OrthodoxChristianity.net
October 23, 2014, 07:53:04 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 181519 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 12,126


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


WWW
« Reply #90 on: April 28, 2006, 09:55:24 AM »

There were plenty of such "civil" female priests. The Hellenistic Philosophers liked to described for polemical purposes pagan priesthood and cultic practice as little more than ignorant decadence and an excuse for prostitution (a refrain that the Church Fathers picked up, as they did a number of other arguments against paganism, e.g. Clement of Alexandria's arguments against pagan art and cultic practice, which come right out of fashionable Alexandrian non-Christian philosophy). However, most female priests -- and certainly most female participants in cultic practices and ceremonies -- were not involved in prostitution.

Point well taken, and might I say a strong case as well.

God bless.

Mina
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.
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 32,659


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #91 on: April 28, 2006, 01:09:28 PM »

The Theotokos can never be an example for women, or anyone. The Incarnation was a Singularity which will never be repeated in this age (or any other as far as we know). The only way women could "follow the example" of the Theotokos is if they could conceive and give birth while remaining virgins. The example we have to follow, whether male or female, is Christ- the same example the Theotokos followed, and we seek Her Intercession to aid us in following Her Son and God.

I think the above quote misses a few things about the example that the Theotokos is for us.
  • "Behold, I am the handmaid of the Lord; let it be to me according to your word."  This response of the Theotokos to the archangel Gabriel during the Annunciation is the example par excellence of the obedience that every one of us owes to God.
  • Whereas the Incarnation of the Word of God in human flesh within the womb of the Theotokos is indeed a singular event that will never be repeated, we are all called to allow Christ to make Himself present in our lives through partaking of the Holy Mysteries and through the indwelling of the Holy Spirit.
Logged
Ebor
Vanyar
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 6,423



« Reply #92 on: April 28, 2006, 02:17:02 PM »

That's actually a good point.  The fact that women priests existed in Gentile nations should have at least brought some ease for the Apostles to allow female priesthood when converting.  However, the outcry was that most of these woman priests were there for pagan sexual festivals, with the priestess being some sort of the prostitute at the time.  If one can find that there were "civil" woman priests in Gentile nations, then your point can be well taken.

It is not true that female cleric=prostitution.  The Vestal Virgins of Ancient Rome were not for example. The Oracle of Delphi was not. I am unaware of any Norse goddess worship involving such behaviour. In our own time, the "miko" or shrine maidens of Shinto are most certainly not. ÂÂ

It is interesting that for many people who disapprove of the idea, woman priest ---> immoral sexual behaviour.  On what exactly would this be based beyond a few bits of information that may or may not be historically accurate from such places as Sumer, I wonder.

Ebor
« Last Edit: April 28, 2006, 02:29:03 PM by Ebor » Logged

"I wish they would remember that the charge to Peter was "Feed my sheep", not "Try experiments on my rats", or even "Teach my performing dogs new tricks". - C. S. Lewis

The Katana of Reasoned Discussion

For some a world view is more like a neighborhood watch.
Ebor
Vanyar
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 6,423



« Reply #93 on: April 28, 2006, 02:27:01 PM »

Quote from: GreekisChristian
While I support the ordination of women, I do not like the idea of artificially forcing all titles and customs without allowing for reasonable change like the anglicans did. I would advocate the use of the term Priestess and calling her Mother...though this should have no impact on ranking within ecclesiastical orders.

By all means, let's follow what the Anglicans do!  What kind of slippery slope would we find ourselves on then?!?


Ummm, Not to get too deep in here, since it's not my Church, but if Sarah is saying that Anglicans use the word "priestess" *I've* never heard of it, at least by women clerics themselves.  I have read the term used scornfully to refer to them by opponents of women's ordination.  In that context the word "priestess" has overtones of lurid or paganistic rites, or other such associations as, for example, it is the word used by Wiccans fto describe women leaders in that group; it is meant as an put-down and a label that such women's ministry is not to be taken seriously.  Often the term is accompanied by uncharitable or insulting personal remarks about the women. ÂÂ

GiC, "priestess" at least in English might have some unfortunate shades of meaning.  In those Anglican Provinces that do have women clergy they are referred to as a "priest".


Ebor
« Last Edit: April 28, 2006, 02:31:26 PM by Ebor » Logged

"I wish they would remember that the charge to Peter was "Feed my sheep", not "Try experiments on my rats", or even "Teach my performing dogs new tricks". - C. S. Lewis

The Katana of Reasoned Discussion

For some a world view is more like a neighborhood watch.
Sarah
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 111


« Reply #94 on: April 28, 2006, 02:34:05 PM »

Ebor, you misunderstood what I was saying.  My focus was on the changes made in the Anglican Church not on the terminology used in the Anglican Church.
« Last Edit: April 28, 2006, 02:34:57 PM by Sarah » Logged
Amdetsion
Worship God with all thy strength and all thy might
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christianity
Jurisdiction: Ethiopian Patriarchate; Addis Abebe Ethiopia
Posts: 931


HH Abuna Pawlos - Patriarch of Ethiopia


« Reply #95 on: April 28, 2006, 04:41:30 PM »

The Anglican "church" and all the subsequent spin offs and off springs thereof was started by a seathing, despotic mad man. Created for his need to have sex with everbody he wanted.

Oh yeah!
I forgot one small fact................he was a mass murderer; which includes wholesale slaughter of Bishops and Priests of the Holy Church.

He died just the way a real Catholic Priest told him he would if he did not stop his adulterous lifestyle when he was dating (openly) his lover 'Berlyn' ( I can not remember her first name...she became his defacto second wife). He never asked for forgiveness nor did he make penance before the Holy Church which had many years before had formally excommunicated him at the approval of Pope Clement.

This bazaar socio-path upon finding out that he all but bankrupted the British Royal house had ALL the Church buildings burned to the ground including monasteries after first stealing and selling off all the properties and holdings and pocketed the proceeds. I heard this would equate to about 100 million by todays values. Much of the land holding he assumed as his own.

We all know him as Henry VIII, 16th century King of England during the so-called Tudor period.

Thus the resulting Anglican "church" is really an element of British history thats it.... period.

O.K.

Now again; what example from the Anglicans is worth using for the True Church?

If anyone can find any reason to use any kind of example from this unfortunate group than you may as well use examples from whatever else is out there.

These people (Anglicans) need us to pray for them NOT follow them.
Logged

"ETHIOPIA shall soon stretch out her hands unto God".....Psalm 68:vs 31

"Are ye not as children of the ETHIOPIANS unto me, O children of Israel"?....Amos 9: vs 7
Amdetsion
Worship God with all thy strength and all thy might
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christianity
Jurisdiction: Ethiopian Patriarchate; Addis Abebe Ethiopia
Posts: 931


HH Abuna Pawlos - Patriarch of Ethiopia


« Reply #96 on: April 28, 2006, 04:51:55 PM »

Ebor

Did you not get the sarcasm of Sarah' comment?

You are on the wrong page; at lease where her comments concerned.

Logged

"ETHIOPIA shall soon stretch out her hands unto God".....Psalm 68:vs 31

"Are ye not as children of the ETHIOPIANS unto me, O children of Israel"?....Amos 9: vs 7
Ebor
Vanyar
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 6,423



« Reply #97 on: April 28, 2006, 04:54:59 PM »

Ebor, you misunderstood what I was saying.  My focus was on the changes made in the Anglican Church not on the terminology used in the Anglican Church.

Thank you for clarifying what you meant.  I beg your pardon for not understanding it clearly.

Ebor
Logged

"I wish they would remember that the charge to Peter was "Feed my sheep", not "Try experiments on my rats", or even "Teach my performing dogs new tricks". - C. S. Lewis

The Katana of Reasoned Discussion

For some a world view is more like a neighborhood watch.
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 32,659


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #98 on: April 28, 2006, 05:02:51 PM »

Thus far the only argument I have put forward is that in absence of a theological argument it is a non-theological pastoral issue;

This brings up two questions in my mind.
   1.   How does it follow that just because the Church has not yet put forward a sound theological argument for women's ordination that there is no such argument?  Maybe there is, but the Church hasn't articulated it yet.
   2.   How is the issue of women's ordination not theological?  Considering that lex orandi, lex credendi (the law of prayer is the law of belief), how the Church worships is central to her theology.  And considering that the priest fulfills such an important role in the liturgy of the Church, it follows that the gender of the priest is very much a theological (and ecclesiological) issue and not merely a pastoral issue as you claim.
« Last Edit: April 28, 2006, 05:04:14 PM by PeterTheAleut » Logged
Ebor
Vanyar
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 6,423



« Reply #99 on: April 28, 2006, 05:03:02 PM »

My apologies, Amdetsion, but you seem to have some mistaken ideas about the history of my Church. (yes, the Anglican Communion is Christian.)  Could you please provide some links or documentation for a "real Catholic priest" foretelling how Henry VIII would die?  Thank you.

Anne Boleyn (or "Bullen" spelling was somewhat loose in those days) was Henry's second wife.  And a major reason for desiring an *anullment" from the marriage to Catherine of Aragon was the desire for a male heir to the throne.  Anullments and divorces had been granted to Royals and nobles by Rome before.  It was not something new. ÂÂ

May I ask what your first hand experience with any real Anglican might have been that you have such umm vehement words to direct against us?  Thank you in advance.

With respect

Ebor

edited for spelling
« Last Edit: April 28, 2006, 05:07:27 PM by Ebor » Logged

"I wish they would remember that the charge to Peter was "Feed my sheep", not "Try experiments on my rats", or even "Teach my performing dogs new tricks". - C. S. Lewis

The Katana of Reasoned Discussion

For some a world view is more like a neighborhood watch.
Ebor
Vanyar
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 6,423



« Reply #100 on: April 28, 2006, 05:05:02 PM »

Ebor

Did you not get the sarcasm of Sarah' comment?

You are on the wrong page; at lease where her comments concerned.



Sometimes such things as humour, sarcasm and other emotions or overtones do not come across well in on-line postings.  

Sarah clarified her meaning. Why would you feel the need to make remarks against my misunderstanding?  

respectfully,

Ebor
Logged

"I wish they would remember that the charge to Peter was "Feed my sheep", not "Try experiments on my rats", or even "Teach my performing dogs new tricks". - C. S. Lewis

The Katana of Reasoned Discussion

For some a world view is more like a neighborhood watch.
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 32,659


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #101 on: April 28, 2006, 06:06:06 PM »

But the fact that these arguments are used does illustrate one important point, when this is the best the Church can put forth to defend a position which is contrary to social mores and egalitarian decency is it any surprise that the Church is quickly becomming irrelevant to the masses and especially the youth even in traditionally Orthodox societies?

How do you reconcile your attitude that the Church should conform to "social mores and egalitarian decency" with this passage from St. Paul's Epistle to the Romans: "Do not be conformed to this world but be transformed by the renewal of your mind, that you may prove what is the will of God, what is good and acceptable and perfect." (Romans 12:2)?  The Church is to conform to the will of Christ, not to the mindset and mores of this world.
Logged
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 32,659


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #102 on: April 28, 2006, 07:51:12 PM »

By all means, let's follow what the Anglicans do!  What kind of slippery slope would we find ourselves on then?!?

I agree.

If dialog with other non-Orthodox Christian faiths helps us to understand and appreciate our own Tradition better, I say let's enter into such dialog, but let's be very careful about how we do so.  However, if the Orthodox Church alone possesses the fullness of Truth as we have vowed to proclaim, than there is no truth that any other Christian tradition can possess that we don't already possess.  Any doctrine or practice, therefore, not found in our own Holy Tradition is to be rejected as unorthodox.  Thus, we should do nothing that any other Christian pseudo-church does if what they do is not organic to our own Orthodox Tradition.
Logged
Byzantine Catholic
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 20


« Reply #103 on: April 28, 2006, 08:47:11 PM »

 Angry   Angry   Angry

WHEN HELL FREEZES OVER!!!!

That good 'n' clear??

Brother Ed
Logged

Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God,  have mercy on me a sinner!
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 32,659


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #104 on: April 28, 2006, 10:03:51 PM »

Angry   Angry   Angry

WHEN HELL FREEZES OVER!!!!

That good 'n' clear??

Brother Ed

Is this directed to any particular person, or to the subject of women's ordination in general?
Logged
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Posts: 30,094


Goodbye for now, my friend


« Reply #105 on: April 28, 2006, 10:13:40 PM »

GIC,

I offer you a quote by Jerome, who I think (based on what I've read) speaks for many...

Quote
You have compelled me, my dear Nepotian, in spite of the castigation which my treatise on Virginity has bad to endure--the one which I wrote for the saintly Eustochium at Rome--you have compelled me after ten years have passed once more to open my mouth at Bethlehem and to expose myself to the stabs of every tongue. For I could only escape from criticism by writing nothing--a course made impossible by your request; and I knew when I took up my pen that the shafts of all gainsayers would be launched against me. I beg such to hold their peace and to desist from gainsaying: for I have written to them not as to opponents but as to friends. I have not inveighed against those who sin: I have but warned them to sin no more. My judgment of myself has been as strict as my judgment of them. When I have wished to remove the mote from my neighbour's eye, I have first east out the beam in my own. I have calumniated no one. Not a name has been hinted at. My words have not been aimed at individuals and my criticism of shortcomings has been quite general. If any one wishes to be angry with me he will have first to own that he himself suits my description. - Jerome, Letter 52, 17

The point being that Christian morality has never been what one would call popular Wink
« Last Edit: April 28, 2006, 10:14:23 PM by Asteriktos » Logged

Paradosis ≠ Asteriktos ≠ Justin
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #106 on: April 29, 2006, 12:43:30 AM »

Well, I'm only one person, with that in mind I'll try to address the arguments presented best I can...afterall Clausewitz is calling and as fun as this is, it isn't the art and science of war Wink

There are no female priests in the One, Holy and Apostolic Church.  Those who are looking for one in the future are barking up the wrong tree.

Don't be too quick to prophesy...that which is static will die -- it's an evolutionary imperative.

This is a point I have been meaning to bring up for a while. While Hellenistic Jewish and Roman culture did have a comparatively low view of women, in so far as these societies generally excluded women from direct participation in politics and, with a few exceptions for wealthy nobility, granted women few legal rights per se, it was precisely in the realm of religion and cult practice that women enjoyed considerable leeway.

Two things to consider here; first, until the mid-second century the (overwhelmingly) primary cultural influence was Judaic, especially amongst the leadership of the Church (who were all circumcised Jews). By the mid-second century the norms and institutions were already established.

The second, and more significant, point is about the nature of female involvement in Roman Religion, while they were allowed an official presence in most cults by the end of the first century A.D., they were not given leadership roles (or anything close to it) in these cults which were almost entirely ruled by men (the one notable exception being Bona Dea, which was very suspect in Rome, and even there the leader was chosen by virtue of being the wife of the Flamen Dialis).

This pagan model that is here mentioned is the one the Church would eventually adopt, creating minor orders for women up through the deaconess (which, even though eventually an ordained posistion was still generally considered to be below a deacon), but depriving them from any higher (and therefore ruling) office in the Church.

Quote
The point is this: The legal and political rights of women were restricted, but their cultic, religious "rights" were most certainly not. In fact, orthodox Christianity's staunchly male priesthood was one of the ways in which Christianity stood in contrast to the typical cults of the time. Thus, it seems, GiC, that attributing Paul's words, St. John Chrysostom's homilies and the Church's practice to cultural bias may not be the easiest case to make.

But Christianity, while having a staunchly male priesthood, did adopt the customs of the pagans in allowing women to hold lower religious posistions, but the posistions of power were reserved for the men, as in the pagan cults.

Quote
As others have indicated, what does one do with St. Paul's theology of the family? Is this also "culturally driven"? If the family is the little Church, and the husband is always the spiritual head of the family, how can the spiritual head of the larger family, the parish, not also be taken from one of the already-leading men? (The same questions apply to many, many homilies by St. John Chrysostom, who spoke extensively on the position of women in the Church and family -- not just in the passage from One the Priesthood that you quoted. Cf. David Ford's book on St. John Chrysostom and women.)

The clearly culturally biased family structure mentioned by Paul aside, what of a celibate or widowed woman...would they not be the 'spiritual head' of their 'family,' while this 'family' may consist only of themselves this can also be said of the 'family' of the celibate male priests, who were the ones to hold the highest posistions in the Church (in the east the episcopacy, in the west ideally all sacerdotal posistions by the six century (it took several centuries to make this ideal universal, but it was the ideal before the sixth century)). Though a relationship between family leadership and Church leadership may have been envisioned by Paul, the fact that the leaders of the Church were generally (and are) celibate and not family men tends to undermine the analogy between one's family role and one's official ecclesiastical role.
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
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #107 on: April 29, 2006, 12:54:32 AM »

GiC, "priestess" at least in English might have some unfortunate shades of meaning.  In those Anglican Provinces that do have women clergy they are referred to as a "priest".

I am aware of that, though my statement you're responding to was a bit muddled. However, I do believe that such negative connotations are unfortunate. For while I support the ordination of women, calling a woman 'father' or, to a lesser degree for various linguistic and cultural reasons, calling a priestess a priest would bother me.

But I tend to get annoyed over minor linguistic points. The campaign against using the term 'man' for 'humanity' is another one that bothers me, the original use of the word 'man' was in reference to 'humanity' with waepman or wer meaning a male (and wyf or wifman meaning a female). So if you're going to complain about an inappropriate use of the word 'man' complain about using the word to refer specifically to males, because THAT is the misuse of the word.

But I'm sure I'm one of the few people that actually gets upset over the loss of Anglo-Saxon conventions in the English language (and dont even get me started about what's happening to our subjunctive)...so, in reality, these issues probably arn't that big of a deal for people who actually have a life.
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
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #108 on: April 29, 2006, 12:59:43 AM »

This brings up two questions in my mind.
 ÃƒÆ’‚  1.   How does it follow that just because the Church has not yet put forward a sound theological argument for women's ordination that there is no such argument?  Maybe there is, but the Church hasn't articulated it yet.

But if one is going to insist that there is a theological argument, the burden to prove that this is the case is upon them. It is not reasonable to expect me (or anyone else for that matter) to prove the non-existance of an argument (which is theoretically impossible).

Quote
2. ÂÂ  How is the issue of women's ordination not theological? ÂÂ Considering that lex orandi, lex credendi (the law of prayer is the law of belief), how the Church worships is central to her theology. ÂÂ And considering that the priest fulfills such an important role in the liturgy of the Church, it follows that the gender of the priest is very much a theological (and ecclesiological) issue and not merely a pastoral issue as you claim.

But I could use similar arguments to say that the race of a priest is also a significant theological issue...yet this is an issue that the Church has formally addressed and it has rejected the idea. Hence, we can have gentile priests. On the issue of the ordination of women I would say that just as there is no Greek or Jew in Christ, neither is there Male or Female; all are created in the image and likeness of God. Thus, what is important is not the race or gender, but rather the fact that the person is human and, thus, in the image and likeness of Christ.
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
bergschlawiner
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 235

Sarisan


« Reply #109 on: April 29, 2006, 01:44:04 AM »

 :-\This may sound silly but when I hear this stuff I wonder what vestments a woman priest(ess) would wear since the priestly vestments are adaptions of male clothing worn at one time or the other in the imperial times.  Or would they wear something like the icons of holy empresses wear?   ::)Would they wear clerical robes like nuns?  What type of head covering would they wear?  Middle eastern? Burkhas? Roll Eyes
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 #110 on: April 29, 2006, 02:24:17 AM »

:-\This may sound silly but when I hear this stuff I wonder what vestments a woman priest(ess) would wear since the priestly vestments are adaptions of male clothing worn at one time or the other in the imperial times.
Well, considering that it would be a new thing in our times to have women priests, perhaps they should adopt contemporary dress. A smart twin-set with Channel buttons on the jacket and a pearl necklace seems appropriate. But considering the length of Orthodox Services, I think high heels would be out of the question.
And I think we should also consider maternity vestments.
« Last Edit: April 29, 2006, 02:25:58 AM by ozgeorge » Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
prodromos
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 1,463

Sydney, Australia


« Reply #111 on: April 29, 2006, 04:15:22 AM »

This brings up two questions in my mind.
   1.   How does it follow that just because the Church has not yet put forward a sound theological argument for women's ordination that there is no such argument?  Maybe there is, but the Church hasn't articulated it yet.
   2.   How is the issue of women's ordination not theological?  Considering that lex orandi, lex credendi (the law of prayer is the law of belief), how the Church worships is central to her theology.  And considering that the priest fulfills such an important role in the liturgy of the Church, it follows that the gender of the priest is very much a theological (and ecclesiological) issue and not merely a pastoral issue as you claim.
The fact of the bodily assumption of the Theotokos after her death is a good example to consider. Though there has never been a definitive statement from the church regarding Mary's assumption, there is no possibility of it being up for question.

John
Logged
montalban
Now in colour
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek
Posts: 1,813



« Reply #112 on: April 29, 2006, 08:39:25 AM »


1 Corinthians 14:33 For God is not a God of disorder but of peace.
      As in all the congregations of the saints, 34 women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the Law says. 35 If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church.
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 #113 on: April 29, 2006, 08:46:51 AM »

1 Corinthians 14:33 For God is not a God of disorder but of peace.
      As in all the congregations of the saints, 34 women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the Law says. 35 If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church.
Gosh, we Greek Orthodox had better close down all our convents. All those disgraceful women reading Services and incensing in the church.......
« Last Edit: April 29, 2006, 08:51:07 AM by ozgeorge » Logged

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

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Armenian
Posts: 342



« Reply #114 on: April 29, 2006, 12:26:34 PM »

GIC,

Since you seem to have overlooked my question to you, I will repeat it.

Please explain why you think the "ordination" of women would be "pastorally beneficial" for the Orthodox Church, when it has been proven to be anything but that in the other Christian communities where it has been introduced.

Thank you.



Thus far the only argument I have put forward is that in absence of a theological argument it is a non-theological pastoral issue; I believe that, over all, the ordination of women would be pastorally benificial. And in an earlier post (though perhaps on the threat where this discussion began) I put forward my reasoning as to why I believe it to be pastorally benificial. I fail to see the danger in asserting that I believe a certain course of action to be more pastorially benificial than another; especially since it does not appear to be a theological issue, if someone believes otherwise I'm still waiting for a sound theological argument. Asking me to prove it's not a theological issue is absurd, as it is not even possible to prove non-existance outside of a well-defined axiomatic mathematical system.
Logged

"I don't think I've ever eaten anything Armenian I didn't like.  I even drink my non-Armenian coffee out of a St Nersess Seminary coffee mug because it is better that way." --Mor Ephrem
Gregory1958
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 36


« Reply #115 on: April 29, 2006, 04:29:35 PM »

I am a convert to Orthodoxy, after being a protestant my whole life, and a protestant minister for a number of years.  I have one question:

What in the world is happening to Orthodoxy that those in the Church want to become like protestants?  Good grief!  It is not in our tradition for women to be priests and it is unbiblical, too boot!  Try this passage from the Holy Bible:  "I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent.  For Adam was formed first, then Eve.  And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner."  -- 1 Timothy 2:13-14

Now, lest some of you want to use the protestant argument that the "times were different and women were not respected", let me point out that the Apostle gives theological reasons as to why women cannot have authority over a man (which cancels out the priesthood, now doesn't it?) which transend "the times".  

If you want to be protestant, then abandon the true faith and go where you can come up with any theological stance that you tickles your fancy.  If you want to be in the Church and truly Christian, do like I did and abandon the "heresies of the West" and stop entertaining these wayward thoughts!
Logged
pensateomnia
Bibliophylax
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox Christian
Posts: 2,352


metron ariston


« Reply #116 on: April 29, 2006, 07:09:18 PM »

I am a convert to Orthodoxy, after being a protestant my whole life, and a protestant minister for a number of years.  I have one question:

What in the world is happening to Orthodoxy that those in the Church want to become like protestants?

No need to worry over much. I can't imagine any Synod allowing the ordination of women to the priesthood (a) before the topic was discussed and settled favorably at a Pan-Orthodox Synod and (b) before the female diaconate were already broadly established and accepted.

Now, I would be willing to bet my entire library that option A will never happen before the Second Coming, if only for the simple fact that the various Orthodox communions evinced little consensus on the many issues discussed at the Pre-Conciliar meetings over the last few decades and have thus basically decided to chuck the idea of having a Pan-Orthodox Synod (it would obviously lead to major schism).

Heck, for much the same reason I'm willing to wager my library that option B will never happen before the Second Coming either! (As silly as that is, considering the ample evidence we have for such an office in Scripture, canon law and Church history).
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)
suzannes
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 97



« Reply #117 on: April 29, 2006, 07:39:26 PM »

My post on this subject yesterday got lost!  I'll try to remember what I said.  I think it was...this is a very reasoned and intelligent discussion, and obviously, many people on this board are incredidibly well-versed in the Fathers and the Bible, but I want to ask a very basic, and perhaps stupid question.  Has there ever outside of our present times, been a call for women priests within Orthodoxy?  My second question would be: how does one separate the various "isms" of the 19th. and 20th. centuries from this subject?  What I mean is, how can the question of a female priesthood ever be separated from contemporary feminism?
An Anglican friend of mine says that female priesthood is idolatry because it is exactly this worship of "isms" (feminism, liberalism, etc.) that is motivating the desire of women to be ordained.  These are things of man's world, not God's.  Woman can serve God in a million ways, as can men.  A few days ago, I was in a doctors waiting room, there was a pregnant girl who had been mauled by a pit bull, and her arm was destroyed (NOT the day we were at the doctors), and she wanted to get up and get some water.  Normally, I would just read my book and not talk, but you gotta ask yourself "it's Bright Week, shouldn't I tell this girl that if the nurse calls her, I'll tell them she'll be right back?"  I know, I sound nuts, but what I mean to say is, I've heard women say "I'm called to celebrate the sacraments" but wretches that we are, how fortunate are we just to *partake*??  I want to hear an argument in favor that is characterized by humility and self-effacement of Christ.  I just don't see that.  I see more of a "having it all" mentality, which will never be the way of Orthodoxy.  (I HOPE this goes through this time!)
Logged
montalban
Now in colour
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek
Posts: 1,813



« Reply #118 on: April 29, 2006, 07:54:59 PM »

Gosh, we Greek Orthodox had better close down all our convents. All those disgraceful women reading Services and incensing in the church.......
Unless of course we don't take a literal 'silence' but view it in relation to his views about women teaching... which he was against.
Which Gregory1958 himself cited...
"I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent.  For Adam was formed first, then Eve.  And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner."  -- 1 Timothy 2:13-14


 Amusing though your responses have become. Where's the picture of a puppy-dog? Embarrassed
« Last Edit: April 29, 2006, 07:57:32 PM by montalban » 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 #119 on: April 29, 2006, 07:59:22 PM »

My post on this subject yesterday got lost!  I'll try to remember what I said.  I think it was...this is a very reasoned and intelligent discussion, and obviously, many people on this board are incredidibly well-versed in the Fathers and the Bible, but I want to ask a very basic, and perhaps stupid question.  Has there ever outside of our present times, been a call for women priests within Orthodoxy?  My second question would be: how does one separate the various "isms" of the 19th. and 20th. centuries from this subject?  What I mean is, how can the question of a female priesthood ever be separated from contemporary feminism?
An Anglican friend of mine says that female priesthood is idolatry because it is exactly this worship of "isms" (feminism, liberalism, etc.) that is motivating the desire of women to be ordained.  These are things of man's world, not God's.  Woman can serve God in a million ways, as can men.  A few days ago, I was in a doctors waiting room, there was a pregnant girl who had been mauled by a pit bull, and her arm was destroyed (NOT the day we were at the doctors), and she wanted to get up and get some water.  Normally, I would just read my book and not talk, but you gotta ask yourself "it's Bright Week, shouldn't I tell this girl that if the nurse calls her, I'll tell them she'll be right back?"  I know, I sound nuts, but what I mean to say is, I've heard women say "I'm called to celebrate the sacraments" but wretches that we are, how fortunate are we just to *partake*??  I want to hear an argument in favor that is characterized by humility and self-effacement of Christ.  I just don't see that.  I see more of a "having it all" mentality, which will never be the way of Orthodoxy.  (I HOPE this goes through this time!)

I do believe you are onto something here. Many modernist apologists want to make the church 'relative' to current trends and fads. This is in fact what the Catholic church tried to do with Vatican II, and they're still suffering because of it.
Logged

Fàilte dhut a Mhoire,
tha thu lan de na gràsan;
Tha an Tighearna maille riut.
jaderook
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 113


« Reply #120 on: April 29, 2006, 08:36:52 PM »

I am a convert to Orthodoxy, after being a protestant my whole life, and a protestant minister for a number of years.  I have one question:

What in the world is happening to Orthodoxy that those in the Church want to become like protestants?  Good grief!  It is not in our tradition for women to be priests and it is unbiblical, too boot!  Try this passage from the Holy Bible:  "I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent.  For Adam was formed first, then Eve.  And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner."  -- 1 Timothy 2:13-14

Now, lest some of you want to use the protestant argument that the "times were different and women were not respected", let me point out that the Apostle gives theological reasons as to why women cannot have authority over a man (which cancels out the priesthood, now doesn't it?) which transend "the times". ÂÂ

If you want to be protestant, then abandon the true faith and go where you can come up with any theological stance that you tickles your fancy.  If you want to be in the Church and truly Christian, do like I did and abandon the "heresies of the West" and stop entertaining these wayward thoughts!

I'm with you here.  Speaking as a woman who once thought that women's ordination was a good thing, and sat under a woman minister for a short time; she was super nice, but as for me, I was immediately convicted that it was wrong.  That conviction grew even more as I encountered women ministers on-line.  There is a tendency to make it all about pride and 'look at me and what I can achieve as a woman.'  No humility at all.  I certainly hope it never happens in Orthodoxy.
Logged
Gregory1958
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 36


« Reply #121 on: April 29, 2006, 11:36:08 PM »

The lack of understanding that men and women have different roles does not mean that they have different value seems to be lost on the modern "mind".  While we are of equal value to our loving Creator, we are also designed to have different roles.  This is not a bad thing, as the feminist cannot seem to understand.  For example, I cannot be a mother, no matter how badly I would like to be one!  I can whine and complain and demand equal right all I want, but it will just never happen.  I was not designed to be a mother.  The Creator did not give me that option.  Neither does He give women the option to be bishops and priests.
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 #122 on: April 29, 2006, 11:54:42 PM »

I wish people would stop thinking of "modernity" as a "heresy". Everything in the Church was "modern" at some stage of her history. Everything is subject to change: the Sixth Oecumenical Council anathamised those who do not receive Communion in the hand.
In Holy Tradition "not now" does not necessarily mean "never."

Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
montalban
Now in colour
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek
Posts: 1,813



« Reply #123 on: April 30, 2006, 12:29:03 AM »

I wish people would stop thinking of "modernity" as a "heresy". Everything in the Church was "modern" at some stage of her history. Everything is subject to change:


I accept that there's change inherent in the Orthodox Church - each time we take our faith to a new culture, we try to present it in their language.

We have seating in our churches, whereas once everyone stood.

But we should not confuse 'traditions' with 'Holy Tradition'. It is the same mistake Protestants make when we present evidence for keeping traditions; such as....

Now I praise you, brethren, that you remember me in all things and keep the traditions as I delivered them to you (I Corinthians 11:2)

 

“Therefore, brethren, stand fast and hold the traditions which you were taught, whether by word or by our epistle” ÂÂ (II Thessalonians 2:15)



Fundamental to the teachings of Christ are the roles men and women play.



the Sixth Oecumenical Council anathamised those who do not receive Communion in the hand.
In Holy Tradition "not now" does not necessarily mean "never."
I thought it was the other way around; going against those that did receive it in the hand.

The Sixth Ecumenical Council, at Constantinople (680-681)
Forbade the faithful to take the Sacred Host in their hand, threatening transgressors with excommunication.
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Oracle/9463/cith.html

My church doesn't give communion in the hand. That site also has quotes suggesting that this is the way it has usually been practiced (though I haven't had time to cross-check these quotes).
« Last Edit: April 30, 2006, 12:33:10 AM by montalban » 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 #124 on: April 30, 2006, 12:31:50 AM »

The lack of understanding that men and women have different roles does not mean that they have different value seems to be lost on the modern "mind".  While we are of equal value to our loving Creator, we are also designed to have different roles.  This is not a bad thing, as the feminist cannot seem to understand.  For example, I cannot be a mother, no matter how badly I would like to be one!  I can whine and complain and demand equal right all I want, but it will just never happen.  I was not designed to be a mother.  The Creator did not give me that option.  Neither does He give women the option to be bishops and priests.
I agree. This also goes to why homosexuality is forbidden by the church because it confuses gender roles.

This of course burns the ears of those who are modernists.
Logged

Fàilte dhut a Mhoire,
tha thu lan de na gràsan;
Tha an Tighearna maille riut.
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Posts: 30,094


Goodbye for now, my friend


« Reply #125 on: April 30, 2006, 12:44:32 AM »

Technically it was the Council in Trullo in 691, not the Sixth Ecumenical Council in 680, which issued the canon in question, but traditionally these two gatherings are bound together...

Quote
The divine Apostle loudly proclaims the man created in the image of God to be a body of Christ and a temple. Standing, therefore, far above all sensible creation, and having attained to a heavenly dignity by virtue of the soterial Passion, by eating and drinking Christ as a source of life, he perpetually readjusts both his eternal soul and his body and by partaking of the divine grace he is continually sanctified. So that if anyone should wish to partake of the intemerate body during the time of a synaxis, and to become one therewith by virtue of transessencc, let him form his hands into the shape of a cross, and, thus approaching, let him receive the communion of grace. For we nowise welcome those men who make certain receptacles out of gold, or any other material, to serve instead of their hand for the reception of the divine gift, demanding to take of the intemerate communion in such containers; because they prefer soulless (i.e., inanimate) matter and an inferior article to the image of God. In case, therefore, any person should be caught in the act of imparting of the intemerate communion to those offering such receptacles, let him be excommunicated, both he himself and the one offering them. - Council in Trullo, Canon 101
Logged

Paradosis ≠ Asteriktos ≠ Justin
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 #126 on: April 30, 2006, 12:48:43 AM »

And here is the the 101st Canon of the Council with it's ancient epitome.
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf214.xiv.iii.cii.html
This is a Canon of an Oecumenical Council- and has never been "officially" revoked.
So communing with a Spoon is not only "modern", it is technically uncanonical.
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
montalban
Now in colour
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek
Posts: 1,813



« Reply #127 on: April 30, 2006, 12:49:24 AM »

Posted in error
« Last Edit: April 30, 2006, 12:51:24 AM by montalban » Logged

Fàilte dhut a Mhoire,
tha thu lan de na gràsan;
Tha an Tighearna maille riut.
Bizzlebin
Theologian
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodoxy
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 714

MonkBot, Go Forth!


WWW
« Reply #128 on: April 30, 2006, 12:50:25 AM »

Hmm, just having read through the entire thread, I noticed something interesting: the total lack (not scarcity, but absence) of any patristic support for those who advocate women's ordination. I think that sums up about everything any patrisitically minded Orthodox Christian needs to know on the issue.
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
Bizzlebin
Theologian
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodoxy
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 714

MonkBot, Go Forth!


WWW
« Reply #129 on: April 30, 2006, 12:52:07 AM »

And here is the the 101st Canon of the Council with it's ancient epitome.
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf214.xiv.iii.cii.html
This is a Canon of an Oecumenical Council- and has never been "officially" revoked.
So communing with a Spoon is not only "modern", it is technically uncanonical.

You misread the canon. It is speaking of laymen who, I quote, "bring vessels of this kind." So, it is not speaking of the priest using a vessel, but of laymen coming and bringing vessels, rather than "arranging his hands in the form of a cross."
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 #130 on: April 30, 2006, 12:55:30 AM »

And here is the the 101st Canon of the Council with it's ancient epitome.
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf214.xiv.iii.cii.html
This is a Canon of an Oecumenical Council- and has never been "officially" revoked.
So communing with a Spoon is not only "modern", it is technically uncanonical.
How does one take bread AND wine in one's hands?
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 #131 on: April 30, 2006, 12:56:25 AM »

Hmm, just having read through the entire thread, I noticed something interesting: the total lack (not scarcity, but absence) of any patristic support for those who advocate women's ordination. I think that sums up about everything any patrisitically minded Orthodox Christian needs to know on the issue.
And having read through the last posts as well as many other threads, I find a total lack of patristic support for Communing with a Spoon.....yet we now do. Wink
There is no patristic support for the use of the "Epitaphio" on Holy Friday either- it is not found in the rubrics of any typicon. Yet we began to use it.
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 #132 on: April 30, 2006, 12:58:02 AM »

How does one take bread AND wine in one's hands?
The Precious Blood is drunk directly from the Chalice
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 #133 on: April 30, 2006, 12:59:29 AM »

And having read through the last posts as well as many other threads, I find a total lack of patristic support for Communing with a Spoon.....yet we now do. Wink
There is no patristic support for the use of the "Epitaphio" on Holy Friday either- it is not found in the rubrics of any typicon. Yet we began to use it.

Start threads specifically on the subject, and you'll likely get a lot of responses. I am not well versed in the issues, so I cannot speak there. What's disturbing, though, is that after 9 pages, not one patristic source is cited. I cannot recall any other threads quite like this.
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 #134 on: April 30, 2006, 01:01:29 AM »

The Precious Blood is drunk directly from the Chalice
Cyprian talks about using a cup, and it's given by a woman deaconess.
25...When, however, the solemnities were finished, and the deacon began to offer the cup to those present, and when, as the rest received it, its turn approached, the little child, by the instinct of the divine majesty, turned away its face, compressed its mouth with resisting lips, and refused the cup. Still the deacon persisted, and, although against her efforts, forced on her some of the sacrament of the cup. Then there followed a sobbing and vomiting. In a profane body and mouth the Eucharist could not remain; the draught sanctified in the blood of the Lord burst forth from the polluted stomach. So great is the Lord's power, so great is His majesty. The secrets of darkness were disclosed under His light, and not even hidden crimes deceived God's priest.
Treatise III. On the Lapsed at http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/ANF-05/anf05-113.htm#P7009_2277176

However you will notice that the Eucharist comes from the cup. There doesn't seem to be a separation of bread and wine - but that's just my interpretation.
Logged

Fàilte dhut a Mhoire,
tha thu lan de na gràsan;
Tha an Tighearna maille riut.
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 0.153 seconds with 73 queries.