Deaconesses: An Orthodox Institution Untheologically Blocked by Petros Vassiliadis
The necessity of an immediate restoration of the order of deaconesses, the history of the decision to hold the symposium at this particular moment, as well as its expectations, were presented at the opening session. The first and primary reason for convening the symposium was to encourage the traditional access of women to the sacramental “diaconal” priesthood. Unlike the general issue and demand for women ordination into episcopacy and the “hierurgic” priesthood, the symposium aimed at highlighting the diaconal character of the Christian faith, and not the redistribution of power within the Church. As Prof. Dn. John Chryssavgis underlined, we should perceive and practice “the diaconal ministry not as a stepping-stone to the priesthood or episcopate, but as a symbol of the vocation of every Christian (male and female) to serve. It is (he is convinced) today more than ever before, harder to be a deacon in the Orthodox Church than it is to be a priest or a bishop. Unfortunately, centuries of hardened clericalism, ecclesiastical illiteracy, and blatant disregard for the diaconate have rendered it almost impossible for people in our church—clergy and laity—to appreciate how the diaconate should inform every aspect of pastoral leadership and church ministry.…If we do not understand the diaconia, we cannot understand the other ranks of priesthood…even the role of the laity in the Church…The authentic image of the Church that we should be seeking—in our minds as in our ministry—is that of a dinner table, not that of a corporate ladder. The Church is not a pyramid, where all attention and authority are turned toward the summit. Instead, we should imagine the Church as a sacrament, where the primary and essential focus is the celebration of the Eucharist.”
Diakonia, service may be important of the Christian life but that service is primarily not of others or even the Church, but of God. The Church cannot presume to violate the Divine Wisdom in order to establish a more "equal" order. What is the role of the deacon? It is not so broad as Nicholas Denysenko thinks, and is rather limited as recorded in Acts to specific purposes. Many of the particularities regarding the service of the deacon within Divine Liturgy would appear to be a much later development, after their original functions had been lost, and while some Orthodox may attempt to explain the theology of the diaconate in accordance with these later developments (e.g. serving the bishop at Divine Liturgy), I think they are incorrect to do so. Can we have a true restoration of the diaconate in those countries where Byzantine Christianity is the default religion of the population? Let them show that they can restore and renew the diaconate first before they talk about further ecclesial "reform." (It is not just corporal works of mercy, to which all Christians are called to do, but ministering from the treasury of the Church to members of the Church in need, so that the bishops/presbyteros do not have to occupy themselves with this vital work and focus instead on duties attending to the "spiritual life.")
The Eucharist does have the aspect of a "meal"; should we think of the Church as being gathered at the Wedding Banquet - there is a scriptural warrant for that, but is that image more metaphorical than literal?
If the Church is not a "pyramid" then who is pushing for the "restoration" of deaconesses other than [older] feminist-minded men and women, and their episcopal enablers? Does this initiative have broad support in Greek Orthodox communities? How many of their faithful care enough to have an opinion? Do Greek Orthodox communities have problems retaining men? Photos of the men in their young adult groups in the U.S. are not impressive. If these innovators are content to push men away even more by pursuing this initiative, then let them do so and suffer the consequences. God will not be mocked by "followers" who think they know a standard of righteousness (one informed by feminism) better than what they have received from Him. Even if they claim to be merely interpreting Tradition properly when the Church failed to do so before, they are just interpreting Tradition through a feminist lens.
Along with the diaconal dimension of the authentic witness of the Church of Christ, equally important is the moral responsibility of the body of Christ for women, their role and ministry both in society and in all the manifestations of ecclesiastical life: royal, priestly, prophetic (in other words, governance, liturgy, mission).The three offices are those proper to Christ but are manifested in the life of every Christian, no matter what their calling or role. Women are able to participate in all three offices without having to be admitted to Holy Orders, and it is a mistake to confuse the "royal" office with that of the episcopate or having authority in the Church (which St. Paul denies is possible for women). Where is the moral responsibility of the Church for non-ordained men?
Why are the Greeks pushing for this at this time? I think they have become too soft and reliant upon money from a select few, especially American money. One might even say that they are overcompensating for an ecclesial mindset that is still clericalist and imperial, trying to cement their future legacy. If anything, they are casting doubts on whether the norm of elevating monastics to the episcopate is should remain unmodified. Too much pleasing some vocal people instead of being a rock for their flocks? I think Aaron might have something to say to them about this. We must beware of false forms of "mercy" which are really idols we have set up of ourselves.
What sort of faith is this:
The Old Testament, of course, exemplifies patriarchal bias in many ways, notably in the metaphor of woman coming out of man (Gen 1:22). It is inescapable, however, that this was corrected in the New Testament, by the explicit Pauline statement that “when the set time had fully come, God sent his Son, born of a woman” (Gal 4:4). God becoming incarnate “from a woman” is a reversal of woman “coming out of man.”The innovators might say that it is not God who is the source of this bias (or even error) in Scripture, but the human authors, and that God makes use of inspired authors but doesn't necessarily forcibly correct their minds so that they understand His revelation of Himself properly.
the final report
No comments:
Post a Comment