www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life The Christian East & West Bishop Kallistos Ware's Clarification

>>>Didn't notice it. But I'm glad that this has been resolved. Since it bothered me to think that an Orthodox Bishop might have said such
a thing!<<<

But then, Archbishop Anthony of Sorouzh, who is the Russian Orthodox primate of Great Britain, did say such a thing; i.e., that he could see no reason why women could not be ordained. But then he continued by saying that, until such time as the Church agreed with him, he of course would not unilaterally break with Tradition.

Kallistos' essay in Hopko's revised edition outlines his position very cogently: He agrees that Tradition prohibits the ordination of women to the presybterate, but he finds the various reasons offered as to why this is the case to be unconvincing and unsatisfying, and therefore, he believes that the Church has not in fact "closed" the issue at all.

>>>At variance with your view, the Orthodox members of the WCC do
believe that the WCC is a sound platform for ecumencial initiative and that their membership is not a serious error. <<<

That's not quite what the Orthodox position on the WCC is. Rather, they feel it necessary to remain involved with the WCC precisely in order to put forward the Orthodox position, on which there can be no compromise, Orthodoxy being the one true faith preserved in its fullness, without addition or alteration. The Orthodox delegates to the WCC will continue to oppose all propositions that run counter to Holy Tradition (which amounts to almost all of them), and will by their opposition bear witness to the truth of Orthodox belief.

Which is not quite the same thing as saying that the Orthodox Church sees the WCC as a legitimate platform for discussion.

As always, this is a complicated issue. During the Cold War, the Soviet Union encouraged participation in the WCC by the various Orthodox Churches in the USSR and Warsaw Pact as a means of disseminating Soviet positions and disinformatsiya (the role of the KGB in the WCC is documented by Soviet archival sources). And many members of the Orthodox Churches who were not subborned by the KGB saw the WCC as one of the few forums where they could interact with Church members outside of Communist influence. So it was something of a symbiotic relationship.

Since the collapse of the USSR, many members of those same Orthodox Churches, recognizing the manner in which the WCC had been compromised by Soviet agents of influence, as well as the general apostacy of the WCC's more liberal delegations, have had serious second thoughts, and one or two particular Churches have in fact withdrawn from the Council.

>>>Deconesses in the early church were installed in female communities, they were not Ordained. Read you oecumenical council
documents of the Church<<<

Dear Stephanos,

You are quite wrong here. In the Church of Constantinople, and by extension, to all of the Byzantine Churches, Deaconess was an ordained major order, in rank and dignity equal to the diaconate. They were ordained using EXACTLy the same formula used to ordain a deacon, including the critical phrase, "The divine grace, always healing that which is weak and supplying what is deficient. . ." I don't know how many Byzantine ordination services you have seen, but when they say that, you are a major cleric.

In the Church of Constantinople, the deaconesses were responsible for assisting in the baptism of female catechumens, for maintaining good order and discipline among the women and children, for the distribution of charity to widows, consecrated virgins and orphans, for the distribution of the sacrament to women in confinement, and for"women's issues" generally. They received communion at the altar right after the deacons, and with each species separately, as clergy. Their ordained status was confirmed in Byzantine civil law by the Codex Justinianus, and in the East the institution of the deaconess continued well into the 14th century. In the mid-20th century, a number of women were ordained as deaconesses to serve in isolated female monasteries, and today the Orthodox Church in Greece is seriously considering a general restoration of the office.

St. Olympias, friend and confidante of John Chrysostom, was the Protodeaconess of Hagia Sophia, with responsibility for no fewer than 400 other deaconesses throughout the city. Since she was not a monastic, and did not live in isolation, but held a cathedral office which involved interaction with the rest of the cathedral clergy of Constantinople, the idea that this was a mere "dignity" given to women serving in cloistered communities can be laid to rest with absolute certitude.

I would just like to add that a recent head of the Greek Orthodox Patriarchate of Alexandria, Pope Parthenios III (Memory Eternal +1996), who was, to say the least, one the more intellectually adventurous of Orthodox hierarchs, favored the ordination of women priests.

Many American Greek Orthodox presbyteras certainly do favor the ordination of women to the diaconate (deaconesses).

Sophia!

Bill

The explanation given is quite good about Deaconesses (and their role in the Great Church). However, one thing must always be added regarding the Major Order of Deacon. When reposed, the Deacon is buried with a censer in their hand and in the Burial Service of a...Layman.

Christ Is With Us!

Three Cents

Patriarch Bartholomew hosts women's conference:
www.stnina.org/97f/97f-ecupat-conf.htm [stnina.org]

[This message has been edited by bill tomoka (edited 07-29-2001).]

THE ORANGE COUNTY REGISTER, February 15, 1987 Sunday, METRO; Pg. B01


Greek Orthodox hierarchy gathers; Proper role of women in church to be debated
Scott Fagerstrom, The Register


ANAHEIM -- Like her mother before her, and her grandmother before that, Alice Scourby learned early that there were certain things girls could not do in church -- like helping the priest conduct services.


Unlike her mother and grandmother before her, though, Scourby wanted to know why. And even though she's grown up to become a professor of sociology at Long Island University, she still wants to know.
Scourby, a member of the Greek Orthodox Church, finally may get an answer to her question. Greek Orthodox bishops from North and South America, in Anaheim this week for a business meeting, say the church will sponsor an international gathering of theologians, clergymen and sociologists later this year to debate the proper role of women in church.

Bishop Anthony, spiritual leader of the Greek Orthodox Church in California and other Western states, said the gathering probably wouldn't produce any big change in the church's theology or practice.
But the fact that the meeting will take place is noteworthy, he added.
One of the most traditional sects in Christianity, the Greek Orthodox Church has not made major revisions in its theology since the year 787.
And the style of worship has changed little since the second century.


While many Protestant denominations and even the Roman Catholic Church, once a bastion of tradition, have made major changes in the 20th century, the Greek Orthodox have clung tenaciously to their ancient practices. But they are not insulated completely from the waves of change that have swept across the other major Christian sects in the United States.

Introduced to this country by Greek immigrants, most of whom came here in a mass migration at the turn of the century, the Greek Orthodox Church in America was for years primarily an ethnic enclave. Worship services were conducted in Greek, and the church served as a social center for Greek neighborhoods, rather than simply as a house of worship.
But many of the original immigrants have died, and now the church's members are third- and fourth-generation Americans who wonder about some of the "old ways," Scourby said. Religious traditions and cultural traditions have been wrapped in the same package for centuries, and now that some of the cultural aspects of Greek life are fading, the church must decide which traditions are central to the faith, she said.

Scourby, who has conducted several studies of Greek immigrants in the United States, said that in the 1980s, U.S. women of Greek descent still identify with the church but find it is "restrictive and limiting to women."
Since the beginning of the century, Greek-American immigrants have gone from a primarily unskilled labor force to people who occupy professional and managerial positions.
"They've been very upwardly mobile; however, this has not been true of many women. I think it hasn't been true of the women because of these continuing, patriarchial norms. I think that Greek women who are now more educated would like to see more favorable attitudes," said Scourby, who spoke to a women's auxiliary meeting in Anaheim on Saturday.
The question of women's roles is one of many issues with which the church is grappling. As more and more Americans of Greek descent speak English as their primary language, priests and bishops must decide how much of the service should be in Greek and how much in English.

"The key is flexibility," said the Rev. James Diavatis, a priest at St. John the Baptist parish in Anaheim. "If I have a mixed wedding -- one of the spouses is non-Greek -- I'll sometimes do 100 percent (of it) in English."
In a Sunday-morning worship service, the ratio of Greek to English is about 60-40, he added.

The church is in transition, said Bishop Anthony, and "like in any transition, there is a tremendous amount of pain" as leaders struggle to preserve the Greek culture without becoming irrelevant to their primarily American congregations.


Ironically, the ultratraditional nature of Orthodoxy is starting to attract converts from Roman Catholicism and Protestant denominations that have dropped some of their ancient traditions.
The Rev. George Stephanides, a priest at St. Paul's Greek Orthodox Church in Irvine, said about 40 converts join his congregation every year. While half of them are converting primarily because they are marrying someone in the church, the other half are people leaving other denominations, he said.
Diavatis said that hardly a Sunday goes by at his Anaheim church without someone from another denomination wanting to speak with him after the service. Some are just curious, but some -- about 10 to 15 a year -- want to convert.
"The question of ordination of women is a very great problem" among some members of Protestant denominations that have begun to accept women as clergy, he said.
That isn't likely to happen in the Orthodox Church, he added.
"The Orthoodox Church is very pro-woman, but our theology does not allow for a female priesthood," he said. "This has been our stance since Christianity began."

Scourby noted that she isn't calling for the ordination of women as priests, but only wants to see women allowed to become altar girls and deaconesses.
Such a policy would not be revolutionary, she added. The prohibition of altar girls and deaconesses is not a theological one, but a holdover of a Greek, patriarchial family attitude, she said.
Although female priests never have been permitted in the Orthodox Church, women did serve as deaconesses through the 12th century, she added.
Return to Top
Originally Classified as: Articles | Archdiocese

I'm sure Stuart can find indivudual Orthodox who agree with his view, but such statements are lacking from the official sources for the Orthodox members of the WCC. In fact, Orthodoxy hardly operates within the WCC as a 'loyal opposition' or internal dissident. In fact, Orhtodox bishops regularly and currently serve in the highest leadership positions in the WCC, including its presidency. They remian generous financial cotnributors (and have not cut back since the end of the Cold War).

Lastly, if one accepts Stuart's assertion that almost all of the propositions put before the WCC are against Holy Tradition, then the Orthodox are not doing as he says. Teh vast majority of propositions put before the WCC are not opposed by the Orthodox delegations.

Stuart's objective factual error on this last point calls into questione everything he asserts.

K.

>>>Teh vast majority of propositions put before the WCC are not opposed by the Orthodox
delegations.<<<

I never said that they were. And given the structure of the WCC, it is unlikely that any Orthodox resolutions dealing with central dogmatic issues would ever come to the floor. The role of the Orthodox Church in the WCC therefore tends to be negative: a rejection of all propositions that depart from the Apostolic faith through exposition of the Orthodox position.

Might I suggest that you guys take INTENSIVE courses in Greek and then hie yourselves to the nearest Kaffeineion ( the closest is in Greektown in Baltimore, on Eastern Avenue near St. Demetrius Church). The men there (no women -- TRADITION!) sip Venizelos coffee, smoke dank cigarettes or the occasional hookah, play skat (a card game) and engage in the most ferocious debates on every topic imaginable.

To suggest that any Greek (or Orthodox) would pass up a chance to park it and debate with folks, is just not a reality.

So too with the WCC; it is a chance for Orthodoxy to engage in that most Near Eastern and Byzantine practice of talking/debating/arguing/discussing and throwing down the gauntlet. And when it is all over ('last call'), the Westerns may stagger out the door wondering what has happened, while the Greeks (and other Byzantine folks) pack up the cards and head homewards enjoying the fact that issues were discussed and new thoughts were presented for consideration. Overall, it was a fruitful night.

So, when Euro-ethnic-Orthodox sit down with Anglicans, German-Evangelicals, Lutherans, Catholics, etc., there is no expectation that there will be a memorandum of agreement coming forth although the Westerns might expect some such trifle, but the Greeks/Byzantines see it as a fruitful exchange of ideas and something worthy enough to be repeated. The Westerns have suspicions about doing it again -- hey! there was no 'product' -- but for the Eastern folks: the very debate and discussion is EXACTLY the prize that should be expected and relished. Different mindsets.

So, for the Greeks/Byzantines, the next question is: your place or mine? And who brings the wine and mezedes (hors d'ouvres)?

Take the time to STUDY what the Eastern Christian community is and how we understand ourselves and you. Don't jump to conclusions based upon your paradigm -- that's not being Christian towards the East. Give us some space -- we're not really that queer and weird -- just different.

And when we have time to sit together and eat and talk and debate and argue, we're showing you the greatest respect because we're taking the time to do so and dedicating it to you.

So, let the Orthodox continue to interact with the Western Christian communities --even in the WCC-- and even if apparently there is no hope in hell to reach a memorandum of understanding. As John Paul II has made abundantly clear by his actions, the very fact that we are present to each other is a most wonderful sign of God's grace.

Blessings!

Dr. John,

Again, I fully apprciate your post. However, in addition to the worthwhile debates or discussions within the family of the WCC, many common endeavors are agreed to and implemented witht he full support of the Orthodox members.

As to Stuart's point, his error can be demonstated mathamatically. He claims "


One simply needs to take the propositions that come before the WCC (I'll let others pick the time frame), look at the vote of the Orthodox delegations and calculate if the Orthodox vote in the majority more often than not. In fact, they do most often vote witht he majority, disproving the assertion that they oppose almost all propositions.

K.

Kurt, luv', there is a wonderful anecdote that clarifies the issue. It is the story of the Nazi Quakers. When the conflict is established, everyone gets up with their flaming torches and engages in a massive torchlight parade, screaming and chanting. When war is declared the Nazi Quakers sit down and, in conscience, sit down and refuse to go.

So too with the Orthodox in the WCC. It's fine to stand up and march around and vote the way the rest do. But when push comes to shove, there is a chasm. And the Orthodox in the WCC 'abstain' from doing what the group has determined to do. E.g., Orthodox will affirm the absolute value of a woman's soul and right to be a part of the community. [Torchlight parade!] But there is no question of accepting women's ordination. (Sit down and refuse to accept.]

Don't sweat it. It's just our way. Though it may drive the non-Easterns nuts.

Blessings!

[This message has been edited by Dr John (edited 07-31-2001).]

But Dr. John, I think you have bought in to the right wing critics. First of all, the WCC has no formal stance on women's ordination. Second, the Council has a wide variety of initiatives (the "war") of which the Orthodox DO participate in, fully and enthusiastically.

I do think the the right and the anti-ecumenists and just the old fashioned haters have done a hatchet job as to what the WCC is, does and is all about.

The Orthodox, in fact, tend to be more participatory than many other members.

Those who beleive in ecumenism (the stated purpose of this forum) should rejoice in these positive endeavors. Those right wingers who are just looking for a coalition partner in their culture wars, of course, have a different agenda.

K.


[This message has been edited by Kurt K (edited 08-01-2001).]

Dear Stephanos,

I am sorry to have upset you so!

Actually, my Catholic friends think of me as "Orthodox" and my Orthodox friends think of me as "Catholic."

So as not to confuse myself, I accept both names!

I was simply relating a story from Celtic times, not saying anything about its veracity or affirming that women should be ordained etc.

You are very touchy about these issues. Are you a new convert? I have two convert friends who react similarly to you whenever I so much as tell them "Good Morning."

You should also be careful who you label a "heretic."

I have read the sources you cite. You should read and re-read Stuart's eloquent post above.

God will judge me for my faith, whether I was an heretic, Orthodox or Catholic.

I have related this same story to Metropolitans and Bishops.

They have yet to throw their Croziers at me and yell, "Anathema."

You would have made an excellent inquisitor.

Too bad that office isn't around today.

Alex

I hope noone will mind if I post a reply for this topic, since it is a couple of months old.
As for Orthodox participation in the NCC/WCC.
Despite what bishops might say publicly, I think there is a growing antipathy towards participation among the laity. While the OCA, for example, is different back east than it is on the west coast, I think the prevailing mood out here is probably more anti-ecumenical than back east.
Bishop Tikhon, for example, has made some statements that are not pro ecumenical, to say the least. For example look in the Indiana list archives http://listserv.indiana.edu/archives/orthodox.html
I'll withhold my opinion on whether participation in the NCC/WCC is wrong, but I just want to point out that there is a wide range of views here.

In Christ,

Michael King