforce the prerogative of the Apostolic See to

approve such books so as to facilitate “full, conscious, active participation” in the sacred

liturgy.14 Liturgiam authenticam makes reference to Sacrasanctum conciliaum, nn. 37-40.

Specifically, the Council Fathers wanted to allow for the adaptation of the sacred liturgy to the

different languages and cultures of peoples where the Church exists.15

Thus the question of whether by signing the Eucharistic anaphora there is a valid change

from the substance of bread and wine into the substance of the Sacred Body and Precious Blood

betrays a profound ignorance of sacramental theology. It is, in effect, a non-issue.16

12
Cf. CONGREGATION FOR DIVINE WORSHIP AND DISCIPLINE OF THE SACRAMENTS, General Instruction on the
Roman Missal (2003), on the Web at http://www.usccb.org/liturgy/current/GIRM.pdf, accessed 9 April 2008.
13
SACRED CONGREGATION FOR THE DOCTRINE OF THE FAITH, Declaration on the Meaning of Translations of
Sacramental Formulae Instauratio liturgica, 25 January 1974, cited in A. FLANNERY, gen. ed., Vatican Council II:
The Conciliar and Post Concilar Documents, Collegeville, The Liturgical Press, 1975), pp. 254-255 (hereafter A.
FLANNERY, Vatican II). Given the structure of signed language, e.g. A.S.L., linguists have been unsuccessful
developing a written form and, by extension, it has been impossible to create liturgical books ‘in’ sign language.
Since written/spoken language is linear and phonetic whereas signed language is nonlinear and non-phonetic, an
‘A.S.L. Liturgikon’ remains impossible; in fact, linguists estimate at least another two centuries must pass before the
creation of written form to American Sign Language.
14
SECOND VATICAN ECUMENICAL COUNCIL, Dogmatic Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy Sacrosanctum
concilium, no. 14; SACRED CONGREGATION FOR DIVINE WORSHIP AND DISCIPLINE OF THE SACRAMENTS, On the
Use of Vernacular Languages in the Publication of the Books of the Roman Liturgy Liturgiam authenticam, nn. 1, 2,
on the Web at
http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/ccdds/documents/rc_con_ccdds_doc_20010507_liturgiam-
authenticam_en.html, accessed on 8 April 2008.
15
SECOND VATICAN ECUMENICAL COUNCIL, Dogmatic Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy Sacrosanctum
concilium, n. 37, in A. FLANNERY, Vatican II, p. 13.
16
Surprisingly, even St. Thomas Aquinas, the ‘Angelic Doctor’ of the Church, says in his Summa theologiae
that enunciating the words is not a necessary condition for the consecration of the Holy Gifts. “As Augustine said,
the word [= “This is My body”; “This is My blood”] operates in the sacraments ‘not because it is spoken,’ i.e., not
by the outward sound of the voice, ‘but because it is believed’ [Tract. Lxxx, sup. Ioan.] in accordance with the sense
of the words which is held by faith. And this sense is indeed the same for all, although the same words as to their

8
 M. G. Hysell Deaf Candidates to Holy Orders:
Impediment or Opportunity?

However, Fr. McNamara wrote that “Certainly, a priest who suffers from loss of hearing

does not lose his vocation but must bear the burden of having to limit some areas of his

ministry.” The suggestion of limiting one’s pastoral office is a breathtakingly ignorant one. I

know of no presbyter or deacon who, on account of his identity as a Deaf man, has had to “limit

some areas of his ministry.” The immense disproportion of ministers who are suitable for

responding to the pastoral needs of Deaf people more than makes up for how Deaf ministers are

‘limited.’ Preparing Deaf couples for marriage (cc. 1063-1072), preparing Deaf parents for the

baptism of their children and Deaf adults for Christian Initiation (cc. 851-852; 890), and

preparing children for the celebration of First Communion (c. 914). Sacramental confession (c.

965), spiritual direction, and especially holy preaching in sign language are grave pastoral needs

for Deaf Catholics which can be met only by those sacred ministers who are themselves Deaf or

at least are proficient in sign language. Fr. McNamara has reversed the state of the problem:

Deaf ministers are burdened by the insurmountable needs of the Deaf Catholic community. In

fact, it is rare for a hearing pastor who is proficient in sign language to also serve hearing

Catholics full-time.17

sound be not used by all. Consequently no matter in what language this sense is expressed, the sacrament is
complete” (S.th. IIIa, q. 60, art. 7, ad 1). Although St. Thomas, like the early Scholastics before him, thinks that the
‘words of consecration’ in fact effects the change from bread and wine into the Sacred Body and Precious Blood,
this view has never been proposed as dogmatic in character, i.e., it has never been the taught by the infallible
magisterium. The earliest (and probably only) statement that comes close is found in H.H. Pope Eugene IV’s Bull of
Union With the Armenians, issued at the Council of Basel (et. al.), session 8 on 22 November 1439, which is cited in
the Roman Catechism issued by the authority of the Ecumenical Council of Trent. The fact remains, however, that
the opinion that the ‘words of consecration’ being the Institution Narrative, although it enjoyed high status, has
never been definitely taught by the magisterium. Although Trent reiterated the dogma of the Real Presence of Christ
in the Eucharist, and sanctioned the use of the word ‘transubstantiation,’ the moment in which the Holy Gifts are
changed remains an open and fruitful debate today. With the encouragement of my canon law professor, I am
currently researching this question.
17
In fact, I know of only one such pastor, the Revd. Msgr. Patrick McCahill, pastor of St Elizabeth of Hungary
Parish in the Archdiocese of New York and moderator of the New York Catholic Deaf Centre. While he received
the greatest support from Terrence Cardinal Cooke and John Cardinal O’Connor, the present archdiocesan curia has
offered little to promote his apostolic work. The closing of the Deaf seminarian programme at St Joseph’s Seminary
was a tremendous setback for the Catholic Deaf community in the Archdiocese of New York.

9
 M. G. Hysell Deaf Candidates to Holy Orders:
Impediment or Opportunity?

The Deaf Apostolate and Provision by the Church’s Pastors

Clearly, canon law and other liturgical laws of the Church offer no prohibition for the

ordination d/Deaf men to the deaconate or presbyterate. The adaptation of liturgical books to a

nonverbal language, however, may be understood as a lacunae in Canon law and liturgical law,

even if only partially addressed by the Church’s pastors.

In 1998, the National Conference of Catholic Bishops (now the United States Conference

of Catholic Bishops) authorized American Sign Language as a valid liturgical language in the

territories under its jurisdiction.18 As far as I am aware, this is the closest that the Church’s

authority has come to understanding the validity of sign language in the celebration of the sacred

liturgy.

According to the National Office for the Deaf, there are approximately 135,735 Deaf

Catholics in the dioceses of the United States. To date, however, only six Deaf presbyters have

been ordained. There are two additional candidates and one other seminarian. Leaving aside

roughly one dozen presbyters who have signing proficiency, current statistics has only one Deaf

presbyter per 22,622.5 Deaf Catholics. And yet anecdotes of the refusal on the part of ordinaries

to accommodate the pastoral needs of Deaf Catholics are too common. The Archbishop of New

York, for instance, opted to abide by the decision of the faculty senate of St Joseph’s Seminary

in Dunwoodie to close the priestly formation programme established by the late John Cardinal

O’Connor. Rather than to allow the flourishing of a catalyst that would have provided sacred

ministers to respond to the pastoral needs of Deaf Catholics, the Archdiocese of New York has

instead contributed to a ‘vocations crisis’ and allowed for the paucity of ministers to the Deaf

18
At the time of this writing, I have been unable to find the appropriate citation of this act of the United States
Conference of Catholic Bishops.

10
 M. G. Hysell Deaf Candidates to Holy Orders:
Impediment or Opportunity?

Catholic community. Similar complaints have been leveled against the previous Archbishop of

Washington, D.C. and several other North American prelates.

How would Canon law judge such apathy towards the pastoral needs of Deaf Catholics?

“The Christian faithful have the right to receive assistance from the sacred pastors out of the

spiritual goods of the Church, especially the word of God and the sacraments” (c. 213). More

precisely, “The Christian faithful have the right to worship God according to the prescripts of

their own rite approved by the legitimate pastors of the Church and to follow their own form of

spiritual life so long as it is consonant with the doctrine of the Church (c. 214). Since presbyters

participate in the mission of Jesus Christ, our Great High Priest, it follows that their ministry

follows in the mystery of the Incarnation by which the Son of God received a body and soul to

reach its full purpose at His Pasch. Just as the Son of God became a member of the human race

to proclaim the Gospel, so too does the priest, as a member of the human race, live and work

among ordinary people for the building up of Christ’s body. In the same vein, God has called a

number of Deaf men to Holy Orders in order to incarnate the Gospel in the particular cultural

milieu of Deaf Catholics. This is the enduring missionary mandate of the Church:

The Church learned early in its history to express the Christian message in the concepts and
language of different peoples… Indeed, this kind of adaptation and preaching of the revealed
Word must ever be the law of all evangelization. In this way it is possible to create in every
country the possibility of expressing the message of Christ in suitable terms and to foster vital
contact and exchange between the Church and different cultures.19

It follows, then, that the major seminary is the locus for training candidates of Holy Orders to

respond to the pastoral needs of Deaf people, Catholic or otherwise.20 One of the triumphs of the

Holy Spirit in modern times is the renewal of the Church’s pastoral self-understanding. In point

19
SECOND VATICAN ECUMENICAL COUNCIL, Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World
Gaudium et spes, 7 December 1965, n. 44, cited in A. FLANNERY, Vatican II, p. 946 (emphasis added).
20
Sadly, even those religious communities whose baptism the Catholic Church does not recognize (e.g.
Jehovah’s Witnesses, Mormons, etc.) have proven themselves more effective in the task of proselytism than
Catholics have. Moreover, Fundamentalists have been more successful in their efforts to recruit Deaf people,
especially Deaf Catholics.

11
 M. G. Hysell Deaf Candidates to Holy Orders:
Impediment or Opportunity?

of fact, the Second Vatican Council outlined specific norms for the “Strictly Pastoral Training”

of future ministers.21 The Council Fathers also addressed the pastoral office of bishops: they are

not only to devote themselves to those who have faith in Christ, but also those who do not yet

profess faith in Him.

Likewise in similar circumstances provision should be made for the faithful of a different
language group either by appointing priests who speak their language, or by creating special
parishes, or by appointing an episcopal vicar well versed in it. If it is deemed suitable he may be
ordained bishop, or the matter may be dealt with in some other appropriate way.22

The 1983 Code of Canon law, as H. H. Pope John Paul II wrote, sought to incorporate the

Church’s renewal in its legislation: “It could indeed be said that from this there is derived that

note of complementarity which the Code presents in relation to the Second Vatican Council, in

particular with reference to the two constitutions, the dogmatic constitution Lumen gentium and

the pastoral constitution Gaudium et spes.” Since the renewal undertaken by the Council

consisted in a new self-understanding of Church as Church, “…it follows that what constitutes

the substantial newness of the Second Vatican Council, in line with the legislative tradition of the

Church, especially in regard to ecclesiology, constitutes likewise the newness of the new

Code.”23 Moreover, since the Second Vatican Council was an exercise of the extraordinary

magisterium, it follows that it also bears a legislative authority in the Church of the highest order

(c. 337 §1; cf. c. 750 §2).

As such, apathy towards the training of sacred ministers for the Deaf apostolate is

prohibited by the teachings of the Second Vatican Council. In terms of Canon law, in

accordance with the norms of c. 212 §2, Deaf Catholics—whether by way of the National

21
SECOND VATICAN ECUMENICAL COUNCIL, Decree on the Training of Priests Optatam totius, 28 October
1965, nn. 19-21, cited in A. FLANNERY, Vatican II, pp. 721-723.
22
SECOND VATICAN ECUMENICAL COUNCIL, Decree on the Pastoral Office of Bishops in the Church Christus
Dominus, 28 October 1965, n. 22, 3, ¶3, cited in A. FLANNERY, Vatican II, pp. 577-578.
23
POPE JOHN PAUL II, Apostolic Constitution Sacrae disciplinae leges, ¶¶ 20, 21, cited in CANON LAW SOCIETY
OF GREAT BRITAIN AND IRELAND, The Canon Law: Letter and Spirit, London, Geoffery Chapman, 1995, p. xxviii.

12
 M. G. Hysell Deaf Candidates to Holy Orders:
Impediment or Opportunity?

Catholic Office for the Deaf, the International Catholic Deaf Association, or by individual

members of the laity and clergy—have repeatedly made known their pastoral needs, often to no

avail.

Conclusion

Deafness, as an hearing-impairment, does not constitute either an irregularity or

impediment to the reception of Holy Orders. The question of a Deaf man already ordained, on

the other hand, may constitute a lacuna in Canon law because (i) even though some episcopal

conferences have approved sign language as a valid liturgical language, (ii) there cannot yet be a

‘typical edition’ of a liturgical book in such languages. The crux of this lacuna has nothing to do

with ‘validity’ but rather with the facilitation of communal worship since each community

celebrates the sacred liturgy differently, although all of them make full use of sign language.

A great number of Deaf Catholics have displayed clear signs of a vocation to either

religious life or Holy Orders, and there are several such communities for them. But the

formation of Deaf candidates for ordination has proven itself to be a much more sensitive

question with few pastors willing to embrace a response.

The urgency of the question is imposed by the Second Vatican Council, which sought to

renew the Church’s self-understanding especially by way of liturgical renewal and a rediscovery

of the Church as a communion of Christ’s faithful. Therefore addressing the pastoral needs of

d/Deaf Catholics, according to the teachings of the Council Fathers, cannot be lawfully ignored.

Salus animarum suprema lex Ecclesia. To ignore the task of evangelization and missionary

outreach of Deaf people, Catholic or otherwise, would be to act as though d/Deaf people are not

deserving of salvation. Even Jesus Christ our Lord served the deaf, not simply by curing his

13
 M. G. Hysell Deaf Candidates to Holy Orders:
Impediment or Opportunity?

hearing loss, but inviting him to “be opened”—ephphatha—to God’s Self-disclosure in the

Incarnate Word (Mk 7:31-37).

14
 M. G. Hysell Deaf Candidates to Holy Orders:
Impediment or Opportunity?

Bibliography

AQUINAS, ST. THOMAS. Summa theologiae[sic], trans. Fathers of the English Dominican
Province. Allen, TX: Christian Classics, 1948.

CANON LAW SOCIETY OF GREAT BRITAIN AND IRELAND, The Canon law: Letter and Spirit,
London, Geoffery Chapman, 1995.

CATHOLIC CHURCH, Code of Canon Law: Latin-English Edition, Washington, D.C., Canon law
Society of America, 1999.

CONGREGATION FOR DIVINE WORSHIP AND DISCIPLINE OF THE SACRAMENTS, General Instruction
on the Roman Missal, in D.A. Lysik (ed.), The Liturgy Documents: A Parish Resource,
4th ed., vol. 2, Chicago, Liturgy Training Publications, 2004.

__________, General Instruction on the Roman Missal (2003), on the Web at

http://www.usccb.org/liturgy/current/GIRM.pdf.

FLANNERY, A., Vatican Council II: The Conciliar and Post Concilar Documents, Collegeville,
The Liturgical Press, 1975.

HUELS, J. The Pastoral Companion: A Canon law Handbook for Catholic Ministry, Quincy, IL,
Franciscan Press, 1997.

KASLYN, R. L., “The Sacrament of Orders: Irregularities and Impediments—An Overview,” in

The Jurist, 62 (2002), 1 and 2.

LANE, H., R. HOFFMEISTER, and B. BAHAN, A Journey into the Deaf-World, San Diego,
DawnSignPress, 1996.

MIRAS, JORGE, Exegetical Commentary on the Code of Canon law, Montreal, Wilson and
Lafleur, 2004.

NEUNER, J. and J. DUPUIS, The Christian Faith in the Doctrinal Documents of the Catholic
Church, 7th rev. and enlarged ed., Staten Island, Alba House, 2001.

O’CONNOR, +J. CARD., “The Possibility of Becoming Priests,” in The Catholic New York, 12
March 1998, on the Web at http://www.cny.org/archive/cv/cv031298.htm.

TANNER, N., ed., Decrees of the Ecumenical Councils, 2 vols. Washington, DC: Georgetown
University Press, 1990.

15