OrthodoxChristianity.net
July 28, 2014, 04:49:16 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 »   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Ordination of Women in the Orthodox Church  (Read 175834 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Bizzlebin
Theologian
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodoxy
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 714

MonkBot, Go Forth!


WWW
« Reply #405 on: May 06, 2006, 06:36:52 PM »

Neither was the depiction of Icons until the Seventh Oecumenical Council- was that evidence which should have led to a triumph of Iconoclasm?

Jesus Himself is an Icon. Even in the OT, God commanded the Israelities to make images of angels. What other evidence do you need?
Logged

Fashions and opinions among men may change, but the Orthodox tradition remains ever the same, no matter how few may follow it.

-- Fr. Seraphim Rose
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #406 on: May 06, 2006, 06:55:42 PM »

What other evidence do you need?
An Oecumenical Council to clarify that this is indeed the Church's teaching and does not contradict the Second Commandment of the Decalogue. Fortunately, there was one. You may have not needed one, but apparently the Church felt she needed one.
Jesus Himself is an Icon.
Yes, He said that He was the image of the Father, but where in the "Gospels or related documents" did He add: "Therefore make images of Me and venerate them"? What Icons did Our Lord instruct His disciples paint and venerate?
Even in the OT, God commanded the Israelities to make images of angels.
And to venerate them? I think you are being a bit anachronistic here and contradicting the teachings of the Seventh Oecumenical Council. The Council decreed that since Christ had been Incarnated and had Sanctified and Redeemed created matter, it was therefore possible to depict Him and the Saints in Icons and venerate them. This was not possible before the Incarnation.
The Iconoclasts were not so much opposed to the making of Images, but to their veneration. Hence the Imperial order to place them high and out of reach in Churches.

« Last Edit: May 06, 2006, 06:59:52 PM by ozgeorge » Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
Bizzlebin
Theologian
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodoxy
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 714

MonkBot, Go Forth!


WWW
« Reply #407 on: May 06, 2006, 07:06:21 PM »

An Oecumenical Council to clarify that this is indeed the Church's teaching and does not contradict the Second Commandment of the Decalogue. Fortunately, there was one. You may have not needed one, but apparently the Church felt she needed one.

Yes, He said that He was the image of the Father, but where in the "Gospels or related documents" did He add: "Therefore make images of Me and venerate them"? What Icons did Our Lord instruct His disciples paint and venerate?

And to venerate them? I think you are being a bit anachronistic here and contradicting the teachings of the Seventh Oecumenical Council. The Council decreed that since Christ had been Incarnated and had Sanctified and Redeemed created matter, it was therefore possible to depict Him and the Saints in Icons and venerate them. This was not possible before the Incarnation.

If the Ecumenical Council is the highest authority, then who established the Ecumenical Council, or set them up as that authority? Whoever/whatever is behind that is the real authority.

Jesus was venerated Himself. Also, seeing that we are commanded to honor our elders, and that anyone who follows God is a mother or brother or sister, etc, then what is the logical conclusion if not "honor the saints?" And what is veneration if not that?

I don't think I mentioned the veneration of icons before the Incarnation before, but no, it doesn't contradict the Seventh Ecumenical Council. Honor was to be given, even under the Old Covenant. Surely those commands from God were not sinful.
Logged

Fashions and opinions among men may change, but the Orthodox tradition remains ever the same, no matter how few may follow it.

-- Fr. Seraphim Rose
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #408 on: May 06, 2006, 07:41:10 PM »

If the Ecumenical Council is the highest authority, then who established the Ecumenical Council, or set them up as that authority? Whoever/whatever is behind that is the real authority.
True, but that's not the point. An Oecumenical Council's role is to define what is and isn't dogma. Until an Oecumenical Council decrees one way or another, we may be able to have an opinion of what we think is a dogma, and even back it up with what we understand of Holy Tradition, but we cannot absolutely state that our opinion is the opinion of the Church on the matter. Even the Iconoclasts claimed they could back up their teaching with what they believed was Holy Tradition (eg, the Second Commandment of the Decalogue, the writings of St. Eusebius of Caesarea and Epiphanius of Cyprus).
The Church, and the Church alone, discerns what is and isn't the Teaching of Christ and the Apostles.
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
Bizzlebin
Theologian
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodoxy
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 714

MonkBot, Go Forth!


WWW
« Reply #409 on: May 06, 2006, 07:44:11 PM »

True, but that's not the point. An Oecumenical Council's role is to define what is and isn't dogma. Until an Oecumenical Council decrees one way or another, we may be able to have an opinion of what we think is a dogma, and even back it up with what we understand of Holy Tradition, but we cannot absolutely state that our opinion is the opinion of the Church on the matter. Even the Iconoclasts claimed they could back up their teaching with what they believed was Holy Tradition (eg, the Second Commandment of the Decalogue, the writings of St. Eusebius of Caesarea and Epiphanius of Cyprus).

The Church, and the Church alone, discerns what is and isn't the Teaching of Christ and the Apostles.

Again, what set the Ecumenical Council so high? That is the real authority. It is indeed the Church, because the Church gives authority to Councils, not vice versa. Because of this, we already have a definitive answer, one that has not changed in the history of the Church. Let us accept that, and not reject the very Body of Christ.
Logged

Fashions and opinions among men may change, but the Orthodox tradition remains ever the same, no matter how few may follow it.

-- Fr. Seraphim Rose
montalban
Now in colour
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek
Posts: 1,813



« Reply #410 on: May 06, 2006, 08:00:54 PM »

Jesus Himself is an Icon. Even in the OT, God commanded the Israelities to make images of angels. What other evidence do you need?
The seraphim were depicted on the ark of the covenant
Logged

Fàilte dhut a Mhoire,
tha thu lan de na gràsan;
Tha an Tighearna maille riut.
montalban
Now in colour
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek
Posts: 1,813



« Reply #411 on: May 06, 2006, 08:10:50 PM »

If you follow the discussion between Bizzelbin and myself, you will note that the sequence of thought is as follows:
1) I agreed with Bizzelbin's position that the Church has never changed it's stance on the ordination of women to the priesthood, but said that this does not constitute evidence that a male only priesthood is a dogma. I said "No evidence of women's ordination is not evidence against women's ordination."
I've already noted that you seem to believe that raising this 'question' seems to be a cause for you, to strengthen the church. Perhaps you feel it's something the church should make a formal statement on in order to clarify it's position. You're raising an issue that is only an 'issue' because you're raising it.
2) Bizzelbin said that there are no records in the Gospels or related documents of women's ordination to the priesthood.
There doesn't need to be. The very fact that all the evidence is that men were ordained as priests is enough. There's no prohibitions (as far as I'm aware) against children being priests, either. We don't need to have an exacting list of those who are prohibited. Perhaps I've mistaken your argument, because it now seems your championing a legalistic mode for the Orthodox church.
3) I replied that there is no evidence in the Gospels or related documents in favour of depicting Icons.
There doesn't need to be. Jesus Himself is the icon depicted. The whole Bible is to put the 'essentially unknowable God' into an expressible form, a word-picture if you will. The very fact God depicted Himself is enough.
So the "point" is that the dogmas about Icons were clarified despite the silence in "the Gospels and related documents" about the use of Holy Images; so therefore, a silence in "the Gospels and related documents" about the ordination of women to the priesthood cannot be construed as being clear evidence against it.
We are not a sola-scriptura church. Not everything was written down.
John 21:25 Jesus did many other things as well. If every one of them were written down, I suppose that even the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written.

The evidence rests in a) Jesus only picked men for the priesthood. b) the church has only picked men for the priesthood. That is enough for most.

Logged

Fàilte dhut a Mhoire,
tha thu lan de na gràsan;
Tha an Tighearna maille riut.
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #412 on: May 06, 2006, 08:16:01 PM »

Jesus Himself is the icon depicted.
An Icon of Who?
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #413 on: May 06, 2006, 08:30:20 PM »

The evidence rests in a) Jesus only picked men for the priesthood. b) the church has only picked men for the priesthood. That is enough for most.
And the fact that the people Christ first chose to preach the Resurrection were the myrrhbearing women......oh wait....
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
Bizzlebin
Theologian
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodoxy
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 714

MonkBot, Go Forth!


WWW
« Reply #414 on: May 06, 2006, 08:31:44 PM »

And the fact that the people Christ first chose to preach the Resurrection were the myrrhbearing women......oh wait....

And yet even they were not ordained priests. Interesting...
Logged

Fashions and opinions among men may change, but the Orthodox tradition remains ever the same, no matter how few may follow it.

-- Fr. Seraphim Rose
Sarah
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 111


« Reply #415 on: May 06, 2006, 08:33:13 PM »

Montalban

Speaking of which, have you dug up any actual quotes from Church Fathers that articulate this? I mean, if it's such an obvious and necessary distinction, then surely someone in Church history must have mentioned it! Someone? Anyone? Grin

In Vol. 2 of What the Church Fathers Say About . . ., in the "Bishops, Priests, Deacons" chapter, there are 5 quotes:

"A woman does not become a priest (or priestess)."  Canon Law of St. Photius (9th century)

"The Church has never appointed women presbyters or priests."  "Panarion" by St. Epiphanius (4th century)

"The appointment of women priests to stand before goddesses is a delusion of Hellenic godlessness, and not a decree of Christ."  Apostolic Constitutions (c. 375 A.D.)

"It is not permitted for a woman to speak in the Church.  Neither may she teach, baptize, offer the Eucharistic Sacrifice, nor claim for herself any function proper to a man, least of all the sacerdotal (priestly) office."  Tertullian

"Deaconesses are forbidden to cense before the All-Pure Mysteries, or to take in their hands the sacramental fans, which is strictly the deacon's function."  "Alphabetical Syntagma" (14th century)

Logged
Bizzlebin
Theologian
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodoxy
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 714

MonkBot, Go Forth!


WWW
« Reply #416 on: May 06, 2006, 08:37:55 PM »

"A woman does not become a priest (or priestess)."  Canon Law of St. Photius (9th century)

Thanks for that wonderful post! I am definately getting that book.

But about the quote I quoted above, do you know if that is one of the canons from the Eighth Ecumenical Council? That would settle it once and for all, if so.
« Last Edit: May 06, 2006, 08:38:26 PM by Bizzlebin » Logged

Fashions and opinions among men may change, but the Orthodox tradition remains ever the same, no matter how few may follow it.

-- Fr. Seraphim Rose
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #417 on: May 06, 2006, 08:40:07 PM »

And yet even they were not ordained priests. Interesting...
And yet Our Lord commissioned them to teach and evangelise men...Strange, since St. Paul, (I'm told), "clearly" forbids this.....even more interesting... Wink
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
Bizzlebin
Theologian
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodoxy
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 714

MonkBot, Go Forth!


WWW
« Reply #418 on: May 06, 2006, 08:43:00 PM »

And yet Our Lord commissioned them to teach and evangelise men...Strange, since St. Paul, (I'm told), "clearly" forbids this.....even more interesting... Wink

It wasn't in Church, and it wasn't preaching, so no connection.
Logged

Fashions and opinions among men may change, but the Orthodox tradition remains ever the same, no matter how few may follow it.

-- Fr. Seraphim Rose
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 19,954


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #419 on: May 06, 2006, 08:43:24 PM »

No, the Lord didn't tell them to teach, just to announce that He is Risen; proclamation and instruction are different.  Yes, they were to tell the men that He rose, but they weren't part of His inner circle, they didn't receive the straight-talk that He gave the 12 ("ahh, now you speak plainly" and etc.), and according to the accounts of Pentecost they weren't part of the original group to receive the spirit.

Does this make them inferior?  Of course not.  But their mission was different without being lower.
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
Sarah
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 111


« Reply #420 on: May 06, 2006, 08:45:10 PM »

Bizzlebin, I don't know.  So sorry.  I quoted from the book exactly, and that's all that was printed.

ozgeorge, women can certainly talk to men, but the restriction on evangelizing/teaching/etc. is in the venue, i.e., not the temple.
Logged
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #421 on: May 06, 2006, 08:52:14 PM »

"A woman does not become a priest (or priestess)."  
We knew that. Ive said the same thing on this thread. Isn't that what the discussion is about?

"The Church has never appointed women presbyters or priests."
We knew that. Ive said the same thing on this thread. Isn't that what the discussion is about?

"The appointment of women priests to stand before goddesses is a delusion of Hellenic godlessness, and not a decree of Christ."  Apostolic Constitutions (c. 375 A.D.)
Unfortunately we don't worship godesses or godlessly, so this Canon doesn't clarify things much either.

"It is not permitted for a woman to speak in the Church.  Neither may she teach, baptize, offer the Eucharistic Sacrifice, nor claim for herself any function proper to a man, least of all the sacerdotal (priestly) office."  Tertullian
You're quoting someone whose teachings were denounced as heresy.

"Deaconesses are forbidden to cense before the All-Pure Mysteries, or to take in their hands the sacramental fans, which is strictly the deacon's function."  
The practices of Deaconesses changed. We've said this before on this thread- including me.
Nevertheless, at Vespers in Orthodox convents, when no Priest is present, who censes the Holy Table?
« Last Edit: May 06, 2006, 08:55:10 PM by ozgeorge » Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #422 on: May 06, 2006, 08:58:29 PM »

"The appointment of women priests to stand before goddesses is a delusion of Hellenic godlessness, and not a decree of Christ."  Apostolic Constitutions (c. 375 A.D.)
And doesn't this decree also seem to indicate what was suggested on this thread before that the exclusion of women from the Christian priesthood was a cultural reaction to pagan worship?
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
Sarah
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 111


« Reply #423 on: May 06, 2006, 08:58:42 PM »

Look, ozgeorge, Asteriktos was asking for quotes.  I simply gave them to him.  If you had read my post, as you have accused others of not doing to yours, you would have realized that.
Logged
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #424 on: May 06, 2006, 09:03:06 PM »

Look, ozgeorge, Asteriktos was asking for quotes.  I simply gave them to him.  If you had read my post, as you have accused others of not doing to yours, you would have realized that.
I do realise that. I'm sorry, I wasn't attacking you- I should have removed your name from the quote fuction.
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
Sarah
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 111


« Reply #425 on: May 06, 2006, 09:36:04 PM »

Thanks for clarifying that.
Logged
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Faith: refuse
Posts: 29,313


« Reply #426 on: May 06, 2006, 09:45:36 PM »

Sarah,

Quote
Look, ozgeorge, Asteriktos was asking for quotes.  I simply gave them to him.  If you had read my post, as you have accused others of not doing to yours, you would have realized that.

Actually.... what I was asking Montalban to provide evidence for was the idea that a distinction can be made between "Tradition" and "traditions". I don't deny the need for the type of clarification that such a distinction provides, I am merely asking an Orthodox Christian what patristic support he has for his position. That seems like the standard he would hold others to. I'm just being fair and balanced. Smiley If it is such an obvious and important position, I would think that he would be able to come up with a quote like:

"And now you all know, of course, that a tradition like apostolic succession is different from a tradition like sitting while the Psalms are read at the service..." - Some Father, Some Work, 5, 43, 21
Logged
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Faith: refuse
Posts: 29,313


« Reply #427 on: May 06, 2006, 09:51:29 PM »

Quote
But about the quote I quoted above, do you know if that is one of the canons from the Eighth Ecumenical Council? That would settle it once and for all, if so.

How so? Canons from Ecumenical Councils have been discarded and ignored for 1,681 years (give or take a few months), why would a canon from a Council that the overwhelming majority of Orthodox don't consider Ecumenical "settle it once and for all"? Did Nicea settle once and for all the common practice of a bishop committing spiritual and pastoral adultery--ie. moving from city to city? No, the canon was disregarded almost as soon as the ink was dried.
Logged
Bizzlebin
Theologian
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodoxy
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 714

MonkBot, Go Forth!


WWW
« Reply #428 on: May 06, 2006, 09:55:13 PM »

How so? Canons from Ecumenical Councils have been discarded and ignored for 1,681 years (give or take a few months), why would a canon from a Council that the overwhelming majority of Orthodox don't consider Ecumenical "settle it once and for all"? Did Nicea settle once and for all the common practice of a bishop committing spiritual and pastoral adultery--ie. moving from city to city? No, the canon was disregarded almost as soon as the ink was dried.

By some, not by all. Remember that every parish and church doesn't treat the canons like dirt. I tend to think those kind of things are the exception, too; all the Orthodox I know outside of OC.net are very interested in the canons and keeping them.
Logged

Fashions and opinions among men may change, but the Orthodox tradition remains ever the same, no matter how few may follow it.

-- Fr. Seraphim Rose
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 19,954


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #429 on: May 06, 2006, 10:07:09 PM »

How so? Canons from Ecumenical Councils have been discarded and ignored for 1,681 years (give or take a few months), why would a canon from a Council that the overwhelming majority of Orthodox don't consider Ecumenical "settle it once and for all"? Did Nicea settle once and for all the common practice of a bishop committing spiritual and pastoral adultery--ie. moving from city to city? No, the canon was disregarded almost as soon as the ink was dried.

Actually, the Photian Synod is considered to have the weight of ecumenicity by most of hte Orthodox, but we don't call it "Ecumenical" because of our dialogues with the Catholics.  BUt if you see, the canons hold force within the church as if it were, and the decrees as well.
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #430 on: May 06, 2006, 10:11:32 PM »

Again, what set the Ecumenical Council so high? That is the real authority. It is indeed the Church, because the Church gives authority to Councils, not vice versa.

That's not how I read Church History...the Oecumenical Synods' authority is derived from the Imperial Authority.

But about the quote I quoted above, do you know if that is one of the canons from the Eighth Ecumenical Council? That would settle it once and for all, if so.

OK, First of all there are only Seven (7) Oecumenical Synods, none of the subsequent Imperial Synods have been received by the Church as Oecumenical, though the Frist-Second Synod under Photios is certainly held above most other non-Oecumenical Imperial Synods. Secondly, no, the canon was not promulgated by the First-Second Synod.

Furthermore, before summoning Photios to your defence perhaps a more precise reference could be given than 'Canon Law of St. Photius (9th century)'...I mean if you're referencing a quote in defence of your posistion surely you have access to the primary source so that you are aware of the context, right?...right?

Unfortunately, I lack the context (and am unwilling to do someone else's research for them) so an informed comment is impossible; however, a quick look at the translation seems to imply that the term 'does not,' rather than 'cannot,' is used; implying two things, the canon is part of a greater context and that it's not a prohibition against the ordination of women.

By some, not by all. Remember that every parish and church doesn't treat the canons like dirt. I tend to think those kind of things are the exception, too; all the Orthodox I know outside of OC.net are very interested in the canons and keeping them.

As tempted as I am to go into the proper interpretations and applications of canon law, being not absolute commandments but 'temporal manifestations of eternal truths;' unfortunately, I really don't have the time or energy right now...so I'll simply ask this, no inter-christian marriages at your parish? or anyone have a Jewish doctor? Roll Eyes
« Last Edit: May 06, 2006, 10:15:20 PM by greekischristian » Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Faith: refuse
Posts: 29,313


« Reply #431 on: May 06, 2006, 10:13:52 PM »

Bizzlebin

Gregory the Theologian didn't seem too concerned with keeping that particular canon, otherwise he'd never have gone to Constantinople... his opponents, the semi-Arians, were the ones who were trying to "keep the canons" in that case. And Orthodox bishops violate that canon all the time. Just read the biographies of the Patriarchs of Constantinople in the 20th century... one of them wwa in almost every single Orthodox Patriarchate as bishop!


Cleveland,

To be honest, I very much doubt that most Orthodox have even heard of the Photian synod(s), but I was trying to not seem condescending, which I'm not trying to be, but it's the truth, most haven't. And I would agree that they are binding in Orthodox theology, at least as far as any other pan-Orthodox council is binding (ie. take what you like and call it settled doctrine/dogma, ignore what you don't like). However, I don't see what the Catholic part of the equation has to do with it... are the Catholics going to reject their Photian Council, ie. the one that condemned Photius a few years prior to the Orthdoox Photian Council? The Catholics call their Photian Council Ecumenical, even if an attempt has been made in recent years to "rehabilitate" the reputation of Photius in the Catholic Church. But as I already mentioned, it doesn't really matter, since the canons that are liked are applied, and the canons that aren't are ignored. This is especially helpful when the canons contradict each other (e.g., affirming different Old Testament canons), ya know? Wink
« Last Edit: May 06, 2006, 10:16:42 PM by Asteriktos » Logged
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 19,954


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #432 on: May 06, 2006, 10:14:28 PM »

Wouldn't many canonists argue that the First-Second and a few others have Ecumenical weight within the Church?
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
Bizzlebin
Theologian
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodoxy
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 714

MonkBot, Go Forth!


WWW
« Reply #433 on: May 06, 2006, 10:19:02 PM »

That's not how I read Church History...the Oecumenical Synods' authority is derived from the Imperial Authority.

OK, First of all there are only Seven (7) Oecumenical Synods, none of the subsequent Imperial Synods have been received by the Church as Oecumenical, though the Frist-Second Synod under Photios is certainly held above most other non-Oecumenical Imperial Synods. Secondly, no, the canon was not promulgated by the First-Second Synod.

They called the Ecumenical Councils, yes, but they also called other councils which were not. So, it cannot be the deciding factor.

Actually there are 9 Ecumenical Councils, or so say the Patriarchates and their Synods.

Do you have a list of the canons from that Council we could all read?
Logged

Fashions and opinions among men may change, but the Orthodox tradition remains ever the same, no matter how few may follow it.

-- Fr. Seraphim Rose
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #434 on: May 06, 2006, 10:20:16 PM »

Wouldn't many canonists argue that the First-Second and a few others have Ecumenical weight within the Church?

Technically the synod would probably be placed just below the Oecumenical Synods, along with the other Imperial Synods, but the Imperial Synods do hold a universal authority of sorts and the First-Synod is the highest of these Synods.

Of course, this isn't relevant to the conversation since statement presented isn't even in a canon from that Synod.
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 19,954


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #435 on: May 06, 2006, 10:21:40 PM »

Oh... all I saw was a mention of it... but obviously, proof still needs to be provided.
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
Bizzlebin
Theologian
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodoxy
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 714

MonkBot, Go Forth!


WWW
« Reply #436 on: May 06, 2006, 10:22:16 PM »

Gregory the Theologian didn't seem too concerned with keeping that particular canon, otherwise he'd never have gone to Constantinople... his opponents, the semi-Arians, were the ones who were trying to "keep the canons" in that case. And Orthodox bishops violate that canon all the time. Just read the biographies of the Patriarchs of Constantinople in the 20th century... one of them wwa in almost every single Orthodox Patriarchate as bishop!

Even saints aren't perfect, but that doesn't make his actions any more right. At the same time, we must consider the spirit of the canon, too (not saying this is the case here, but in general). And I will have to refrain from comment on the canonicity of recent Patriarchs of Constantinople Tongue
Logged

Fashions and opinions among men may change, but the Orthodox tradition remains ever the same, no matter how few may follow it.

-- Fr. Seraphim Rose
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #437 on: May 06, 2006, 10:23:24 PM »

Do you have a list of the canons from that Council we could all read?

The canons of the synod are listed in the Pedalion as well as in the Syntagma.
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
Bizzlebin
Theologian
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodoxy
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 714

MonkBot, Go Forth!


WWW
« Reply #438 on: May 06, 2006, 10:24:04 PM »

The canons of the synod are listed in the Pedalion as well as in the Syntagma.

Is it available online?
Logged

Fashions and opinions among men may change, but the Orthodox tradition remains ever the same, no matter how few may follow it.

-- Fr. Seraphim Rose
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #439 on: May 06, 2006, 10:25:36 PM »

or anyone have a Jewish doctor? Roll Eyes
God forbid we are ill enough in the Eastern Suburbs of Sydney to need a doctor on Yom Kippur!
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #440 on: May 06, 2006, 10:27:07 PM »

Is it available online?

I came across a site that had the pedalion in english on it a while back, but can't recall what it is, perhaps someone else knows. I have it on my hard drive and am building a canon/roman law resource to perhaps post on the web some day, but I lack the time, energy, and motivation to do it in the near future.
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Moderator
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 10,305


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


WWW
« Reply #441 on: May 06, 2006, 10:41:21 PM »

Did Nicea settle once and for all the common practice of a bishop committing spiritual and pastoral adultery--ie. moving from city to city? No, the canon was disregarded almost as soon as the ink was dried.

Well, that canon at least preserves the idea that a Bishop/priest was married to his diocese/city.  To me, at least this proves...

I won't say it Wink or else I'll lose my "uncle-ness"...lol

God bless.

Mina

PS  Btw...i don't know whether sarcasm was involved or not, but you can read the canons at ccel.org
« Last Edit: May 06, 2006, 10:41:32 PM by minasoliman » Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for \\\"unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain.\\\" (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
pensateomnia
Bibliophylax
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox Christian
Posts: 2,346


metron ariston


« Reply #442 on: May 06, 2006, 11:33:20 PM »

In Vol. 2 of What the Church Fathers Say About . . ., in the "Bishops, Priests, Deacons" chapter, there are 5 quotes:

"A woman does not become a priest (or priestess)."  Canon Law of St. Photius (9th century)

Just FYI, everyone: Having read the actual canons from the so-called "First-Second" Synod several times in the past, I am fairly sure that this quote does not come from either the "First-Second" Synod or from any other. Rather, I believe it comes from St. Photios's commentary on canon law, which included Photios's own interpretations and synethesis, and is particularly important for its discussion of Church-State matters.
Logged

But for I am a man not textueel I wol noght telle of textes neuer a deel. (Chaucer, The Manciple's Tale, 1.131)
pensateomnia
Bibliophylax
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox Christian
Posts: 2,346


metron ariston


« Reply #443 on: May 06, 2006, 11:53:37 PM »

Is it available online?
You are willing to make public pronouncements about the history of canon law and its application in the Church and you don't even know how to find one of the most basic collections of Church canons? Have you even read the Pedalion (not to mention the Syntagma!)?

Really! The mind is boggled. What are we even doing here? What's the point, people? Less talking and more reading! This is like pontificating on what the "Fathers" have to say about this or that when one hasn't even SEEN a full set of Patrologia Graeca -- not to mention actual critical texts.

Less Internet and more Corpus Christianorum and Sources Chretiennes!

Edit: As a complement to hortatory exclamation, I should add incentive. Hence, everyone should know that Sources Chretiennes is currently having a HUGE sale. 50 percent off all 500 titles in the Sources Chretiennes series, which publishes foundationally important Patristic works in the original language, carefully put together from the best manuscripts with an apparatus criticus and a convenient French translation. Here's the Web site: http://www.sources-chretiennes.mom.fr/
« Last Edit: May 07, 2006, 12:10:25 AM by pensateomnia » Logged

But for I am a man not textueel I wol noght telle of textes neuer a deel. (Chaucer, The Manciple's Tale, 1.131)
montalban
Now in colour
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek
Posts: 1,813



« Reply #444 on: May 07, 2006, 12:02:32 AM »

An Icon of Who?

The human part of Him is God personified, described in a comprehendable form.
Logged

Fàilte dhut a Mhoire,
tha thu lan de na gràsan;
Tha an Tighearna maille riut.
montalban
Now in colour
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek
Posts: 1,813



« Reply #445 on: May 07, 2006, 12:03:31 AM »

And the fact that the people Christ first chose to preach the Resurrection were the myrrhbearing women......oh wait....
And have women ever acted as priests? I know you love to argue one thing by addressing another, but it doesn't work like that.
Logged

Fàilte dhut a Mhoire,
tha thu lan de na gràsan;
Tha an Tighearna maille riut.
montalban
Now in colour
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek
Posts: 1,813



« Reply #446 on: May 07, 2006, 12:05:37 AM »

And yet even they were not ordained priests. Interesting...
That is the point. Ozgeorge's argument seems to always be one of showing one thing to prove another.

We're dealing 'ordination of priests', so he argues about deacons.

We're dealing with roles as priests, so he deals with other roles.

I suspect this thread will go on forever until we give up, because he's not going to introduce an argument that deals with the point.
Logged

Fàilte dhut a Mhoire,
tha thu lan de na gràsan;
Tha an Tighearna maille riut.
montalban
Now in colour
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek
Posts: 1,813



« Reply #447 on: May 07, 2006, 12:07:16 AM »

In Vol. 2 of What the Church Fathers Say About . . ., in the "Bishops, Priests, Deacons" chapter, there are 5 quotes:

"A woman does not become a priest (or priestess)."  Canon Law of St. Photius (9th century)

"The Church has never appointed women presbyters or priests."  "Panarion" by St. Epiphanius (4th century)

"The appointment of women priests to stand before goddesses is a delusion of Hellenic godlessness, and not a decree of Christ."  Apostolic Constitutions (c. 375 A.D.)

"It is not permitted for a woman to speak in the Church.  Neither may she teach, baptize, offer the Eucharistic Sacrifice, nor claim for herself any function proper to a man, least of all the sacerdotal (priestly) office."  Tertullian

"Deaconesses are forbidden to cense before the All-Pure Mysteries, or to take in their hands the sacramental fans, which is strictly the deacon's function."  "Alphabetical Syntagma" (14th century)



Thank you for that informative post. I don't think though that evidence will be appreciated by those here who believe speculation and arguing past the point
Logged

Fàilte dhut a Mhoire,
tha thu lan de na gràsan;
Tha an Tighearna maille riut.
montalban
Now in colour
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek
Posts: 1,813



« Reply #448 on: May 07, 2006, 12:08:16 AM »

And yet Our Lord commissioned them to teach and evangelise men...Strange, since St. Paul, (I'm told), "clearly" forbids this.....even more interesting... Wink
Wow, I didn't spot that coming! Showing one thing to prove something else entirely different!
Logged

Fàilte dhut a Mhoire,
tha thu lan de na gràsan;
Tha an Tighearna maille riut.
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #449 on: May 07, 2006, 12:12:09 AM »

The human part of Him is God personified, described in a comprehendable form.
Huh This sounds rather Arian. Christ is God, not a "Personification" of God. Christ is One Person, not a "Personification" of another. At any rate, by "human part" I suppose you mean His "Human Nature"- which He shares with all humanity, in that He is "a man like us in all things". So if His Human Nature is the Image of God, then so must ours. And this resonates with what we know from Genesis in that God created us in His "Image and Likeness".
So everyone is an Icon of God.
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
Tags: ordination of women priestess Ordination priesthood priests deaconesses deacons cheval mort=dead horse laos laity 
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 »   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.141 seconds with 73 queries.