St. Phoebe Center for the Deaconess

Women’s Gifts and the Diaconate

/in , , , , , , , , , , , /by

by Carrie Frederick Frost

originally posted on Public Orthodoxy

The reinstitution of the ordained female diaconate in the Orthodox Church today would result in a much-needed and transformative outpouring of women’s gifts into the Church and into the world.

In order to appreciate the positive potential of the female diaconate, we must understand the absolute parity of women and men in the eyes of the Orthodox Church. The Church has always understood men and women to be equally created in the image and likeness of God, even if its broader cultural surrounding was highly patriarchal.  As such, statements like this from Saint Basil were nothing short of radical:  “The natures are alike of equal honor, the virtues are equal, the struggle equal, the judgment alike” (On the Human Condition). This thinking is representative of early Church Fathers, including Gregory of Nazianzus and Clement of Alexandria, and amounts to a rejection of any hierarchical understanding of the relationship between men and women in the Roman world. Indeed, this understanding of women and men as equal in their creation by God is one of Christianity’s great gifts to the world.

To be sure, this does not mean that all human life has been experienced in this way; indeed, the subjugation of women (at least within marriage) was part of the Fall (“[Your husband] shall rule over you” Genesis 3:16). We as Orthodox, however, do not enshrine any of the other characteristics of our fallen state outlined in Genesis as part of a sanctified and unquestioned order of things—difficult labor, our inclination toward violence, pain during childbirth, etc.—instead, we understand all of these conditions as worthy of our efforts to mitigate and overcome and that will ultimately be overcome.

Also, to be sure, this does not mean that all Christians throughout history embraced this understanding. For example, the early Church acquiesced to Roman norms of a patrician man’s authority in the domain of his household after it transitioned from a community that expected an imminent second coming to a community that was learning how to self-perpetuate. There is also no shortage of memorable misogynistic quips from famous rigorists, like Tertullian, who claimed, “Woman is a temple built over a sewer.”

There is nothing disrespectful to the Church in acknowledging that it has an imperfect historical record on this issue. In fact, it is our responsibility as Christians to lovingly mend any tears in the fabric of the Church’s earthly presence. Most importantly, these ideas have never been considered to be the basis for an Orthodox understanding of the essence of women and man, not in their own time nor our own.

The weight of our tradition reflects the sentiment expressed above by St. Basil: that women and men are equal, a truth which, of course, was illustrated by Jesus Christ himself. He accorded respect and dignity to women at every turn as recorded in the Gospels, even in the most unlikely of circumstances. There may be no greater affirmation of the respect, dignity, and equality of women with men that the fact that it was his women friends to whom he first appeared as the risen Christ.

And here is the second thing that must be understood in order to appreciate the possibility of the female diaconate for the Church today: Even within the context of the Church’s conviction of the essential equality of women and men, there is no sense that the Church understands women and men to be perfectly equivalent. Instead, there has always been an understanding and appreciation for the ways in which the human experience is lived out differently between women and men; the incarnational reality of women and men is not the same. This is reflected in the lives of the saints, in the marriage rite, in the iconography of the Church, the hymnography of the Church, and so on.

When we fully appreciate the fundamental parity between women and men, it becomes clear that any objection to the female diaconate based on women being subordinate to men holds no weight in the Orthodox context. And when we fully appreciate the longstanding acknowledgement of women and men’s different lived experiences and perspectives—their different incarnational realities—we also appreciate that men and women have different gifts to offer the Church.

In this light, the fading away of the female diaconate in the late Byzantine era for what looks to be complex historical reasons can only be understood as a tragedy. With an isolated exception here and there, for something like eight hundred years the Church has not benefited from women’s gifts offered as deaconesses. Of course, women have contributed to the life of the Church in innumerable ways in every historical and temporal context, but the loss of this sort of ordained ministry—which has the support, the protection, and oversight, and the authority of the Church—has deprived the Church of the experiences, perspectives, and unique gifts of generations of its faithful women.

An aside: Considering that the female diaconate has sound historical precedence and theological underpinnings, that the same cannot be said for the female priesthood, and that there is effectively no movement in the Orthodox Church today to even consider—much less push for—the female priesthood, we ought to be able to consider the female diaconate on its own merits.

Particular to the female diaconate: The Church needs its women’s gifts. It needs them by virtue of their baptism; simply on the basis of the unique gifts each human person has to offer. It also needs them because women have a different lived experience than men, a different incarnational reality than men, and therefore have different gifts to offer the Church as women. Women or men can offer the expertise of chaplains, administrators, pastoral counselors, but only women can offer the gifts garnered from their incarnational reality as women.

Any resistance to the female diaconate based on the concern that its effect would be to erase differences between women and men is unfounded. Instead, the female diaconate would honor the differences in the incarnational reality of women, and would allow the Church to benefit from these differences. In fact, refusing to consider the female diaconate out of fear of the Church succumbing to trends in the larger society around us that seek to elide any differences between women and men is actually, and ironically, a capitulation to society’s trends.

Women need women’s gifts; they need woman-to-woman ministry. This is not an antiquated idea that we here in enlightened America have outgrown. There is a reason I belong to an all-woman book group. There is wisdom behind the decision of the hospice where I volunteer to pair female respite caregivers with female patients (and male respite caregivers with male patients). There are times when a woman needs to be ministered to by another woman. And, yes, this happens informally in parishes (and book groups), but the good that could be done would be a hundredfold more if there were theologically and pastorally trained women ordained as deaconesses, ready to minister to other women, with the oversight, support, and authority of the Church.

The whole Church—not only women—needs women’s gifts. Women have a different lived experience of sexual abuse and assault, from which the whole Church would benefit. Women have a different perspective on authority, its judicious use, its squandering, its misuse, its abuse, from which the whole Church would benefit. Women have a different view of childrearing, marriage, and family life, from which the whole Church would benefit—and so on. And, again, yes, some of these gifts are already being shared with the Church here in the twenty-first century—with women on now on parish councils, teaching in seminaries, and so on—but this cannot compare to the ways in which women’s gifts would be truly infused into the life of the Church if women were ordained to the diaconate, and thus had the sacramental blessing of this ministry. As I understand it, the recognition of both the need for woman-to-woman ministry and the ways in which women’s gifts benefit the entire Church prompted the Patriarch of Alexandria to reinstitute the order of deaconesses in Africa last year.

I truly believe that the reinstitution of the ordained female diaconate in the other autocephalous Orthodox churches would do the opposite of undermining the differences between women and men; that it would instead allow the gifts of women to more fully be given to the Church and the world; that these gifts would be honored, celebrated, and realized in new, wonderful, and unanticipated ways; and that the female diaconate would prompt an effloresce of healing, well-being, flourishing, and hope in the life of my beloved Orthodox Church today.

Carrie Frederick Frost, PhD is a scholar of Orthodox theology, Professor of Theology at Saint Sophia Ukrainian Orthodox Seminary, and a Board Member of Saint Phoebe Center for the Deaconess.

Public Orthodoxy seeks to promote conversation by providing a forum for diverse perspectives on contemporary issues related to Orthodox Christianity. The positions expressed in this essay are solely the author’s and do not necessarily represent the views of the editors or the Orthodox Christian Studies Center.

St. Phoebe Center for the Deaconess

Survey Results Released on “Challenges and Opportunities of the Role of Women in the Church”

/in , , , , , , /by

In cooperation with the World Council of Churches’ Faith and Order Commission, Saint Catherine’s Vision (SCV) recently developed and inaugurated a Survey for Orthodox Christian Faithful.

The survey sought participants’ input regarding “Challenges and Opportunities of the Role of Women in the Church” for the Consultation on “Ecumenical Perspectives on the Role of Women in the Churches,” held at the Monastery of Bose in Mangano, Italy on October 3-7, 2017.

74% of those surveyed stated or intimated that they would like to see more opportunities for women to serve in the Church. Even though there were no questions regarding the rejuvenation of the ministry deaconesses, 30% of those surveyed mentioned deaconesses with 18% of those saying they would like to see deaconesses, with some not stipulating whether they felt deaconesses should be ordained or simply blessed by a bishop, or if they should have liturgical functions.

We pray these findings will be helpful toward the discernment of future initiatives for the sake of “building up the body of Christ” (Eph. 4:12). http://www.saintcatherinesvision.com/assets/files/Feb.%202,%202018%20SCV%20Survey%20Report.pdf

See Survey here

St. Phoebe Center for the Deaconess

Orthodox move for women deacons is ‘revitalization’ not ‘innovation’

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

Appearing in the National Catholic Reporter

Nov 30, 2017
by James Dearie

Orthodox liturgical theologians are voicing support for the decision of Patriarch Theodoros II and the Greek Orthodox Holy Synod of the Patriarchate of Alexandria to reinstate the order of deaconesses.

“We respectfully support the decision of the Patriarchate of Alexandria to restore the female diaconate, thus giving flesh to an idea that has been discussed and studied by pastors and theologians for decades,” nine theologians from theology schools and seminaries of the United States and Greece said in a statement dated Oct. 31.

The reinstitution of the female diaconate does not constitute an innovation, as some would have us believe,” the theologians said, “but the revitalization of a once functional, vibrant, and effectual ministry,” the theologians said.

Theodoros, pope and patriarch of Alexandria and All Africa, consecrated five women to the diaconate last February in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, primarily to assist in missionary churches.

Modern Orthodox scholarship acknowledges the existence of a female diaconate in the early church, with many tracing it back to a woman named Phoebe mentioned by the Apostle Paul in his letter to the Romans. However, “it really fell out of existence in the late Byzantine period,” said Carrie Frederick Frost, an Orthodox theologian who sits on the board of the St. Phoebe Center for the Deaconess, an organization that provides education about and promotes the female diaconate in the Orthodox Church.

“Every now and again there has been one … but, for the most part, the past few hundred years have not seen deaconesses,” Frost told NCR in a Nov. 20 interview.

For several decades, Orthodox patriarchs have discussed the possibility of bringing the order back. A 1988 Pan-Orthodox Consultation at Rhodes, Greece, produced the document “The Place of Women in the Orthodox Church,” which stated that the “apostolic order of deaconesses should be revived.”

Little had been done to advance the cause until Theodoros’ surprise move earlier this year.

Reports indicate, however, that Theodoros did not ordain the women in the traditional manner, with the laying of hands at the altar, but “consecrated” them on the side.

Frost says that the ceremony appeared to be a “blending” of the ordination of deacons and the blessing of those entering the subdiaconate, the highest minor order in the Orthodox Church, possibly to deflect pressure from parts of the church that are resistant to the idea of conferring major orders on women.

“There’s an allegiance to tradition that sometimes gets lived out as resistance to change,” Frost said. Many Orthodox are wary of breaking with tradition, she said, and see the decline in other churches’ membership as evidence that the way of the past is the way of the future for the Orthodox Church.

“They see [the female diaconate] as a slippery slope,” she said. “It’s a fear about capitulating to what is perceived to be the secular world at large, in that doing things differently in the Orthodox Church, even if it were a return to something that was historically the case, like the female diaconate, that that would be a capitulation to secular pressures about modernity and change.”

For this reason, the Patriarchate of Alexandria’s decision could have a large impact. Orthodox bishops do not answer directly to a pope or head patriarch, and could technically start ordaining women as deacons, but probably will not as long as it appears that such a move would cause conflict. In a church very concerned with precedent, the patriarchate “really gave us an example of a local church … making that decision internally,” said Frost.

Ultimately, she said, the question of female deacons is a question of the needs of the modern church, many of which she believes female deacons could help meet, citing ministry to women as an important example.
Related: Orthodox Church debate over women deacons moves one step closer to reality

“I don’t want to pigeonhole them into woman-to-woman ministry, but I think that is something they would give the church that the church does not have right now,” Frost said.

She also notes that in the case of the Patriarchate of Alexandria, the women were chosen “to help with missionary work. The church is growing gangbusters in Africa right now; there aren’t enough priests, there aren’t enough people on the ground … and they desire to deputize these women to teach, catechize and lead services.”

The revitalization of a female order of deacons in the Orthodox Church could influence the work of Pope Francis’ commission studying the possibility of female deacons in the Roman Catholic Church, which has traditionally recognized the validity of Orthodox sacraments.

“I’m sure that there’s a whole lot of conversation going on in the Holy See right now with regard to Catholic-Orthodox relations on this question,” William Ditewig, a theologian, Catholic deacon and former head of the U.S. bishops’ Secretariat for the Diaconate, told NCR.

While both churches are considering the possibility of women in the diaconate, the move in the Orthodox Church should not be seen as a step toward women in the priesthood. “There’s no movement [in favor of female priestly ordination],” Frost said of the Orthodox Church.

“In the Orthodox Church, the diaconate is a ministry on a different level than that of bishops and [priests],” Orthodox Fr. Steven Tsichlis told NCR. “One can be ordained to the diaconate and remain a deacon for one’s entire life; the diaconate should not be seen merely as a step to the priesthood and episcopacy in Orthodoxy — although it sometimes is today.”

“It’s about the vocation,” said Ditewig. The diaconate “is not a lower-case priesthood. This is a vocation in its own right.”

https://www.ncronline.org/news/theology/orthodox-move-women-deacons-called-revitalization-not-innovation

St. Phoebe Center for the Deaconess

Orthodoxy, African Deaconesses, and Missed Opportunities

/in , , , /by

by Kerry San Chirico

The headline from the official news agency of the Romanian Patriarchate read, “Patriarch Theodoros II of Alexandria performs first consecration of deaconesses.” There were mostly heartened and hopeful responses on my Facebook feed. I “liked” the page in the formal if shallow Facebook sense. As such news inevitably takes time to digest, those with keen eyes began to weigh in. “This is not an ordination but a consecration,” one scholar reminded us, noting critical differences between the words cheiriothesia (blessing) and and cheirotonia (ordination). Another pointed out that, given the photographic evidence, this rite was more akin to ordination of a subdeacon, a minor order. Was this then a minor occurrence? Some might wish that.

The whole thing took me back to days of the Soviet Union, when Western observers were forced to determine who was out of the capricious Soviet inner circle solely by looking at photos of waving Politburo members at the annual May Day parade. And this was amusing because we now live in the 21st century, and it’s not as though this liturgy was occurring in North Korea. I began to wonder, Wouldn’t it be amazing if there were some mechanism by which the various autocephalous Orthodox Churches could communicate with one another? Wouldn’t it be something if there was a global forum whereby Orthodox laypeople and clergy could assemble, discuss topical issues affecting the Church and world today, and propose solutions to problems great and minor? And this got me thinking about last summer’s fraught “Great and Holy Council,” with its absent patriarchs and rationalizations for sin that would get called out by any good father confessor. I was returned to a summer of so many missed opportunities—and for reckoning with hard truths about Orthodoxy today, as it really exists.

Patriarch Theodoros II and those he leads in Africa are obviously taking care of the felt needs of Orthodoxy in a landmass that could comfortably fit the United States, Eastern Europe, India, China, and Japan. Whether it was “consecration” or “ordination”—an important distinction, but still inside baseball to most—the point is that the decision reflects a verity about the Church in Africa: it is growing, just as it is for the Roman Catholic Church and the many Protestant churches, to say nothing of the rapid growth of Islam. Christianity is now well into a major demographic shift whose implications most have yet to fully comprehend. It is a fact now popularized in books by Philip Jenkins in The New Faces of Christianity (2006) and The Next Christendom (2011) that the geographical locus of Christianity has shifted to the world’s Southern and Eastern Hemispheres. Consider that in 1910 Christians in sub-Saharan Africa accounted for 10% of the total population; by 2010 that figure had risen to 63%. The Democratic Republic of Congo, location of the consecrations, has one of the top ten largest Christian populations in the world, with some 63.15 million believers. (Germany has 58.24 million Christians). While this shift may be lost on many non-Global Southerners and Easterners who spend much time hand-wringing over emptying and desiccated churches, it is apparently not lost on African Orthodox who have work to do and quite often lack the human and material resources to do it.

Frankly, some will never be convinced enough about the female diaconate to do anything about it here. It is curious that in the church that so prizes the normative weight of beliefs and practices of the early church, a time of active deaconesses, the burden of proof is placed on those seeking female diaconal restoration. Yet by our own historical reckoning, the burden of proof should fall on those arguing against the female diaconate and on those doing nothing to actively reinstate it. It is they who need to reasonably explain why deaconesses should no longer be part of Orthodox ecclesial life.

Throughout North American parishes male clergy are often forced to try to do almost everything by themselves. The married priest is liturgist, financial planner, spiritual father, biblical scholar, teacher, social worker, hospital chaplain, parish secretary, biological father, and husband. These men are understandably exhausted. Some leave the ministry altogether; I know them. Meanwhile, women are also doing the serious work of church—but they usually don’t get recognized for it. Why then do we not formalize their ministry, inspiring other women (and men) for a life of ecclesial service? Speaking about the women, Patriarch Theodoros explained, “We need them.” Do we not?

The female diaconate is not about mere or more recognition. It’s about meeting needs often left unaddressed because they go unmentioned, or because resources are tight, or because we are deaf to those voices refusing to shout. It’s about the normalization of lack and becoming so accustomed to the status quo that we fail to envision how enriched we would be by deaconesses in our midst. It is, as Carrie Frederick Frost argued in Public Orthodoxy, a failure of imagination. It is also a failure of leadership.

We are observing the Patriarch and African Synod do the needful. Admittedly, I am much more familiar with South Asia, but I can imagine these new deaconesses serving both women and men in various ways. See them traversing villages, seeking medical attention, visiting the sick, catechizing, remonstrating against abusive husbands, even (wait for it) praying out demons. They are doing diakonia—and one need not serve in the altar to do that. So why don’t we follow the lead of the African Church? What’s the hold up? All excuses now ring hollow. The refusal of the Church in North America to deal with the pressing needs of our parishes and society are calling the truth claims of our tradition into question. When the gap between the ideal and real widens to such an extent that the cognitive dissonance simply cannot be shaken, we are in real trouble. People become disillusioned. They leave without the fanfare of a podcast.

When I reflect upon the photo of those earnest women facing the iconostasis in expectation, I cannot help but think we are watching a Church embracing its mission. It is a Church more fully appreciating the contributions of more than half its members. It is the Church of the future and, as the numbers show, the present.

Meanwhile, here on this side of the world, one fears we are letting opportunities pass us by. Dubious notions of inevitable “progress” aside, there is certainly no guarantee Orthodoxy in North America will ever flourish. And we are way past the rhetoric of Orthodoxy being America’s best-kept secret. It’s not such a secret any more. Last summer, news of our Council spread far and wide. One Roman Catholic theologian told me he used to point to Orthodoxy as an alternative model of conciliar polity. “Now we’re not so sure,” he said soberly. In the age of the Internet, things are perhaps more public than we would want. There is then no place for triumphalism here, just the hardest thing to do in the world—to see things as they really are in our selves, communities, country, world, and Church.  We cannot do it alone. Africa can show us the way. Ss. Tatiana, Olympias, and Foebe, pray for us.

Kerry San Chirico is Assistant Professor in the Department of Theology and Religious Studies at Villanova University.

This article originally appeared on Public Orthodoxy, a publication of the Orthodox Christian Studies Center of Fordham University.

St. Phoebe Center for the Deaconess

Patriarchate of Alexandria’s Blessing of Deaconesses Inspires Encouraging Response from Distinguished Theologian, Emeritus Professor Evangelos Theodorou

/in , , , /by

Submitted by:
Presvytera Dr. Kyriaki Karidoyanes FitzGerald

During a telephone interview on Saturday, February 18th, 2017, the distinguished theologian, Emeritus Professor Evangelos Theodorou of the University of Athens School of Theology, respected authority of liturgical theology and the historiography of the ordination of deaconesses shared his appraisal regarding the recent blessing of deaconesses for the Orthodox Church in Africa to assist in the mission field.

For the original news release, see:

http://basilica.ro/en/patriarch-theodoros-of-alexandria-performs-first-consecration-of-deaconesses/

Professor Theodorou emphasized that,

This is a fresh and important step. The Synod’s decision to respond to pressing contemporary pastoral need is rooted in much prayer, study and discussion. As the Holy Apostles in the Book of Acts guided by the Holy Spirit responded to the pressing needs of the Church in their context, so likewise, guided by the Holy Spirit, is the Holy Synod of Alexandria responding to this and other needs confronting the growing Orthodox Church in Africa.

The original news release indicates these devout and tested women were received with a cheirothesia (laying on of hands), apparently similar to a sub-deacon. While no orarion (diaconal stole) was conferred on the candidates, the beautiful photographs nevertheless, depict the new (sub)deaconesses wearing the sub-diaconal towel on their heads and carrying the sub-deacon’s water-bowl. This is truly significant and lovely!

That these newly appointed lay-ministers are identified as “deaconesses”, follows an important historical precedent. For example, “monastic-deaconesses” (nuns appointed as sub-deaconesses) ministered to incarcerated women in jails and prisons on behalf of the Archdiocese of Athens (1930’s).

This action undertaken by the Patriarchate of Alexandria, indeed is a wise first step.  God-willing, may they sooner rather than later discern throughcheirotonia (ordination) faithful and tested female servants of God to the diaconate; as were St. Phoebe (1st c.), St. Olympias (4th c), St. Irene of Chrysovalanton (9th c) and numerous other holy women.

The Professor advised Saint Catherine’s Vision’s 2014 international: Call for the Rejuvenation of the Ministry of the Ordained Deaconess . Together with SCV he emphasized,

…The deaconess can serve the ever-expanding needs of the local church under the direction of the bishop. She can assist in areas such as pastoral care, education, mission, and philanthropy. She can expand the outreach of the church particularly through evangelism and witness as well as care for the sick, destitute and unchurched. She can bear witness to the values of the Gospel in the wider society.

St. Phoebe Center for the Deaconess

Patriarch Theodoros of Alexandria performs first consecration of deaconesses

/in , , , /by

On the feast of the Saint and Great Martyr Theodore of Tyre, 17 February 2016, the day on which His Beatitude Theodoros II, Pope and Patriarch of Alexandria and All Africa celebrates his name day, a festive Divine Liturgy was celebrated at the Holy Church of St Nicholas, within the Missionary Centre of Kolwezi.

Together with the Alexandrian Primate concelebrated Their Eminences Nicephorus, Metropolitan of Kinshasa, Innocent, Metropolitan of Burundi and Rwanda, and the local Metropolitan Meletios of Katanga, accompanied by the Clergy of the Hy Metropolis.

As the official site of the Patriarchate reports, His Beatitude the Patriarch spoke during his homily about the Great Martyr St Theodoros, emphasising the confession of martyrdom before the persecutors of faith and his love for Jesus Christ.

At the end of the Divine Liturgy the Primate of the Alexandrian Throne consecrated the Catechist elder Theano, one of the first members of the Missionary staff in Kolwezi, to “Deaconess of the Missions” of the Holy Metropolis of Katanga and read the prayer for one entering the “ecclesiastic ministry” for three Nuns and two Catechists, in order for them to assist the missionary effort of the Holy Metropolis, particularly in the Sacraments of Baptisms of adults and marriages, as well as in the Catechetical department of the local Church.

Note that it is the first time in the history of Missions in Africa that these consecrations have been done.

See more photos and original story here.

St. Phoebe Center for the Deaconess

“Invisible Leaders in the Orthodox Church” Document Released by Aphaia Resources

/in , , , , /by

thumbnail
Written by Patricia Fann Bouteneff, “Invisible Leaders in the Orthodox Church” is most likely the first list of its kind that begins to acknowledge the powerful and important work of female members of the Orthodox Church. Patricia admits it is not exhaustive. Already, after posting the document on her Facebook page, many of her followers have submitted names of women carrying out noteworthy and life-changing work in a variety of diverse professions and ministries.

Patricia writes, “One of the better kept secrets in the Orthodox Church today is how many of our leaders are or have been female. They tend not to stand out, as we are trained to expect our leaders to wear cassocks, beards, and pectoral crosses or otherwise be male. But knowing about the specific roles women are playing in the Church today is important, all the more if you desire to fulfill your own calling. As the historian Eva C. Topping said in a 1998 interview in St. Nina Quarterly, “Women need to know their own history in the Church. … We cannot make the contributions women are called to make, unless we are first informed of our history and enlivened by the true vision of Orthodoxy that all are equal in Christ.” She is right: we women must know our history, but I would add that we have an even greater need to understand our present reality.”

Read the entire article here.

St. Phoebe Center for the Deaconess

Orthodox Women in the Healing Ministries Resource

/in , , , , , , , , , /by

Women in Healing Ministries-logo-FINALVisit the website of Orthodox Women in the Healing Ministries and learn about the important work of this group.

As part of their mission, ‘the founders have defined all women as persons who “minister to others,” including priest’s wives, teachers, students, mothers and the like…”

Listen to the talks “Toward a Spirituality of Care” by Fr. Silviu Nicolae Bunta, Ph.D during their October 2015 retreat. These are found on the Ancient Faith Ministries website, where you will find other talks on the vital roles women play in ministry.

 

 

St. Phoebe Center for the Deaconess

FAQs

/in , , , , , /by

Download FAQs PDF

Q. What is the goal of the St. Phoebe Center?
A. The purpose of the St. Phoebe Center is to provide education regarding the historical deaconess in the church, highlight the diaconal ministry women are doing today, and work for the restoration of the female diaconate for the building up of the Body of Christ.

Q.  Does the St. Phoebe Center promote the ordination of women to the priesthood (i.e. the episcopos or presbytery)?
A. No, ordination of women to those offices is not part of the Orthodox Christian Tradition and the St. Phoebe Center does not promote this.

Q. If women are ordained to the diaconate, won’t the next step be to ordain them to the priesthood/presbytery?
A. Ordination to the diaconate is not just a “stepping stone” to the priesthood/presbytery.  The order has its own charism and ministry.  Furthermore, for over a thousand years the Church ordained women to the diaconate and it did not lead to the ordination to the presbytery; therefore within the framework of the Orthodox Church, we should not think that would be the case today.

Q.  Some people think that the deaconess was not really an ordained role.
A. Women’s ordination to the diaconate is well-documented. The ordination rite with prayers for her ordination are included in the earliest extant Euchologian [Prayerbook] of the Church, the Barberini Codex, as well as the Bessarionos Codex. Furthermore, in his doctoral dissertation, “ ‘Ordination’ [cheirotonia] or ‘Appointment’ [cheirothesia]of the Deaconess,’” Dr. Evangelos Theodorou, Emeritus Professor of Liturgics at the University of Athens, concluded that the rite of the ordination of the deaconess was a sacramental ordination to the higher orders of the clergy.  The Deaconess was ordained by the bishop, during the Liturgy, at the altar, and at the same place in the service that the male deacon was ordained.  In addition, she was presented with the stole and chalice, and received communion with the clergy prior to the reception by the lower orders of clergy (e.g. sub-deacon) and the laity.

The responsibilities of the Deaconess are also mentioned in early church manuals (e.g. Didascalia Apostolorum, Apostolic Constitutions) and prescriptions for the office are mentioned in the canonical inheritance of the church (e.g. Canon 40 of the Council of Trullo).

Q. Is the push for restoration of the female deacon a result of what other denominations are doing (e.g. the practice of the Episcopal and Anglican churches to ordain women as presbyters and bishops)?

A. No, this is not a result of what other denominations are doing. The Orthodox Church looks to Holy Scripture, Holy Tradition, and meeting the needs of its people in the decisions it makes. Moreover, calls for the restoration of this office are over one hundred years old. The most authoritative call was issued in Rhodes, Greece, in 1988, by an inter-Orthodox consultation attended by bishops and academics of twelve of the autocephalous Churches. More information can be found on this topic here.

Q. If women were ordained in the early church to primarily help with female baptisms, why would their role need to be restored today?
A. Female deacons did more than help with female baptisms. Thirteen different duties of the deaconess are listed in The Study of Liturgy, Oxford, 1978 and Ordination Rites of the Ancient Churches of East and West, 1990. Her duties included: administration, supervision at Liturgy, taking charge of properties, reporting to the Bishop, providing pastoral care to women, sheltering guests, and more.  Most of those needs still exist today.

In a presentation made by Valerie Karras, Th.D., Ph.D., at the “Deaconesses, Ordination of Women and Orthodox Theology International Theological Conference” in Thessaloniki, Greece, Dr. Karras states, “The Church’s historical division according to sex of public and private diaconal ministries paralleled the gendered division of functions in almost all aspect of life in the late antique and Byzantine societies in which Orthodox Christianity developed.” Dr. Karras also states, “If we examine the cultural context of the historical female diaconate, we cannot fail but be astonished that, in a society where women served almost no public roles and held no public offices, the Church nevertheless not only employed women to serve the pastoral and liturgical needs of its female faithful but ranked them among its major orders of clergy, fully ordaining them in a rite virtually identical to that of their male counterparts.” We need to question why the church is not ordaining women today when the cultural barriers of the early church are non-existent.

Q. Aren’t these duties being carried out by our priests?
A. The priest is the shepherd of his parish. To think that the parish priest can meet ALL of the needs of his parish—counseling, administration, liturgical, etc. —is unrealistic and unhealthy for both the priest and his parish. Ordained members of his parish [deacon and deaconess] can help the rector carry out these pastoral and ministerial roles, which can result in a more spiritually healthy parish.

Q. Couldn’t the deacon help the priest with these pastoral and ministerial duties?
A. Yes, the deacon certainly could! The original duty of the deacon was one of ministry and service. Unfortunately, we have seen these responsibilities fall away, leaving only the liturgical role. As a result, many of our faithful see a distorted view of the deacon. Restoring the rightful role of the deacon is just as important to the health and well-being of the Orthodox faithful.
Limiting the diaconate to men ignores the gifts and talents of 50% of our faithful! It also assumes that the deacon and priest can successfully address all of the unique needs and challenges of women. This simply is not the case. Same-sex counseling is beneficial and needed. There is a reason women seek out other women as friends, and why men seek out other men as friends. There is a common ground that exists that allows each gender to help each other with their unique needs and challenges. For women, that can include counseling on marital relations, motherhood, abortion, miscarriages, sexual abuse, caregiving, and other issues.

Q. Why can’t women just continue serving without being ordained, like they do now?
A. In order to answer this question, it is helpful to understand what an ordination means in an Orthodox context.  In one sense, we are all “ordained” into the ministry of Christ—the Royal Priesthood—by virtue of our baptism and chrismation.  In a more specific sense, an ordination is a setting apart of people for ministry in a particular community, changing their relationship with the community. Having been recognized by the community, their gifts are then enlivened by the grace of the Holy Spirit. Those elevated to “priesthood” (i.e. bishop, priest, and deacon) are ordained in the context of the Eucharist, at the altar, and by the bishop. Their service is tied to the liturgy and the altar as the source and summit of their ministry.  In concrete terms, they connect the liturgy of our lives to the sacramental life of the Church.  With the blessing of the bishop, their ministry is universal in scope and confers the authority, credibility, recognition, support, and protection of the Church.  It also demands public accountability to the Church and obedience to the bishop.

Lay ministry is important.  However, it does not function in a sacramental capacity in the way that an ordained ministry does.  (For instance, a lay chaplain can visit and pray with the sick, but cannot bring communion to them.)  In addition, the authority, recognition, support, and protection of the Church given to the lay minister can vary greatly.  Furthermore, the accountability of the lay minister to the Church can vary as well.  (This can even be dangerous to those who are being served in areas where accountability and proper training are particularly important (e.g. pastoral care and spiritual direction.))  Moreover, lay ministry is typically more local in scope and usually dependent on the local priest for its exercise.  If the local situation were to change (e.g. a parish gets a new priest who may have a different idea of what a lay minister, in particular a woman, can or should be doing in the church), the ministerial possibilities for her can change abruptly without recourse.

Q. The church has been just fine over the past 1,000 years, so why is there a need to restore the female deacon?
A. Many would argue that things are NOT fine in the church. Without females holding an official role in the church as in the early church, 50% of the church is not adequately ministered to. Women possess unique gifts that can strengthen the church and its people. Although our contemporary culture does not segregate men and women as they did in the early church, it is still unhealthy and unrealistic for only males to attempt to successfully minister to females.

Q. In what ways could the female diaconate benefit the Church today?
A. The female diaconate could benefit the Church by strengthening the pastoral care of the faithful and connecting them to the sacramental life of the Church; recapturing the philanthropic dimension of the Liturgy; focusing on the Word of God; and connecting the pastoral, social, and liturgical dimensions of the diaconate more fully. These aspects are more fully described in a presentation by Teva Regule PhD (candidate).

Q. Is there biblical evidence of the female deacon?
A. In addition to recording the Gospel of Jesus Christ, the texts of the New Testament include information on the early formation and organization of the Church.  Here, we see the beginnings of what we now recognize as the three-fold pattern of ordained ministry—bishop, presbyter, and deacon, albeit in their embryonic stages. The Church would later develop these ministries to continue its mission.

For the diaconate, the classic text for the establishment of the (male) diaconate is found in Acts 6: 1–6.  It is here that Stephen is selected as the first deacon.  The female deacon is first mentioned in Romans 16:1 where Paul refers to Phoebe as a “deacon of the church” (diakonon ths ekklhsias.)  Although some have suggested that “deacon” in this context merely means a “helper” or “servant,” the Church has recognized Phoebe as the prototype of the female deacon just as Stephen is recognized as such for the male deacon.  Each is mentioned in their respective ordination prayers in the Byzantine Rite.  For instance, in the second prayer of ordination of the female deacon in the Byzantine Rite, Phoebe is the biblical model referenced:
Master and Lord, You do not reject women who offer themselves, and by divine counsel, to minister as is fitting to your holy houses, but you accept them in the order of ministers.  Give the grace of your Holy Spirit to this servant of Yours also, who wishes to offer herself to you, and to accomplish the grace of the diaconate, as You gave the grace of Your diaconate to Phoebe, whom you called to the work of the ministry…. (www.anastasis.org.uk/woman_deacon.htm.   Original in the Barberini  Codex gr. 336.  Translated by Archimandrite Ephrem.)

Later in the biblical text, Paul (or his school) outlines some of the moral or ethical qualifications for those who hold church office.  In 1Timothy 3:1–13, he describes these for the offices of bishop (episcopos) and deacon.  Although the inclusion of the female deacon in this passage is not definitive—the corresponding text to the qualifications of the male deacon (1 Tim. 3:11) merely says “women” (gunaikas) and some suggest that this refers to the wives of deacons—a strong case can be made that the text is referring to women deacons.

1)    First, the parallelism of the text (comparing the characteristics of the bishop and deacons) suggests strongly that it is describing the moral characteristics of women deacons.  In both cases, the text first refers to the qualifications of the office holder and then continues to refer to the arrangements of their respective households.  Although the text assumes the bishop is male and married with a family, it does not mention any moral prescriptions for his wife.  However, in the case of the deacons, the moral qualifications of the “women” are mentioned prior to noting the domestic arrangements and responsibilities of the deacons. This would imply strongly that the “women” (in this case) refers to the women deacons and not the wives of the deacons.

2)    Second, later church manuals (e.g. Didascalia Apostolorum, Apostolic Constitutions) describe the moral character of the male and female diaconate similarly.  In these texts, the existence of the female diaconate is more explicit.

3)    Third, we know that a number of early church fathers recognized women as co-ministers (sundiakonous) with men (e.g. Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Theodoret, and John Chrysostom).  In this case, in his commentary on 1Timothy, Chrysostom argues that Paul is not referring to women in general in this passage, but those women who have the “dignity” or “authority” (axiwma) of the diaconate.  (Homily 11 on 1 Timothy, PG 62, 553 CD)

The New Testament only shows the ordained offices of the church in their nascent form.  However, from the totality of the biblical record, we can see that women were recognized as co-ministers with men from earliest times and, in some cases, were set apart for diaconal ministry.

  1. Why are there no female deacons in the Orthodox Church today?
  2. First, it is important to realize that although the female diaconate has fallen into disuse, the order has never been abolished or disallowed by any Ecumenical Council or canon of the Eastern Church.  Theoretically, a bishop could ordain a woman to the diaconate today. (For instance, on Pentecost Sunday in 1911, Archbishop (now, Saint) Nektarios ordained a nun to the diaconate to serve the needs of her monastery.)  However, he is unlikely to do so without the approval of the Synod of bishops of the autocephalous church to which he belongs.

In general, the question must be answered within the context of the decline of the diaconate of the church more broadly.  From historical sources, we know that by the 7th century in the West, the male diaconate had become mostly a transitional office to the priesthood/presbytery and the ordained female diaconate, which had not been as widely accepted or exercised in the West, had virtually disappeared.  In both cases, the various (active) monastic orders seemed to have assumed many of the historical functions of these ministries. [1]

In the East, both the male and female diaconates were more developed ministries. For instance, the male deacon prepared the offering, assisted in the liturgical celebration, preached, provided pastoral care to the flock, acted as an emissary of the bishop in church and philanthropic matters, etc. The deaconess helped with the baptism of women, taught and provided pastoral care for many of the newly illumined in her care, acted as an agent of the bishop in church matters and philanthropic activity, supervised in the liturgy, etc. However, with the fall of Byzantium the scope and function of the diaconate diminished greatly.  Today, the male deacon generally functions almost exclusively in the liturgical realm and, oftentimes, the diaconate has become merely a transitional stage to the ordination to the priesthood/presbytery. The female diaconate has virtually disappeared.  There does not seem to be any one factor that led to the diminishment of the diaconate for men and the disappearance of the order for women. Most seem to revolve around social-political realities.

In the early church, the two main ministerial orders were the episcopacy and the diaconate.  As the Christianity grew and spread, the presbyter, a delegate of the bishop to the local community, assumed more responsibility for its ministerial and pastoral needs.  Later, with the attacks against and eventual collapse of many of the centers of Christianity (e.g. by the Islamic Ottomans), the social and philanthropic outreach of the church—an important diaconal function—as well as its public presence, were more limited.*  In addition, or as a result of the declining diaconate, some of the male diaconal duties were assumed by the priest/presbyter (e.g. preparation of the bread and wine for the offering, intoning some petitions, etc. in the liturgical celebration and pastoral care duties outside of the gathering) and/or the sub-deacon (assisting the priest in the liturgical celebration, intoning the petitions of the antiphons, etc.), hollowing out the ministry, but placing additional burdens on the presbyter particularly.  The scope of the female diaconate had contracted over time as well. Once infant baptism became the norm, fewer deaconesses were needed to assist in the baptism of adult women. Eventually, the female deacon was limited to functioning mostly within women’s monasteries. Oftentimes, the abbess of the monastery was an ordained deaconess. While she continued to provide instruction and spiritual guidance to those under her care and serve in the liturgy, her ministry was exercised in a more limited context and out of public view.  The rise of a more Levitical understanding of “uncleanness” after iconoclasm seemed to contribute to the disappearance of the female diaconate altogether, since it would have prohibited her liturgical ministry at certain times of the month.  Moreover, the understanding of women as being “unclean” began to be applied to women more generally, limiting the liturgical activity of all women. (More information here.)

The 20th century saw a flourishing of liturgical scholarship and a serious look at the pastoral needs and institutions of the church, especially in the Christian West. (For the most part, western Christian scholars sought to reclaim the inheritance of the undivided Church, oftentimes by looking to its expression in the East.) Because of what has been called the Liturgical Movement, many of the Christian communities in the West reclaimed an understanding of the vital importance of the diaconate—a ministry of liturgy, word and charity. Today, the permanent diaconate for both men, and in some places women, is thriving in those communities, ministering more fully to the needs of their faithful and the world.

In the Christian East, calls for the reinstitution of the deaconess had begun in Russia in the 19th century. (See Calls for the Rejuvenation of the Deaconess in Modern Era.) In the early part of the 20th century, the Moscow Council (1917–18) discussed the issue (as well as a number of others aimed at ministering more fully to the faithful), but no action was taken at the time due to the Bolshevik Revolution. Soon, all the Orthodox churches in the “Eastern Bloc” would be subject to state suppression and any attempt at revitalizing church life at the institutional level (including a rejuvenated diaconate for both men and women) would be put on hold; they were concerned primarily with just surviving. These churches have only recently emerged from state control. Similarly, in the Greek-speaking world, the Church in the 20th century was only beginning to re-emerge after 500 hundred years of Ottoman rule. It has only been within the last hundred years that it has begun to re-engage with society and look at its pastoral needs, internal structures, and external mission. Notably, in 2004 the Church of Greece took steps to reinstitute the female diaconate to serve the needs of remote monasteries. (More information here.) Other ecclesial practices that have a much longer history than the disappearance of the female diaconate are beginning to be re-examined and reclaimed by the Orthodox Church as well. For example, frequent communion of the laity (which had fallen into disuse, by some accounts, as early as the 4/5th c) is now encouraged, the reading aloud of the prayers of the liturgy by the celebrant, especially the Anaphora, (a practice that had died out, in some places, as early as the 6th c.) is found in more places, etc. These renewed practices have contributed to the spiritual growth and enrichment of the faithful. Let us hope that the Church will reexamine and see the efficacy of a renewed and rejuvenated diaconate for both men and women similarly to meet the ministerial needs of Her faithful and the world for today.

*Because Christianity was brought to the Slavs during a certain epoch of its existence (i.e. after much of the social and philanthropic emphases of the diaconate had disappeared), the diaconate in the Slavic tradition has usually been more limited in scope and more particularly focused on its liturgical expression.

[1] We have evidence (e.g. papal letters) that, in some cases, abbesses of monasteries were still being ordained to the diaconate until around the 12th century. This was separate from their consecrations as abbesses.

Download FAQs PDF

St. Phoebe Center for the Deaconess

Enthusiastic First Meeting of St. Phoebe Center Southern Chapter

/in , , , , , , /by
Speakers at St. Phoebe Conference Recap Event (L to R): Dionne Manos, Marilyn Rouvelas, Matushka Alexandra Safchuk, and Christina Jatras.

Speakers at St. Phoebe Conference Recap Event (L to R): Dionne Manos, Marilyn Rouvelas, Matushka Alexandra Safchuk, and Christina Jatras.

The Southern Regional Chapter of St. Phoebe Center hosted a program, “Restoring the Holy Orthodox Tradition of Deaconess” at St. Katherine Greek Orthodox Church, in Falls Church, VA, on May 28, 2015.

Over forty people from Romanian, Greek, OCA, Antiochian, and Russian parishes in the Washington area and Richmond, VA, attended. Participants shared their enthusiasm, concerns and questions in a lively discussion after the presentations.

The conversation and planning next steps will continue on Thursday, July 16, 2015.

Two recaps of recent women deacons conferences were presented: Matushka Alexandra Safchuk (St. Mark Orthodox Church, Bethesda, MD) read the summary prepared by Lena Zezulin (Russian Orthodox Cathedral of St. John, Washington) of the St. Phoebe Center Conference, December 6, 2014, in New York City. Marilyn Rouvelas (St. Katherine Greek Orthodox Church, Falls Church, VA) recapped the conference held by the Center of Ecumenical, Missiological and Environmental Studies in January, 2015 at Thessalonki, Greece.

Christina Jatras and Dionne Manos (Protection of the Holy Mother of God Orthodox Church, Falls Church, VA) who had attended the St. Phoebe New York conference, joined Matushka Alexandra and Marilyn for a panel discussion with the audience. The discussion included concerns about what women deacons could do today to serve and meet the needs of the Church, why the Church stopped ordaining them, what liturgical role women had in the early Church, and whether ordination to the diaconate might lead to ordination to the priesthood. The panelists explained that the ordination of women deacons is not a pathway to priesthood, but a restoration of a historic ministry. It was pointed out that the definitive Inter-orthodox Consultation on “The Place of Women in the Orthodox Church” at Rhodes, Greece, in 1988, concluded that women could not be ordained priests, but could be ordained deacons.

Attendees wanted to know the process for getting women ordained, and it was pointed out that ordination is by a bishop who would need to have the approval of his synod before doing so. One of the benefits of ordination is that a deacon is accountable to the bishop. The discussion showed that this ministry is entering new territory and will entail extensive dialogue among the bishops, priests, deacons, diaconate program directors and laity to determine how these women could serve the church today, the required qualifications, and how they would be educated and trained. The document, Dialogue, not Demands: Engagement Suggestions from St. Phoebe Center was used as a basis for discussion about next steps.

Exploration, discussion and planning will continue at the next meeting on July 16, 2015, in Arlington, VA. For more information on this meeting email mrouvelas at verizon dot net.