NEWS: "Orthodox Hierarch Urges Women's Ordination Dialogue"

[ikonographics]

Unfortunately I have a great deal of personal experience with Archbishop Seraphim, of which I won't go into detail. But more worrying than this latest news is that fact that he is an ardent supporter of Vassula Ryden (see here) who has been declared a heretic by the Church of Greece and has even had her go to South Africa to help with his "mission work". It puts the latest news in a bit of perspective.

 

[Gwendolyn]

What is an ecclesiastical school?

Is that a school where students are taught theology?

 

[Dorothea]

Hold the phone! Nowhere does it say that women should be ordained to the priesthood. It says they should be altar servers, readers, chanters, and the order of the Deaconess should be restored.

All of this is canonical and has happened in the past. In fact, women have read the Epistle in the parish I grew up in, and the Presbytera at the Cathedral in Atlanta I attended is going to be tonsored a chanter and currently chants every Sunday with the other chanters. As far as women "preaching," while you won't see a woman at the pulpit, there are plenty of women speakers in the Church, Khouria Frederica Mathewes-Greene immediately coming to mind as one of them.

There is nothing "new" being said here. So before you start getting excited, read the canons, read the statement.

I really wish people would stop pretending that women are "opressed" in the Church and that they need "liberating" because they really don't.

For crying out loud, the Theotokos is hailed as "more honorable than the cherubim and more glorious beyond compare than the seraphim." What male saint out there has such a declaration sung about him?

Just because women can not be priests does not mean they are being opressed. It means they have a different role than men.

 

[MamaBug]

I'm not quite sure what the issue is over not allowing girls at ecclesiastical schools. Are they essentially 'seminary-prep' or are they Orthodox-run educational institutes like the Catholic schools here? IOW - is it seen as a 'future priest only' type of thing or is it open to all boys regardless of possible vocation? I am very confused over how excluding girls from an ecclesiastical school seems to be tied to the pro-feminist/ordination of women theme of the article so I think I'm missing something about the nature of these schools.

 

[E.C.]

Hold the phone! Nowhere does it say that women should be ordained to the priesthood. It says they should be altar servers, readers, chanters, and the order of the Deaconess should be restored.

All of this is canonical and has happened in the past. In fact, women have read the Epistle in the parish I grew up in, and the Presbytera at the Cathedral in Atlanta I attended is going to be tonsored a chanter and currently chants every Sunday with the other chanters. As far as women "preaching," while you won't see a woman at the pulpit, there are plenty of women speakers in the Church, Khouria Frederica Mathewes-Greene immediately coming to mind as one of them.

There is nothing "new" being said here. So before you start getting excited, read the canons, read the statement.

I really wish people would stop pretending that women are "opressed" in the Church and that they need "liberating" because they really don't.

For crying out loud, the Theotokos is hailed as "more honorable than the cherubim and more glorious beyond compare than the seraphim." What male saint out there has such a declaration sung about him?

Just because women can not be priests does not mean they are being opressed. It means they have a different role than men.

Quoted for Truth.


About a month ago the small town of Wilkeson had its centennial celebration, which meant that my dad and I gave tours of Holy Trinity which was consecrated by St. Tikhon in 1902. The church itself is used mostly for weddings, funerals and major feast days now.

During the day about one in twenty people in the tour would ask something to the effect of "can women in the Orthodox Church be ordained?" After the "no", about 9/10 questions would be "well, what DO women do in the Church then? They can't be priests so they MUST be oppressed!" (after the seventh time that happened it got old).
What my dad, a tonsured reader, did was quite ingenious. He explained that although women are not ordained priests, they have a greater amount of influence in Church life than men. He brought up the notorius babushki (we love them anyway!) and the women in "My Big Fat Greek Wedding". About 99% of the time the person claiming that women are oppressed realized that "not in a clergy position" does not equate to "being oppressed".


I'm obviously not a woman, so I can not make any judgment about oppression and whether it is 'real' or not. But from what I see, a big deal is being made about an issue that does not exist. As for reading the Epistles, I've seen it done. Who reads the Epistles is done on a rotational basis at my parish and there is one lady who reads once every five weeks or so. I remember the first time she did a few of the babushki asked Fr J. if that is really allowed or if the parish had turned to heresy. He assured them that reading the Epistles is allowed within the canons.

Just because women can not be priests does not mean they are being opressed. It means they have a different role than men.

Spot on.

 

[Monica child of God 1]

Maybe if the schools are meant for preparing priests there could be separate schools for women to prepare them for the roles open to them?

M.

 

[rusmeister]

I recommend the OP be retitiled to "Much Ado About Nothing".

 

[Gwenyfur]

Hold the phone! Nowhere does it say that women should be ordained to the priesthood. It says they should be altar servers, readers, chanters, and the order of the Deaconess should be restored.

All of this is canonical and has happened in the past. In fact, women have read the Epistle in the parish I grew up in, and the Presbytera at the Cathedral in Atlanta I attended is going to be tonsored a chanter and currently chants every Sunday with the other chanters. As far as women "preaching," while you won't see a woman at the pulpit, there are plenty of women speakers in the Church, Khouria Frederica Mathewes-Greene immediately coming to mind as one of them.

There is nothing "new" being said here. So before you start getting excited, read the canons, read the statement.

I really wish people would stop pretending that women are "opressed" in the Church and that they need "liberating" because they really don't.

For crying out loud, the Theotokos is hailed as "more honorable than the cherubim and more glorious beyond compare than the seraphim." What male saint out there has such a declaration sung about him?

Just because women can not be priests does not mean they are being opressed. It means they have a different role than men.

Exactly that!!!!

 

[Spiritus7]

From the introduction to Kindling the Divine Spark, written by Abbot Herman:

That sounds great, I will have to check this out

 

[flaglady]

MOD HAT ON

SOME POSTS HAVE BEEN SPLIT OFF
FROM THIS THREAD BECAUSE THEY WERE
OFF TOPIC TO THE OP
THEY ARE NOW TO BE FOUND IN
Education and home schooling


MOD HAT OFF
​

 

[Silentchapel]

In Russia, it were essentially the women who kept faith. Not that there were no devoted men - but not being in position of 'authority' like men, they kept the faith alive precisely because they weren't ordained. They could go around unnoticed and baptize people.

 

[Joshua G.]

What I don't get is why many here are acting as if there is even of scandal to the ariticle in the OP. I am not for the ordination of women into the priesthood, but as Handmaiden and others have said, that's not what this is about. Honestly, I think a lot of good can come of this. And restoring the ordination or women into the deaconate (as this role was understood in the early Church) is good if indeed the need is once again arising as the Alexandrian bishop seems to feel.

I know that a lot of us see underpinnings to this move, a deeper agenda of wanting to open the door for women in the priesthood one day and they are probably right about some of the people behind it. However, that doesn't mean we should ever discourage serious conversation about women (re) entering other areas of liturgical life. I said conversation, I am not saying what the Council should decide on these matters, though.

Actually, I think discussion about women in the priesthood should be more open as well to create an environment of understanding. While I do not agree with such a position, I do think the other side has very valid points from a sociological and psychological point of view. People often (incorrectly) accuse Bishop Kallistos of wanting women in the priesthood, but all he is saying is that an open dialog should be encouraged and participated by the Church to create understanding.

We are often quick to demonize those who push for women in the priesthood, but if all we do is accuse them of being unfaithful to the church or modernist or prideful or whatever and never truly hear them out and recognize the good points they do have, then we succeed in only one thing: driving them out. On the other hand, if we are respectful and truly hear what they have to say and take their thoughts seriously as rational human beings and explicitly acknowledge that we do not think they are sinful beasts for bring this issue up, some of them may do the same for us and realize that we're not a bunch of mysogynists (spelling?). Sure, some of them will still leave, start their own Church or go about this in a defiant and disrespectful way... but we can rest assured that we played not part in their temper tantrum because we didn't throw one either.

I am certainly not talking about anyone in particular... but I realize that this subject, like homosexuality and abortion as well are very hot-button issues and bring up a lot of emotion on both sides and both sides have reason to be emotional over these issues. However, if we can take a moment, take some deep breaths and approach the subject (and the other side) rationally and respectfully, more can be accomplished.

I say this in large part for myself (especially in the abortion topic) but I would think that many of us could benefit from taking this approach in other aspects of Church life, (e.g. this thread) as many have chosen to do and are great examples of it.

Joshua

 

[buzuxi02]

The article just says that the church should formulate the reasons for why female ordination should be prohibited. The national herald making more out of it than it should