www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology Women Deacons

Father Elias' post reminded me of what I read once, that Carthusian solemnly professed nuns were blessed with the order of deaconess, although it was clearly not a sacramental ordination. Now I've often wondered what the point of being a deaconess might be if you're a Carthusian nun. But forgetting that for a minute, it does seem from this (and the article I read this in was pretty recent...circa 1960's) that the Latin Church had a blessing for deaconesses. Was this allowed only for religious communities like the Carthusians? Or is this something that was in the official Latin books, but never used? Is it still in the books of the Latin Church post-Vatican II (and still never used), and is it possible to revive this order in the West without equating it with sacramental ordained ministry?

Only those that share my genetic disposition.

Sorry Admin. I couldn't resist.


[ Justin, who is intent on policing the sexualization of his posts, but grace be given has not yet recieved the "nortorious" status issued from his Bishops ]

If you read the various texts of ordinations of deaconesses floating around the internet, the Bishop gives the deaconess the stole after her ordination.

In Christ,

anastasios

Dear Mor Ephrem,

For the monasteries of nuns, I believe the point of a senior nun being blessed as a deaconess, was the proclamation of the Gospel at Matins.

Elias

Dear Anastasios,

Does this mean that if a certain person is ordained to a certain rank, and then is given a stole to wear, that they are in a rank of Holy Orders? Because in our Church, Readers and Subdeacons get a stole after they are ordained, and yet I've always thought that Reader and Subdeacon were "Minor Orders", and not "Holy Orders" or "Major Orders". Does Stole = Holy Orders then?

And what does this mean if these orders really are Holy Orders? Does the Reader receive "a part" of the diaconal ministry, which when he is ordained a Subdeacon is "boosted", but not quite there yet, and then when he's ordained a Deacon he receives fully?

The Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church baptizes all converts while they are naked. I have heard of a few times wherein some women requested to be able to wear their underwear but that is rare. Even when we ritually wash in the holy water (Tebel) that emanates from natural springs we do so naked. In these contexts there may be many people around. Even nuns come out and wash with many people (including men) standing around. It is all about not "looking' at someone and being respectful, not about the necessity of female priests.

God be with you all

Aklie Semaet

Rome has saved us from the first step down the line to women priest. The deaconate is usually seen as a step to the priesthood along with alter girls and femal readers. Although most dont equate two and two, if women begin to move up in clerical ranks traditionally held by men then the priesthood is the only logical next step. So women deacons would be an almost garuntee they would have the priesthood. Personally, I, like the Orthodox, believe that women have no place whatsoever on the alter. Although the modern world is hell bent on creating a uni sex society in which there is absolutly no distinction between men and women, the Church should not give in and continue to affirm the differences between the two genders. I am quit aware however that this is an unpopular view in our modern times but the Catholic Church is not known for holding relevant views, is it?

Christ was a man, his apostles were men, the Church fathers were men, the Church down through the ages affirms that men should only be admitted to holy orders. Every time I attend a Roman rite parish, I am horrified to see that women are serving on the alter in every capacity possible, even distributing the holy gifts to the laity. This clearly gives the impression in peoples minds that women could easily be ordained to the priesthood since they are allowed to do everything short of perform the consecration. Where will it all end, a women Pope? Someone has to set their foot down and draw a line in the sand and say, this is what women should do and this is what men should do! But because everybodys afraid of being called a sexist, no one wants to.

What really irks me is that the Byzantine Church (FRom what I hear on this list) Is thinking about doing all this femal stuff as well. I certainly am suprised about hearing this. Why I remember a Byzantine parishioner that I talked to one specifically told me that the Byzantine rite was absolutly against women on the alter and that they were made nervous by the emergance of alter girls and women lay assistants and so forth. He even went so fr as to say that if Rome allowed women priest then the Byzantine rite would go Orthodox! It does not matter what may have been done before. THe point is that because the world is so liberal in its orientation, the Church needs to counter balance that by being as conservative as she can in all things. Women deacons would be a powerfull victory for the liberals in their never ended attempt to destroy the Catholic Church and create pagan based "mother goddess" religion for the world in its place!

Robert K.

The cultural differences never cease to amaze me!

Being a product of the North American MTV generation Aklie, I'm not sure I'm built with the proper dispositon for something like this.

And the Nun thing?! Horror to god, we Latin men would have a heart attack. I think I would have to beat my self with a belt on the back for at least a week and draw blood in the process.

Robert,

The Masons have long wanted the laity in the Catholic Church to take charge of the Church. The Masons have long wanted the Church to become an image of popular culture.

I never gave the Masons much thought of having any corruptable influince on the Church of North America. But it is interesting to note that why would a fraternal orginization that believes in no orginized religion or absolute truth encourage it's members to become part of the intimate fabric of all Churches including the Roman Catholic - who it has long hailed as it's most arch enemy?

Apperantly since the 60's or 70's Priests, Bishops, and Cardinals, have become Masons. Though higher masonic degree's call for renounce of the Papacy and the Universal Church it's self.

Is this all just coincidental? I don't know? But it is interesting.

By the way Masons have historicaly held a close relation to the Invisible Empire of the Knights Ku Klux Klan. Many of the top echlon have been Masons.

I quite positive abotu women deacons and am sure both Orthodoxy and Catholicism will soon be fully employing this important ministry.

The Church, however, needs to move slowly. Clearly many people still have "issues" in dealing with women in a manner of dignity, respect and as social peers. The Church must be careful not to alienate these people.

Axios

Axios,

As I understand it the Deaconate is a sacrament. If this is true then it is just not a matter of "dealing with women in a manner of dignity", it becomes a greater question of theology. If women and men can be ordained to both the Priesthood and Deaconate - then why not "transgender" persons. It would seem by your estimation that the Preisthood and Deconate is not something confered by God and qualified necessarliy by any absolute truth. But rather it is depended soley on cultural prejudices.

What is the "absolute truth" that says (along with transgenders, farm animals, etc) cannot be deacons?

Axios

There is clearly a movement in todays world to completely overturn all existing social orders and positions and replace them with humanistic ideals. Presntly, I am taking a collge mythology class. The femal professor constantly attempts to fill the class'es head with the so called "goddess culture theory". This belief states that thousands of years ago all humans worshiped god as a femal image and women, not men, were the rulers of society. But in time, a patriarchal culture arose which overthrew the femal dominated culture worldwide. THe concept of ancient peoples worldwide worshipping femal dieties is also followed by an attempt by the present day propagators of such beliefs to re institute this form of pagan worship as well as other heathenish cultural concepts.

All this is freely done in order to destroy the existing social order, formost of which is the Catholic Church which preserves and promots that order. FEminist have succeded in completely ridiculing and reducing the worth of men in todays society. JUst look at the way most men are portrayed routinly on television- as baffons and bigots. Never do we see the wise and understanding father figure once a common place societal archytpe.

It does not suprise me one bit that the Mason are trying to destroy the Catholic Church since they have been attempting to do so for the past several hundred years. But then we had Popes like Clement 13 and Pius 9 who were not afraid to speak out against the errors of such thing s as freemasonry and democratic rule. But one are they from the scene when we need them the most.

Robert K.

I am not trying to intrude into this debate but I will just say that such theories are completely baseless (please don't make me start pulling out the heartbreaking statistics). As someone with an anthropological degree let me just say that there was a time (as an undergraduate) that I was die hard about the idea that there was once a matriarchy. The idea gained a clear popularization by Henry Morgan and Fredrick Engels (the collaborator of Karl Marx) in the late 19th century. I had to give up on it (even then) because it has been disproved. Foremost it was demonstrated to be incorrect by Marxist Feminist Anthropologists themselves in the mid-twentieth century. It is unfortunate that it is popular these days for obscurantist phony scholastic professors (called “post-modernists&#8221) in the humanities to re-hash discredited theories on their unsuspecting students. At best there was a time when there was no such thing as patriarchy, but matriarchy never existed as such.

However you seem to be jumping to the other extreme with this: “Never do we see the wise and understanding father figure once a common place societal archetype.”

Have you ever asked the question that this is not because of “liberals” and “feminist professors” but because maybe in a divorce ridden culture such as the west this figure does not exist on such a grand scale anymore?

But the way to stop this does not seem to be in some type of right-wing political assault to keep women in their “place.” It seems to be to build a vibrant Christian (Orthodox ) culture deeply rooted in the family.

In Christ,

Aklie Semaet

[ 04-29-2002: Message edited by: Aklie Semaet ]

Well according to the Catholic Church - Her West and Eastern Rites - and the Orthodox Church, even if the Bishop were to "lay hands" on the head of a female canidate - nothing would happen, in other words the sacrament would not be confered.

What that means for the Preisthood is that even if you had a woman "Priestess" presiding over Mass (or Divine Liturgy) the laity no matter how hard they strain their brains into belief - will only be recieving regular bread as one would have to recieve the *sacrament* of the Priesthood to make said bread - *flesh of Christ*.

I guess what this all means as far as "absolute truth" to me. Is that it is God's binding law that certain sacraments can only be recieved by the male gender (of the human species that is). And if God so maketh so, then so it is. Nothing is before Him or can supercede Him, not even human love. Though human love maybe an attribute from lets say a derivitive of Divine Providence, or perhaps more accurately an act of what is of us Divine Providence. It still has a first cause and that first cause would be Divine Providence - hence proven greater then human love. And if human love were to supercede God, then God could not be God but rather a secondary submisive god to that god which would in all logic be *human love*.

Anyways I have asked myself why would God confer the Priesthood only onto men (the male human gender). And quite frankly I don't know. Nor am I schooled enough to really make an appropriate educational assumption on it - if you will. But I'm thinking it might have something to do with the nature of the woman and Genesis.

The nature of the woman I think can quite frankly be said to be of some superior status then the man. It is the woman that has the ability to bring forth human life in this world, to nurish newly created life with milk from her breasts. Man can not do this. It was also the *Woman* God says in Genesis that He would send to percipitate change and reorder things to His *Kingdom*. Perhaps it is the nature of the woman to be confered a certain heir of human royalty by nature of her birth. And God has so chosen, to allow men to share in that royalty, by two or three ways --- 1)Marriage to a woman, 2)sacrament of the Deaconate, 3)sacrament of the Priesthood?

Perhaps??