www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life The Christian East & West ACNA and the history of deaconesses

I was just reading a blog post [anglicancontinuum.blogspot.com] by Fr. Robert Hart discussing what he calls "deaconettes" in the Anglican Church North America (ACNA).

He explains his use of the word "deaconette" as follows:


I'm wondering if anyone here can provide any help with the finer points of the history here. In particular, is it an established fact that deaconesses in the early Church were not considered clergy, or is that just one possible theory?

The East and the West had different practices regarding female deaconesses. It is clear from liturgical texts, conciliar acts and imperial legislation, that women in the Eastern Churches were ordained to the major order of the diaconate according to the same rite as male deacons, enjoyed the same status and privileges as male deacons, and therefore, were truly ordained to the diaconate--albeit their liturgical role was strictly circumscribed.

On the other hand, in the West, deaconesses seem to have been considered members of a minor order at best. Father Robert Hart, as is his won't, is looking at the world from an Anglican perspective and his views are shaped by the battle over women's ordination therein. And when your only tool is a hammer, every job looks like a nail. Father Robert needs to step back, take a few deep breaths, and work on being objective.

Why are there no women deacons in the Byzantine church today? Or are there?

The Greeks have revived the office to a limited extent, but not comprehensively enough. They restrict it to very old nuns (mostly abbesses), for no good reason and seem to conflate it with the office of widow, which was distinct.

St Elizabeth Newmartyr tried to revive the office in the Russian Church but it came to nought; they were more comfortable putting her "sisters" in a quasi monastic mould, which was not her original vision.

As to the question of why the female diaconate is not embraced more widely, I think it is due to latinate tendencies that remain in eastern theology; Stuart is correct in his post that deprecation of the female diaconate is a latinism.

Slava Isusu Khrestu

From my reading, I recall the the office of Deaconess was quite established in the early Church in the West. Their primary role was that of being involved with the adult baptism of females..for obvious reasons. When it was suppressed , I am not sure. From having studied photos of ancient texts, I have noticed Abbesses often with miter and crosier also. I wish that I had some of my old books but alas they have developed legs and have walked away.( Actually, they were never returned from borrowers.)

Unworthy
Kolya

Part of the general confusion (and I confess, I have not read the article) concerning the Diaconate arises from the lack of clarity as to whether this is an order unto itself ("Permanent Deacons" in RC parlance) or a preparation for Presybterial Ordination ("transitional Deacon" is the common parlance). It is because of the latter that those who are opposed to women as Presbyters speak disparagingly of women as Deacons.

It should be noted that the ACNA is a very complex coaltion, ranging from "Continuing Anglicans", some of whom are pursuing the Ordinariate, to Pentecostals.

The jurisdictions strike me as bearing some semblance to Eastern polity. There are geographic Dioceses and non-geographic Diocese (called "affinity groups"). Some of each catergory Ordain women, others do not. So it is possible to have a female priest serving a parish of the Diocese of the Holy Spirit even though within the geographic territory of the Diocese of Quincy (which does not Ordain women); or a parish of the Forward in Faith Diocese which does not Ordain women within the territory of the Diocese of Pittsburgh.

"Unity without uniformity" or "local option"...it seems to be holding together.

Every now and again, a Greek bishop will ordain a female deacon to serve at one of the many female monasteries where men are forbidden, except for a visiting priest to celebrate the Liturgy. The order was never abolished, it just fell into desuetude, beginning in the 13th century. First, with the almost universal adoption of infant communion, their main pragmatic purpose (assisting at the baptism of female adult catechumens) had disappeared. Second, after the Latin takeover of Constantinople, the Great Church never again had the wherewithal to support as large a clerical establishment as it had before 1204. Finally, after the fall of Constantinople in 1453, the Church was impoverished and in disarray. There were more important things on people's minds than ordaining female deacons.

First timer to this site, former Anglican priest now a member of ROCOR.

Given the mess the American Episcopal Church is in it is easy to understand Fr. Hart's positon, also keeping in mind that he is looking to the Latin RC Church as his source of authority, not the rich tradition of the Eastern Churches.

The point I would like to make is one that I have not seen on any blog regarding the Deaconess. And it is this. The distiction between "order" and "function". The Deaconess was clearly in "major orders" in the priestly office of Deacon. Her "function", though, was different from the male deacon.
While she did have some limited, though significate liturgical duties, her primary duties (function) were didactic, pastoral, spiritual and works of mercy. Ministries we could use again, from both male and female deacons.

There is much more, but alas this is a blog.
God's grace to all, Moses

I'm not so sure about that. Read some of his other blog entries like Orthodoxy and Anglicanism in a road block [anglicancontinuum.blogspot.com] or The Odd Couple [anglicancontinuum.blogspot.com].

On the former article, Alexander Schmemann wrote in the 1970s to an Anglican friend, "The ordination of women means the death of the dialogue", and so it has proven.

On the latter, Father Hart remains that particular brand of Anglican who has an utterly delusional view of the history of his own ecclesial community. My friend, Dr. William Tighe, has chided him about it many times.

As a long-time reader of Dr. Tighe, my ears perked up when I heard that he had joined the (controversially-titled) blog "The Anglo Catholic". But then he apparently went silent after posting a handful of times. Any ideas what's happening there?

He got frustrated with them.

Hmmm, so he hasn't just been busy with other things.

To be honest, I guess I'm not entirely surprised -- if anything, I was more surprised that he had joined up with them.

Bill and I communicate almost daily. He does have a lot of irons in the fire, but he won't waste his time on people who show themselves unwilling to listen. Bill regularly attends a Ukrainian Greek Catholic church in Allentown.