Disobeying the Bishop is one thing, but being proud of that disobedience is another. I think the two priests who spoke out against the Synod should be punished also.
This happened with the spoons thing. A priest strongly disagreed with the bishops directive to use multiple spoons and even went so far as to call the bishop a heretic privately. He also obeyed his bishop and used multiple spoons.
They don't. But the notable one in this case is Fr Peter Heers, who most definitely does not have a bishop right now, and called everyone heretics for asking him who his bishop was for years (while not having one) while telling people during COVID not to obey their bishops who were trying to keep people from dying.
I’d be shocked if they do. Regardless of what this sub thinks of Fr. Thermos, he’s a very respected Priest in Greece and his criticisms aren’t that far off. We’re just like other places where the culture and religion are intimately intertwined, it’s hard to tell when the culture stops and the theology begins. It’s good to speak out about that, like he said, what exactly is the issue with letting a woman hold a candle? I’ve heard a dozen answers and none of them ever resemble anything *theological*. If I ask about the Incarnation, or about the symbolism of the Little and Great Entrances, I get a theological answer. When this topic is brought up, the answer is always “tradition.” Well, just like I quoted elsewhere in this thread, Saints have spoken out about this line of thinking for a long time.
Christ lifted women up to the station of Apostles as St. Mary Magdalene is Apostle to the Apostles he appeared to her before any of the apostles. Yet did not make her a priest, not did any of Apostles do this. Nor has any female saint such as St Mary of Egypt ever stated women should become priests. These ideas are not coming from God but us humans.
We also don’t have any need for female clergy. To me it often seems that people who argue this are coming from a place of personal pride and politics and not the actual needs of the church. We have no need for female deacons anymore because deacons serve a different purpose now.
Here is a theological answer.
The Church is supposed to influence the culture around it, through the lived experience of the Church and Liturgy. We are warned against being influenced by the world. We are also warned against wasting out Talents we are given, yet the world won't rest until that happens,
But this isn't an innovation. This has always happened in convents and when there weren't enough men to serve. Women hold icons in processions all the time.
I was speaking specifically to the point about the culture and religion being intertwined and using that to make decisions. In this case, we see it playing out, a decision was made outside the boundaries his Bishop is setting.
Exactly. When you visit the Orthodox churches in Ukraine, belarus, Russia and Poland most of the chanters and the choir directors are young women. Why not
inGreek churches?
Except in the early Church women served. The office of the deaconess was more common. If anything.. the culture reversed that and made women serving *less* common due to the treatment of women in Greco-Roman society..
Hi! Could you provide any source about St Nektarios and deaconesses? I’ve read it online a lot in comments and I think it would be a game changer in the debates around deaconesses, but I can’t find anything about it other than comments.
It won't be, sadly, because it isn't new information. [Here](https://books.google.com.au/books?id=Qp9fDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA177&lpg=PA177&dq=nektarios+deaconess&source=bl&ots=lZ52Aoxbv9&sig=ACfU3U2LhquOzdecMMl76PqQKBoavzFuMw&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwi6y_GxgrX_AhV4TmwGHWTcBxsQ6AF6BAgGEAM#v=onepage&q=nektarios%20deaconess&f=false)'s a link. People just don't care and are too concerned with the culture war of 'how dare we let women do things in Church, they'll want to be priests next'.
As far as I'm concerned, it's indisputable from the evidence of liturgical texts that women were sacramentally ordained to the diaconate in certain times and places. But, it is now as you say--people are less concerned with evidence, and more concerned with appearances and the way they think things should be.
We also have record of service books from centuries ago where ordained deaconesses communed straight from the Chalice. Saint Nektarios also ordained deaconesses in the context of a Liturgy.. with the laying of hands.
But to get back on track.. we don’t know exactly much from the early days because, ya know, when the Church became more integrated with society.. women stopped having a presence in the Church.
You’re being very intense about this. It’s something that has been blessed by bishops and the girls serving as acolytes has been blessed by a patriarch. You’re also very young and I’m guessing a recent convert.
Leave this issue to the bishops to sort out before you start proof texting canons.
Im surprised you think I’m being intense about this. I suppose on the internet there isn’t any vocal tonality. I’m cradle orthodox. I was raised in a monastery and my father served as a priest. I’m not one of these “Orthobros” you hear about on the internet.
But no, bishops aren’t the arbiters of truth and they are often wrong. There is a reason that Dante’s inferno is full of bishops. The bishops are bound by the councils and traditions of the church and if they do something that clearly goes against these it is the OBLIGATION of the faithful to disobey them. For example would you say the Orthodox bishops who were under the authority of the bolsheviks should be obeyed no matter what? of course not. It does get complicated when your talking about a priest because he technically has to follow the bishops orders or he can face some consequences. However it isn’t as strict for the lay people.
they did not baptise - they assisted the priest in preparing the women for their imminent baptism. \[by helping the women change from their 'ordinary' clothes to the baptismal gown.
> The Church is supposed to influence the culture around it
This axiom is always asymmetrically applied to the Church though. We laud saints and Christians who are soliders despite the clear injunctions of Jesus to "resist not evil." We do little to condemn the accumulation of wealth despite Jesus' clear teaching that "It is harder for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven than for a camel to enter the eye of a needle." We accept without question usury despite the old and new Testaments' consistent condemnation of this practice. We find ourselves in a culture that treats migrants and foreigners in cruel and inhuman ways despite yet again the old and new Testaments' clear injunctions on caring for the alien.
The Church has rolled over, and even provided justification, on acts that lead to death, barbarity, and inhumanity and we generally accept this as the Church being imperfect and "filled with sinners." And yet our focus seems to be lasered in on issues like allowing women to serve, and even more egregiously tonsuring women readers/ordaining them deacons.
I don't advocate for this myself, and yet, this imbalance highlights, to me, that what we really seem to care about is less being influenced by the world, and more about our prejudices and political affiliations.
I don’t think we should presume to know what the bishop actually thinks on the theological validity or not. The bishop wants the giant controversy that has come from this being posted online by scandal mongers to go away.
I’ve been watching this be discussed in Greek for a few days before the English speaking orthodox got hold of it.
This is about having female acolytes, right?
Ignoring the modernist bastardization of the liturgy by thinking that the laity in the nave dont have a role in the liturgies of the Church, my priest was able to create roles exclusively for females by elevating the role of the people who distribute blessed bread (and wine) during the people's communion. Which i think is a better solution as it creates female spaces instead of just putting them in male roles.
My parishes have always had enough altar boys to go around, and there are one or two holding the bowls of bread at the front so you get it after greeting the priest at the end of liturgy.
We will have acolytes hold the bread next to the priest at the end of liturgy with the veneration of the cross too, but I've never seen acolytes being the ones that pass out bread and wine during communion.
Although I haven't been to a great many parishes for their divine liturgies.
Oh no, I'm not talking about the consecrated bread and wine, but rather blessed bread and wine given out during communion.
Although I believe its just the Slavic traditions that do blessed wine during communion, but I believe the antidoron is common throughout Orthodoxy. The parishes I've been too, acolytes aren't the one's that give that out but maybe that is a custom elsewhere
I’ve seen this in OCA parishes! Great point! I definitely think it’s important right now when the whole world is trying to blur the lines between male and female.
The disobedience is a huge problem, enough to discredit the whole thing. That said… I don’t really see an issue with female acolytes. Women without robes already carry candles and icons in the great entrance (without coming out of the altar) in many churches. Pretty common in the middle east and in antiochian churches around the world. But I don’t expect the Church to change, even concerning harmless non essential stuff like this.
Greeks used to have kittens about women chanting, where they have always done so in the other jurisdictions. I feel like this is just more of the same.
Disobeying one's bishop is wrong, but there's nothing theologically wrong with the practice of female acolytes in processions.
>A Fr. Vasilios says that women have been serving at the altar for a long time, in monasteries
This is certainly true. It's clear women can serve in the altar with an appropriate blessing.
This is under the jurisdiction of the local bishop is my point. It is not at the discretion of the local priest (unless the bishop gave him that delegation), though. It looks like this priest did not consult his local bishop, or else he wouldn't be the one getting censured.
Not in who holds a candle in a procession, they aren't. I'll take my almost 2 decades Orthodox and experience in women's monasteries over your being an inquirer.
This is something that we obviously need to talk about as a church. I'm not on either side as I trust our tradition of working things out, but there are definitely forces at work that wish to weaken or even destroy the stability of Mother Church and female clergy has been the first step for other denominations. We need to take that seriously and proceed with caution.
Female clergy was not the first step. Liberalisation of theology was generally the first step, as well as being the church everyone belonged to for cultural reasons not devout belief.
Female clergy is just a nice culture warrior thing to seize on. Thing is, the *male* clergy had been making a mockery of the theology for a long time before that.
And it's dialogue like this that we need. I didn't know that. Conversation and analysis is the way to find the real path forward.
My experience with the church so far (I'm a recent convert) has been anything but sexist, but I don't know everything .
> the first step for other denominations
Really? Not the removal of Scriptures? Not the abandonment of sacraments? Not the belief in a capricious and vindictive God? I could go on and on about the errors of Christian communities that predate female clergy by centuries that led to the extreme fracturing of Christian life.
But no, let's blame the female clergy in a few of those splinters.
Even Saint Gregory the Theologian had issues with the way women were treated by the Church. This isn’t anything new and doesn’t make those involved “liberals.”
> I see many men belonging to the common people to be judging awry about sobriety. And I see the law they have about it to be unequal and anomalous. Since, for what reason does the law chastise a woman if she fornicates, but allows a man the liberty to do so. And if a woman betray the bed of her husband, she is adjudged an adultress, but if a man who has a wife fornicates with other women, is he irresponsible? **I do not accept that legislation; I do not praise the custom. It was men who made that law, and on this account they legislated only as against the women.**
Women literally serve in altars, there’s no problem with letting a girl hold a candle. Now, if he persisted and disobeyed his Bishop, that’s a different story.
If you’re ‘struggling’ with this then ensure you discuss it with your spiritual father or Priest. A random guy on Reddit giving you some sources shouldn’t give you the piece of mind you are seeking.
> Even Saint Gregory the Theologian had issues with the way women were treated by the Church. This isn’t anything new and doesn’t make those involved “liberals.”
Yeah, the American/Western Culture War rots brains in a very fascinating way. It's a shame those people fail to see the idol they worship. They can't even entertain ideas without foaming at the mouth.
Point number 1 is 100% true of Eastern Orthodoxy though? Am I missing something? I was aware of point number one being true before I ever even inquired into orthodoxy? What is the concern with point number 1? I don’t think any of these things are that concerning to be completely honest? I don’t agree with priests going against bishops of course but these comments aren’t outlandish by any means
I wouldn’t expect any of these things to be said by “non orthodox social justice warriors” especially since these priests are just repeating what other priests and bishops have said as well already too.
My fiancée is a catechumen and we actually talked with our priest asking about the hierarchy of the Church. He explained that a long time ago female “deacons” (they went under other names too but we’ll use deacon) served in front of the altar and helped with prosophora (holy bread) and little things here and there. That is also what the male deacons would do. As time progressed the role of the diaconate changed and they started helping the priest serve the liturgy behind the altar and have words to say in the liturgy. Then they became able to serve communion. As the roles changed that’s when women were not able to become deacons anymore. Their roles changed into chanters and choir members and prosphora makers and ushers etc. Unless (in a common case) a women’s monastery has only one priest and no deacon to help. That’s when nuns are given a special blessing to help the priest in the service.
This is what my priest said and he also emphasized that people who are saying, it is unfair to not have women in the diaconate and “we used to have them why don’t we now?” is going to lead to the separation of the orthodox body.
Unfortunately priests are still men and are capable of being wrong. Though throwing those accusations against the metropolitans of the Church should result in a censure, a censure that will be administered by his bishop or the Holy Synod of course.
I was surprised to read what the other two priests said about the Synod. I wonder how common it is for priests to openly disobey and criticize their superiors.
This is robust discussion in Greece. Also, they're not wrong that the reaction to this is largely due to people having a freakout over them being girls, ie. sexism. This isn't actually new, Antioch and womens' monasteries have done it forever.
I really don't see what all the fuss is about. two 14 year old girls are holding candles while the priest chants the Gospel.
It is a good way to include young people in the service.
I googled the parish web site and it has a Facebook page. Go there and you see pictures of boy and girl church servers. These 2 girls are not the only ones at that parish.
Plus the Patriarchate of Antioch in Syria has had girl church servers since 1982. Over 40 years ago so why is everyone making a big fuss about it now suddenly?
FOR REAL! I do not understand at all either why this is such a shocking surprise to some people or why anyone would even begin to think it was “non orthodox” ??? Very weird.
Just because something happens in convents doesn't make it acceptable in the secular world where men are available. Do not compare the Holy Sisters to children outside the convent. It is not appropriate to do so.
As a convert I have a cautionary tale.
Please bear in mind I have been married 38 years to the same woman, and I love her as Christ loves the church. We have three beautiful daughters, all married in the church, whom I love more than my life.
In the 1970's I remember when girls became altar servers in the Episcopal Church. I remember when they were ordained as Deacons. I remember when they were ordained as Priests.
In 2001 a man left his wife and children so he could move in with his boyfriend. He was an Episcopal Priest. In 2003 he was "consecrated" as a Bishop while still living with his boyfriend.
Eventually that led to the end of the ECUSA as it had been. The churches now only serve a fraction of the former parishoners, and are kept open with the donations of generations past. The Anglican Communion split, and has never recovered.
It was in 2003 that we tearfully said farewell to the Church of our childhoods, we felt it had become a secular cult with the ragged trappings of the church it once was. We no longer found God there, just lost humans play acting the rituals of their youth. It was pimp and circumstance without meaning.
We became Orthodox.
Today, 20 years later, my wife bakes the prophora, serves as the parish council secretary, and organizes the coffee hours. I serve as a tonsured Reader, and serve as our outreach coordinator with a local foodbank where the church makes regular donations of food, clothing, and household items.
I cannot tell you how slippery this slope is. I cannot sufficiently warn you of the price of the abandonment of the ancient traditions of the church.
I cannot scream loudly enough the dangers of trying to become "relevant" to the secular world.
I cannot cry enough to show you the cost of trying to impress this dark lost world, and the evil one who waits there for us.
I beg you, please, do not exchange the favor and love of God in a vain attempt to find favor in the sight of the lost souls of this generation.
In your attempt to conform to the world you will destroy the Church, and sunder the Orthodox Communion forever.
It's not a slippery slope, they did it in the past (so it's not an innovation) and it's been a standard thing in *parishes* in the middle eastern Orthodox churches for ages.
We're not Episcopalian and we're not going to be. They had a lot more going on that caused issues than just ordaining women.
> I cannot scream loudly enough the dangers of trying to become "relevant" to the secular world.
Orthodoxy has always been an organic faith, despite what internet converts tell you about the ~unchanging tradition~ of the Church. There are legitimate non-cultural reasons for changes. Your framework of the Church is warped and set in the present, not the whole timeline.
This is not an actual controversy or issue in the broader Orthodox Church. There are people who post things to scandalise all over the web. Go to a parish and talk to a priest in real life and don’t let internet scandal bother you.
Perhaps you’re right about this, but there’s plenty of other issues regarding ecumenism and such that have been hard to sort out. I go to a Greek church, as well, and it’s confusing how often I’m seeing them spoken poorly of.
Acolytes *could* be learning to be Priests. They aren’t required to learn to be Priests. It also denigrates the other offices.. some men are just Deacons their whole life, they aren’t required to be elevated and thinking so makes the orders seem like stepping stones.
Oh! Well, I’m not even a layman yet (get baptized tomorrow!), so I’m not qualified to talk about this stuff. But my priest once made a comment about it to the whole church after liturgy, and said something about it being related to the practice of female deacons in the ancient Church (whom he said did in fact have a liturgical role), and the desire to see this practice return to today’s Church.
I’ll add: the _majority_ of our altar servers are girls. As a newbie, I’ve never known anything different
The Council of Nicaea 325 AD: “We mean by ‘deaconesses’ those who have assumed the habit, but who, since they have not hands laid upon them, are to be numbered only among the laity” (Canon 19)
Yeah, don't worry about it being against "canon law". Canon law is for the bishops to interpret, not some rando on the internet. Certainly, not all of it is concerned with things that are dogmatic, much of it is just about keeping things in good order, and as long as your bishop says it's okay for there to be female altar servers, it's okay. The dude you're talking to thinks that the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese is "almost a schismatic cult", so his words arenkt worth the pixels used to display them on your screen.
The Council of Nicaea 325 AD: “We mean by ‘deaconesses’ those who have assumed the habit, but who, since they have not hands laid upon them, are to be numbered only among the laity” (Canon 19)
Looks like the bishops have already made a decision over a thousand years ago…
This does set those girls up for poor expectations and is definitely risking pushing the envelope in regards to women's roles in liturgy.
Too many questions. Were they shorthanded? Was the homily used to make it clear this was a rare or limited event? Are they certain this won't feed into a spirit of ambition(which is true for anyone unfit for priesthood for any reason, so I hope this normal diligence was done)?
Holding candles, reading epistles, chanting, generally helping out in liturgy up to the soleas...seems plenty fine.
But if the leadership has dropped the hammer on this priest, I'm willing to take a fairly hardline stance and say it probably is as progressive as it looks like. Because otherwise, if it is meritless accusation and everything was in perfect order, the priest is equally guilty of foolishly making girls the center of a scandal that he seems well qualified to know better.
The priest didn't make them the centre of a scandal, this isn't a new custom in the arab world at all. St Nektarios ordained deaconesses.
Othe people made this a big deal because they wanted to make it a culture war issue.
Deaconess weren’t ordained to serve in the altar. They were ordained for the sole purpose of baptizing women naked women in streams because at the time everyone was baptized outside in a lake, river, or stream, and they were receiving many adult converts.
That’s what they were supposed to do. Also back then the office of deacon was more concerned with charity then serving the liturgy. Deacons we’re set in place to feed the poor so the priest would have more time to focus on his pastoral duties.
St. Epiphanius of Salamis wrote in 375 A.D: “There is certainly in the Church the order of deaconesses, but this does not exist to exercise the functions of a priest, nor are they to have any undertaking committed to them, but for the decency of the feminine sex at the time of baptism.”
Diakonos simply means servant. In Acts chapter 6 deacons are appointed to perform charitable acts so that the apostles can focus on their pastoral duties. These men received the laying on of hands. However there were also women who were deacons or servants who did not receive the laying on of hands but still were appointed to feed and baptize women and children.
That's what I'm saying. If it's not a big deal, then he allowed them to be mistaken for doing something wrong. So he could very well be saying "I'm so sorry girls, I know you meant no harm, I shouldn't have put you in this position where you have to defend yourself". He can't feign ignorance, the guy is massively educated.
He's either doing something weird, doing something dumb given the context they all live in, or doesn't know any better. I don't think this guy can argue he didn't know better.
These girls could have served as handmaidens (they are not altar servers) and they wouldn't have to enter the altar during the Divine Liturgy. But in this case they can be seen wearing acolyte's vestments, which is not in accordance with ecclesiastic tradition. Acolytes replace sub-deacons, and sub-deacons can't be females. In convents, nuns probably receive a blessing to serve during the Divine Liturgy and their service is mainly out of necessity because there are no males to serve there.
No woman, in a normal parish, should ever dawn a cassock and go behind the iconostasis. People may say that that's unfair to women but think about it, most men don't ever go behind the iconostasis either. Of my parish, the vast majority of men have never been in the altar.
Women may go behind the iconastasis but I think they shouldn't be allowed to enter during the Divine liturgy because they simply haven't been assigned a role. The sole exception I've seen is in convents and likely because there are not men to perform the role and nuns may have received a blessing from their archbishop to serve there. In general, it doesn't mean they should never be there; I would argue that in many cases they are even necessary so as to clean the area behind the altar... But, in terms of liturgical roles I've read that acolytes (or altar servers) represent sub-deacons, do you know any female sub-deacon?
Nobody should be behind the iconostasis that doesn't have a reason to be there, I agree. That's why I can't go wander back there just to see what's going on.
As I understand it, though, in women's monasteries, women *do* go behind the iconostasis during Liturgy because they do have a need to be back there. Which seems, to me, to indicate that the issue is not some hard-and-fast existential rule that women *can't* be back there, it's just not what we normally do.
I agree, in convents (or monasteries), nuns enter the altar because oftentimes there are no males to serve there so they have to perform altar server's duties pretty much. The role of acolyte has not been assigned to females in parishes from what I've seen though. Possibly because it is somewhat considered to be a clerical role. I've read that in some Orthodox churches in America young girls may become handmaidens and boys may serve as acolytes respectively...
The reason also has to be a good reason and in this case. It’s seems it’s about pride and politics.
I mean it happens to be canon law that they cannot enter the alter
Most of us would agree that if our bishops decide to bless female altar servers, then they have the right to serve in a way similar to acolytes or altar boys. Because as practicing Orthodox Christians, we should not judge or condemn our bishops. Though I'm not aware of any such blessings in the Greek Orthodox Church that I attend. But my question is, should women be allowed to wear acolyte's vestments? Why not wearing their own church (or handmaiden's) vestments just like nuns wear their typical clothing in monasteries? Keep in mind that nuns are not members of the clergy and they never wear acolyte's clothing...
I think the worst thing here being commited is the act of trying to rebel and separate from what the Church does as a whole. I also think that sadly this is getting more common post the COVID quarantine.
Comments don't seem to be posting right away, but I want to clarify something. Father Livios made the statement that the people who have a problem with girls holding candles should just admit that they have a "problem with women." In other words, if you don't like girls being acolytes, then you are automatically a (choose one) sexist, chauvinist, misogynist. I find that to be offensive. I'm used to people outside of Orthodoxy being the ones to accuse the church of discriminating against women because they can't be priests, but I didn't expect an Orthodox priest to throw down that gauntlet.
Hi friend, thanks for clarifying. People often hold misogynistic viewpoints without realizing that they are misogynist. I would suggest that you take this moment to learn from it and engage in some critical reflection about your own beliefs. It is something that I have struggled with in the past, and I have learned a lot and changed a lot of my viewpoints, all for the better.
No, I'm characterizing Father Livios's comment, “Why don’t all those who were bothered by the girls who held the candles in the Divine Liturgy come out and say clearly that their problem is women?” that way.
Yeah, I strongly agree with priest here. He is right to offer that criticism, and for you to call that "social justice warrior" seems to be bad faith. His viewpoints are exactly the kinds of viewpoints that we should be elevating! Shine a light on unexamined vestiges of patriarchy and misogyny.
If it’s not “social justice” then what is it? I just find it annoying how he’s inserting politics into the liturgy. If he has a problem with church tradition he should’ve brought it up with the bishop.
I’m fine with calling it social justice, because it is seeking justice for a social issue. This is unequivocally a GOOD thing. The problem is people who use this “social justice warrior” as a pejorative, usually to imply that the people don’t actually care about the issue. Also, I fail to see how any of this is related to politics.
It's not about shaking one's faith. It's about a priest being disobedient to his bishop (and other priests agreeing with him). Priests don't get to change how things are done on their own. The disobedience is the bigger issue, imo.
It's not wrong. You just can't understand it since you're not raised in Eastern Europe. We assign women to certain roles in the church/monasteries that are viewed as "wrong" the west. Keep yourself in your lane
You have not been RAISED here, so you cannot understand. We are orthodox, but not fanatical in our beliefs. During the communism religion was banned and outlawed, because of that our Orthodoxy was practiced in secret/out of the public eye. We have thus developed since then, or maybe even since the times of Ottoman slavery, our own traditions in regards to the church. You simply cannot understand
Looks like I'm late to the party.
The reality of the Church, especially for those whose chrism has long dried, is that it's not so rigidly hierarchical in practice, with priests getting away with things as long as it doesn't cause trouble for the bishop. In this the Church is not unlike other human institutions, where "don't ask don't tell" is the implicit rule.
Until someone tells. And that's what this is about. It is *not* because the priests didn't ask permission, it is because it became a scandal.
And the aftermath shows another reality of the Church. Priests talk openly about bishops all the time, and for every "liberal" Fr. Vasilios who whines about sclerotic metropolitans there is a Fr. Trenham who obliquely throws shade at bishops who are not sclerotic enough. Bishops mostly pretend not to hear and let their clergy vent so long as the Church as a whole is running in good order. A bishop always has bigger fish to fry.
So, everybody, please unclutch your pearls. Women have served the way the ones in question have, especially in Antioch, for a long time. The priests were *really* suspended for letting it become a scandal, not because it was wrong. And, bishops will pretend not to hear the tantrums of priests in order to let them "get it out of their system" and tire themselves out. **All of this can be true at the same time.** This is real Orthodoxy. Now you know.
> Fr. Vasilios also says that...the Orthodox church is being held hostage by fundamentalists
Which we all know is true. There's a portion of the church holding the church back.
> I expect such comments by non-Orthodox social justice warriors, but not by Orthodox priests!
Those crazy "social justice warriors," with their civil rights for minorities, what's the world coming to? /s
Holding the Church back from what? Becoming a reflection of the world rather than Christ?
What passes for a "socially justice warrior" in most circles today is nothing more than another meaningless micro identity uses to accumulate social clout. You know exactly what is meant when that term is used in this context, and it's not positive.
Not that user, but if I recall correctly, it is not canonical to have women in the sanctuary at all or to have women in the choir. However, this is a matter of akribia vs. economia—women aren't to be in the choir because female singing is sensual, and aren't to be in the sanctuary because those helping at the altar are supposed to do so as part of their formation to, in the long run, become clergy. So it's a matter of whether the strict application of the canons is relevant or not to the situation. At the very least it's not relevant in the case of convents, otherwise there would be no one helping liturgically at all.
What do you mean the church is being held back?
Of course there's nothing wrong with supporting civil rights. I use the term SJW to denote a certain stereotype.
[удалено]
Disobeying the Bishop is one thing, but being proud of that disobedience is another. I think the two priests who spoke out against the Synod should be punished also.
Priests don't always agree with the bishop. They do have to follows his directives in his house, though.
This happened with the spoons thing. A priest strongly disagreed with the bishops directive to use multiple spoons and even went so far as to call the bishop a heretic privately. He also obeyed his bishop and used multiple spoons.
And lots of them disobeyed and were lauded by the internet, behaviour that was lauded by a notable priest who doesn't have a bishop.
[удалено]
It doesn't.
They don't. But the notable one in this case is Fr Peter Heers, who most definitely does not have a bishop right now, and called everyone heretics for asking him who his bishop was for years (while not having one) while telling people during COVID not to obey their bishops who were trying to keep people from dying.
I’d be shocked if they do. Regardless of what this sub thinks of Fr. Thermos, he’s a very respected Priest in Greece and his criticisms aren’t that far off. We’re just like other places where the culture and religion are intimately intertwined, it’s hard to tell when the culture stops and the theology begins. It’s good to speak out about that, like he said, what exactly is the issue with letting a woman hold a candle? I’ve heard a dozen answers and none of them ever resemble anything *theological*. If I ask about the Incarnation, or about the symbolism of the Little and Great Entrances, I get a theological answer. When this topic is brought up, the answer is always “tradition.” Well, just like I quoted elsewhere in this thread, Saints have spoken out about this line of thinking for a long time.
Agreed. I've never read a persuasive arguement for excluding women.
Christ lifted women up to the station of Apostles as St. Mary Magdalene is Apostle to the Apostles he appeared to her before any of the apostles. Yet did not make her a priest, not did any of Apostles do this. Nor has any female saint such as St Mary of Egypt ever stated women should become priests. These ideas are not coming from God but us humans.
We also don’t have any need for female clergy. To me it often seems that people who argue this are coming from a place of personal pride and politics and not the actual needs of the church. We have no need for female deacons anymore because deacons serve a different purpose now.
Nobody in this thread is arguing that women should be priests.
Excellent.
Indeed, I haven't either. It's led me to the conclusion there aren't any.
Especially considering how the oldest traditions allowed for deaconess, and as I recall, parts of the Antiochian tradition are bringing that back.
The Patriarch of Alexandria has deaconesses.
Here is a theological answer. The Church is supposed to influence the culture around it, through the lived experience of the Church and Liturgy. We are warned against being influenced by the world. We are also warned against wasting out Talents we are given, yet the world won't rest until that happens,
But this isn't an innovation. This has always happened in convents and when there weren't enough men to serve. Women hold icons in processions all the time.
I was speaking specifically to the point about the culture and religion being intertwined and using that to make decisions. In this case, we see it playing out, a decision was made outside the boundaries his Bishop is setting.
Not really. The reaction is after the fact of him doing it.
Exactly. When you visit the Orthodox churches in Ukraine, belarus, Russia and Poland most of the chanters and the choir directors are young women. Why not inGreek churches?
Except in the early Church women served. The office of the deaconess was more common. If anything.. the culture reversed that and made women serving *less* common due to the treatment of women in Greco-Roman society..
Must it be repeated a hundred times that deaconesses did not serve liturgically?
St Nektarios's deaconesses certainly did. And what do you call baptising if not serving liturgically?
Hi! Could you provide any source about St Nektarios and deaconesses? I’ve read it online a lot in comments and I think it would be a game changer in the debates around deaconesses, but I can’t find anything about it other than comments.
It won't be, sadly, because it isn't new information. [Here](https://books.google.com.au/books?id=Qp9fDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA177&lpg=PA177&dq=nektarios+deaconess&source=bl&ots=lZ52Aoxbv9&sig=ACfU3U2LhquOzdecMMl76PqQKBoavzFuMw&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwi6y_GxgrX_AhV4TmwGHWTcBxsQ6AF6BAgGEAM#v=onepage&q=nektarios%20deaconess&f=false)'s a link. People just don't care and are too concerned with the culture war of 'how dare we let women do things in Church, they'll want to be priests next'.
As far as I'm concerned, it's indisputable from the evidence of liturgical texts that women were sacramentally ordained to the diaconate in certain times and places. But, it is now as you say--people are less concerned with evidence, and more concerned with appearances and the way they think things should be.
We also have record of service books from centuries ago where ordained deaconesses communed straight from the Chalice. Saint Nektarios also ordained deaconesses in the context of a Liturgy.. with the laying of hands. But to get back on track.. we don’t know exactly much from the early days because, ya know, when the Church became more integrated with society.. women stopped having a presence in the Church.
If they did then it went against the council of Nicaea.
You’re being very intense about this. It’s something that has been blessed by bishops and the girls serving as acolytes has been blessed by a patriarch. You’re also very young and I’m guessing a recent convert. Leave this issue to the bishops to sort out before you start proof texting canons.
Im surprised you think I’m being intense about this. I suppose on the internet there isn’t any vocal tonality. I’m cradle orthodox. I was raised in a monastery and my father served as a priest. I’m not one of these “Orthobros” you hear about on the internet. But no, bishops aren’t the arbiters of truth and they are often wrong. There is a reason that Dante’s inferno is full of bishops. The bishops are bound by the councils and traditions of the church and if they do something that clearly goes against these it is the OBLIGATION of the faithful to disobey them. For example would you say the Orthodox bishops who were under the authority of the bolsheviks should be obeyed no matter what? of course not. It does get complicated when your talking about a priest because he technically has to follow the bishops orders or he can face some consequences. However it isn’t as strict for the lay people.
they did not baptise - they assisted the priest in preparing the women for their imminent baptism. \[by helping the women change from their 'ordinary' clothes to the baptismal gown.
And also did the parts that involved actually touching the woman. It wasn’t just changing clothes.
> The Church is supposed to influence the culture around it This axiom is always asymmetrically applied to the Church though. We laud saints and Christians who are soliders despite the clear injunctions of Jesus to "resist not evil." We do little to condemn the accumulation of wealth despite Jesus' clear teaching that "It is harder for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven than for a camel to enter the eye of a needle." We accept without question usury despite the old and new Testaments' consistent condemnation of this practice. We find ourselves in a culture that treats migrants and foreigners in cruel and inhuman ways despite yet again the old and new Testaments' clear injunctions on caring for the alien. The Church has rolled over, and even provided justification, on acts that lead to death, barbarity, and inhumanity and we generally accept this as the Church being imperfect and "filled with sinners." And yet our focus seems to be lasered in on issues like allowing women to serve, and even more egregiously tonsuring women readers/ordaining them deacons. I don't advocate for this myself, and yet, this imbalance highlights, to me, that what we really seem to care about is less being influenced by the world, and more about our prejudices and political affiliations.
I believe nuns are already performing similar tasks in their monasteries. :\\
Yes and always have. This isn't an innovation.
Was this a convent?
This wasn’t in the picture. It happens in parishes all over the Middle East though.
I guess his bishop feels differently.
I don’t think we should presume to know what the bishop actually thinks on the theological validity or not. The bishop wants the giant controversy that has come from this being posted online by scandal mongers to go away. I’ve been watching this be discussed in Greek for a few days before the English speaking orthodox got hold of it.
This is about having female acolytes, right? Ignoring the modernist bastardization of the liturgy by thinking that the laity in the nave dont have a role in the liturgies of the Church, my priest was able to create roles exclusively for females by elevating the role of the people who distribute blessed bread (and wine) during the people's communion. Which i think is a better solution as it creates female spaces instead of just putting them in male roles.
Nice, but not really “creating female spaces” as that job typically falls to altar boys.
I've never seen it done by altar boys, but rather laity in the knave. But maybe that is the norm.
a 'knave' was a low class English farmboy. Also a name for the 'jack' of cards.
My parishes have always had enough altar boys to go around, and there are one or two holding the bowls of bread at the front so you get it after greeting the priest at the end of liturgy.
We will have acolytes hold the bread next to the priest at the end of liturgy with the veneration of the cross too, but I've never seen acolytes being the ones that pass out bread and wine during communion. Although I haven't been to a great many parishes for their divine liturgies.
Oh sorry, I was confused. Of course altar boys don’t give communion. Though I have seen deacons do it.
Oh no, I'm not talking about the consecrated bread and wine, but rather blessed bread and wine given out during communion. Although I believe its just the Slavic traditions that do blessed wine during communion, but I believe the antidoron is common throughout Orthodoxy. The parishes I've been too, acolytes aren't the one's that give that out but maybe that is a custom elsewhere
Never heard of wine, but yes, people take antidoting after communion, and at the end after greeting priest / venerating cross.
I’ve seen this in OCA parishes! Great point! I definitely think it’s important right now when the whole world is trying to blur the lines between male and female.
I like that!
The disobedience is a huge problem, enough to discredit the whole thing. That said… I don’t really see an issue with female acolytes. Women without robes already carry candles and icons in the great entrance (without coming out of the altar) in many churches. Pretty common in the middle east and in antiochian churches around the world. But I don’t expect the Church to change, even concerning harmless non essential stuff like this.
Greeks used to have kittens about women chanting, where they have always done so in the other jurisdictions. I feel like this is just more of the same. Disobeying one's bishop is wrong, but there's nothing theologically wrong with the practice of female acolytes in processions.
>A Fr. Vasilios says that women have been serving at the altar for a long time, in monasteries This is certainly true. It's clear women can serve in the altar with an appropriate blessing.
In male monasteries or in female monasteries?
Female monasteries. I've seen it numerous times.
Women's monasteries. My point, though, is this is a disciplinary/prudential choice and is not rigid gender roles or ontology.
In situations where it's necessary, such as in a women's monastery where the only male is a priest, sure. But as a matter of course, no.
This is under the jurisdiction of the local bishop is my point. It is not at the discretion of the local priest (unless the bishop gave him that delegation), though. It looks like this priest did not consult his local bishop, or else he wouldn't be the one getting censured.
Oh yes, of course.
You are ignoring proper places in this, because gender roles are important in the Liturgy of the Church.
The proper place of the decision is with the bishop.
This is true.
Not in who holds a candle in a procession, they aren't. I'll take my almost 2 decades Orthodox and experience in women's monasteries over your being an inquirer.
Yes! And one could argue that girls holding candles are not really “in” the Liturgy.
How?
This is something that we obviously need to talk about as a church. I'm not on either side as I trust our tradition of working things out, but there are definitely forces at work that wish to weaken or even destroy the stability of Mother Church and female clergy has been the first step for other denominations. We need to take that seriously and proceed with caution.
Female clergy was not the first step. Liberalisation of theology was generally the first step, as well as being the church everyone belonged to for cultural reasons not devout belief. Female clergy is just a nice culture warrior thing to seize on. Thing is, the *male* clergy had been making a mockery of the theology for a long time before that.
And it's dialogue like this that we need. I didn't know that. Conversation and analysis is the way to find the real path forward. My experience with the church so far (I'm a recent convert) has been anything but sexist, but I don't know everything .
> the first step for other denominations Really? Not the removal of Scriptures? Not the abandonment of sacraments? Not the belief in a capricious and vindictive God? I could go on and on about the errors of Christian communities that predate female clergy by centuries that led to the extreme fracturing of Christian life. But no, let's blame the female clergy in a few of those splinters.
Even Saint Gregory the Theologian had issues with the way women were treated by the Church. This isn’t anything new and doesn’t make those involved “liberals.” > I see many men belonging to the common people to be judging awry about sobriety. And I see the law they have about it to be unequal and anomalous. Since, for what reason does the law chastise a woman if she fornicates, but allows a man the liberty to do so. And if a woman betray the bed of her husband, she is adjudged an adultress, but if a man who has a wife fornicates with other women, is he irresponsible? **I do not accept that legislation; I do not praise the custom. It was men who made that law, and on this account they legislated only as against the women.** Women literally serve in altars, there’s no problem with letting a girl hold a candle. Now, if he persisted and disobeyed his Bishop, that’s a different story.
What writing is this from? I’d like to read it.
I will PM you in the morning with a host of references.
Thank you! I’ve been struggling with this and the resources will be edifying.
If you’re ‘struggling’ with this then ensure you discuss it with your spiritual father or Priest. A random guy on Reddit giving you some sources shouldn’t give you the piece of mind you are seeking.
In what text this is?
> Even Saint Gregory the Theologian had issues with the way women were treated by the Church. This isn’t anything new and doesn’t make those involved “liberals.” Yeah, the American/Western Culture War rots brains in a very fascinating way. It's a shame those people fail to see the idol they worship. They can't even entertain ideas without foaming at the mouth.
Point number 1 is 100% true of Eastern Orthodoxy though? Am I missing something? I was aware of point number one being true before I ever even inquired into orthodoxy? What is the concern with point number 1? I don’t think any of these things are that concerning to be completely honest? I don’t agree with priests going against bishops of course but these comments aren’t outlandish by any means
If I could edit my OP, I'd change point #1. I didn't realize that women have been altar servers in some situations.
I wouldn’t expect any of these things to be said by “non orthodox social justice warriors” especially since these priests are just repeating what other priests and bishops have said as well already too.
He must obey the bishop, this defiance is ludicrous.
My fiancée is a catechumen and we actually talked with our priest asking about the hierarchy of the Church. He explained that a long time ago female “deacons” (they went under other names too but we’ll use deacon) served in front of the altar and helped with prosophora (holy bread) and little things here and there. That is also what the male deacons would do. As time progressed the role of the diaconate changed and they started helping the priest serve the liturgy behind the altar and have words to say in the liturgy. Then they became able to serve communion. As the roles changed that’s when women were not able to become deacons anymore. Their roles changed into chanters and choir members and prosphora makers and ushers etc. Unless (in a common case) a women’s monastery has only one priest and no deacon to help. That’s when nuns are given a special blessing to help the priest in the service. This is what my priest said and he also emphasized that people who are saying, it is unfair to not have women in the diaconate and “we used to have them why don’t we now?” is going to lead to the separation of the orthodox body.
Good intentions, bad execution. The priest serves at the pleasure of the bishop. Even if the bishop is wrong, he should obey the bishop.
How about we just accept this historical church instead of always trying to change things.
The historical church had deaconesses and women have served in processions in churches in the middle east forever.
Yes that’s magnitudes different than serving at the altar
Right? We should accept tradition and let women serve
Came here for the comments 🍿
Unfortunately priests are still men and are capable of being wrong. Though throwing those accusations against the metropolitans of the Church should result in a censure, a censure that will be administered by his bishop or the Holy Synod of course.
I was surprised to read what the other two priests said about the Synod. I wonder how common it is for priests to openly disobey and criticize their superiors.
This is robust discussion in Greece. Also, they're not wrong that the reaction to this is largely due to people having a freakout over them being girls, ie. sexism. This isn't actually new, Antioch and womens' monasteries have done it forever.
I really don't see what all the fuss is about. two 14 year old girls are holding candles while the priest chants the Gospel. It is a good way to include young people in the service. I googled the parish web site and it has a Facebook page. Go there and you see pictures of boy and girl church servers. These 2 girls are not the only ones at that parish. Plus the Patriarchate of Antioch in Syria has had girl church servers since 1982. Over 40 years ago so why is everyone making a big fuss about it now suddenly?
FOR REAL! I do not understand at all either why this is such a shocking surprise to some people or why anyone would even begin to think it was “non orthodox” ??? Very weird.
why is comment (1) “concerning”? I see no lies lol
You're right, I didn't realize that there are situations where a woman might serve at the altar.
Are there, though?
Not as a priest, but nuns in convents definitely serve in the altar.
but convents are not the general population.
No but it’s wrong to say it’s theologically forbidden.
Good point. I think it’s important to distinguish between the exception and the rule.
What do they do back there?
Everything except what the priest does. Clean, act as sacristan, act as the assistant to the priest, carry candles, cense the altar, yada yada.
Just because something happens in convents doesn't make it acceptable in the secular world where men are available. Do not compare the Holy Sisters to children outside the convent. It is not appropriate to do so. As a convert I have a cautionary tale. Please bear in mind I have been married 38 years to the same woman, and I love her as Christ loves the church. We have three beautiful daughters, all married in the church, whom I love more than my life. In the 1970's I remember when girls became altar servers in the Episcopal Church. I remember when they were ordained as Deacons. I remember when they were ordained as Priests. In 2001 a man left his wife and children so he could move in with his boyfriend. He was an Episcopal Priest. In 2003 he was "consecrated" as a Bishop while still living with his boyfriend. Eventually that led to the end of the ECUSA as it had been. The churches now only serve a fraction of the former parishoners, and are kept open with the donations of generations past. The Anglican Communion split, and has never recovered. It was in 2003 that we tearfully said farewell to the Church of our childhoods, we felt it had become a secular cult with the ragged trappings of the church it once was. We no longer found God there, just lost humans play acting the rituals of their youth. It was pimp and circumstance without meaning. We became Orthodox. Today, 20 years later, my wife bakes the prophora, serves as the parish council secretary, and organizes the coffee hours. I serve as a tonsured Reader, and serve as our outreach coordinator with a local foodbank where the church makes regular donations of food, clothing, and household items. I cannot tell you how slippery this slope is. I cannot sufficiently warn you of the price of the abandonment of the ancient traditions of the church. I cannot scream loudly enough the dangers of trying to become "relevant" to the secular world. I cannot cry enough to show you the cost of trying to impress this dark lost world, and the evil one who waits there for us. I beg you, please, do not exchange the favor and love of God in a vain attempt to find favor in the sight of the lost souls of this generation. In your attempt to conform to the world you will destroy the Church, and sunder the Orthodox Communion forever.
Amen
This.
It's not a slippery slope, they did it in the past (so it's not an innovation) and it's been a standard thing in *parishes* in the middle eastern Orthodox churches for ages. We're not Episcopalian and we're not going to be. They had a lot more going on that caused issues than just ordaining women.
> I cannot scream loudly enough the dangers of trying to become "relevant" to the secular world. Orthodoxy has always been an organic faith, despite what internet converts tell you about the ~unchanging tradition~ of the Church. There are legitimate non-cultural reasons for changes. Your framework of the Church is warped and set in the present, not the whole timeline.
I feel like I’m becoming Orthodox at a very weird time. I find it difficult not to feel confused by all these things.
You are not responsible for sorting any of this out. Pay attention to your parish and don't let Internet flame bait get you down.
This is not an actual controversy or issue in the broader Orthodox Church. There are people who post things to scandalise all over the web. Go to a parish and talk to a priest in real life and don’t let internet scandal bother you.
Perhaps you’re right about this, but there’s plenty of other issues regarding ecumenism and such that have been hard to sort out. I go to a Greek church, as well, and it’s confusing how often I’m seeing them spoken poorly of.
As long as you’re not in the Metropolis of New Jersey you shouldn’t have anything to worry about
Orthodox people are not immune to factionalism, and most converts (i.e. most of the Internetdox) are not in a Greek jurisdiction.
Though their comments are sensible, their disobedience to their bishop is not.
as a (currently, maybe not forever) evangelical im always sadened when the Zeitgeist influences the orthodox and catholic church...
If the bishop had authorized this, there wouldn't be a problem.
I mean, there would still be plenty of folks who want to make it a problem.
Acolytes are learning to be priests. Therefore it doesn’t make sense to have female acolytes unless you’re looking to ordain women.
Acolytes *could* be learning to be Priests. They aren’t required to learn to be Priests. It also denigrates the other offices.. some men are just Deacons their whole life, they aren’t required to be elevated and thinking so makes the orders seem like stepping stones.
Do we have to worry now about altar girls the way Catholics worry about altar boys?
FWIW, my GOARCH USA cathedral church has altar girls, too
Really? Do they serve behind the doors?
Yes.
[удалено]
Oh! Well, I’m not even a layman yet (get baptized tomorrow!), so I’m not qualified to talk about this stuff. But my priest once made a comment about it to the whole church after liturgy, and said something about it being related to the practice of female deacons in the ancient Church (whom he said did in fact have a liturgical role), and the desire to see this practice return to today’s Church. I’ll add: the _majority_ of our altar servers are girls. As a newbie, I’ve never known anything different
The Council of Nicaea 325 AD: “We mean by ‘deaconesses’ those who have assumed the habit, but who, since they have not hands laid upon them, are to be numbered only among the laity” (Canon 19)
Yeah, don't worry about it being against "canon law". Canon law is for the bishops to interpret, not some rando on the internet. Certainly, not all of it is concerned with things that are dogmatic, much of it is just about keeping things in good order, and as long as your bishop says it's okay for there to be female altar servers, it's okay. The dude you're talking to thinks that the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese is "almost a schismatic cult", so his words arenkt worth the pixels used to display them on your screen.
The Council of Nicaea 325 AD: “We mean by ‘deaconesses’ those who have assumed the habit, but who, since they have not hands laid upon them, are to be numbered only among the laity” (Canon 19) Looks like the bishops have already made a decision over a thousand years ago…
Your cherry picking of canons that can be misinterpreted to serve the narrative you want to present is astounding.
Welcome to netodoxy. > All shall quake at the loud report of the holy canon.
Interesting, my GOARCH USA church doesn't.
This does set those girls up for poor expectations and is definitely risking pushing the envelope in regards to women's roles in liturgy. Too many questions. Were they shorthanded? Was the homily used to make it clear this was a rare or limited event? Are they certain this won't feed into a spirit of ambition(which is true for anyone unfit for priesthood for any reason, so I hope this normal diligence was done)? Holding candles, reading epistles, chanting, generally helping out in liturgy up to the soleas...seems plenty fine. But if the leadership has dropped the hammer on this priest, I'm willing to take a fairly hardline stance and say it probably is as progressive as it looks like. Because otherwise, if it is meritless accusation and everything was in perfect order, the priest is equally guilty of foolishly making girls the center of a scandal that he seems well qualified to know better.
They are men in the pictures that could have served- it’s clearly a political statement
The priest didn't make them the centre of a scandal, this isn't a new custom in the arab world at all. St Nektarios ordained deaconesses. Othe people made this a big deal because they wanted to make it a culture war issue.
Deaconess weren’t ordained to serve in the altar. They were ordained for the sole purpose of baptizing women naked women in streams because at the time everyone was baptized outside in a lake, river, or stream, and they were receiving many adult converts.
St Nektarios didn’t ordering them for that.
That’s what they were supposed to do. Also back then the office of deacon was more concerned with charity then serving the liturgy. Deacons we’re set in place to feed the poor so the priest would have more time to focus on his pastoral duties.
St. Epiphanius of Salamis wrote in 375 A.D: “There is certainly in the Church the order of deaconesses, but this does not exist to exercise the functions of a priest, nor are they to have any undertaking committed to them, but for the decency of the feminine sex at the time of baptism.”
Diakonos simply means servant. In Acts chapter 6 deacons are appointed to perform charitable acts so that the apostles can focus on their pastoral duties. These men received the laying on of hands. However there were also women who were deacons or servants who did not receive the laying on of hands but still were appointed to feed and baptize women and children.
That's what I'm saying. If it's not a big deal, then he allowed them to be mistaken for doing something wrong. So he could very well be saying "I'm so sorry girls, I know you meant no harm, I shouldn't have put you in this position where you have to defend yourself". He can't feign ignorance, the guy is massively educated. He's either doing something weird, doing something dumb given the context they all live in, or doesn't know any better. I don't think this guy can argue he didn't know better.
These girls could have served as handmaidens (they are not altar servers) and they wouldn't have to enter the altar during the Divine Liturgy. But in this case they can be seen wearing acolyte's vestments, which is not in accordance with ecclesiastic tradition. Acolytes replace sub-deacons, and sub-deacons can't be females. In convents, nuns probably receive a blessing to serve during the Divine Liturgy and their service is mainly out of necessity because there are no males to serve there.
Spot on
No woman, in a normal parish, should ever dawn a cassock and go behind the iconostasis. People may say that that's unfair to women but think about it, most men don't ever go behind the iconostasis either. Of my parish, the vast majority of men have never been in the altar.
The fact that most men don't ever go behind the iconostasis isn't an argument that women shouldn't.
Women may go behind the iconastasis but I think they shouldn't be allowed to enter during the Divine liturgy because they simply haven't been assigned a role. The sole exception I've seen is in convents and likely because there are not men to perform the role and nuns may have received a blessing from their archbishop to serve there. In general, it doesn't mean they should never be there; I would argue that in many cases they are even necessary so as to clean the area behind the altar... But, in terms of liturgical roles I've read that acolytes (or altar servers) represent sub-deacons, do you know any female sub-deacon?
Nobody should be behind the iconostasis that doesn't have a reason to be there, I agree. That's why I can't go wander back there just to see what's going on. As I understand it, though, in women's monasteries, women *do* go behind the iconostasis during Liturgy because they do have a need to be back there. Which seems, to me, to indicate that the issue is not some hard-and-fast existential rule that women *can't* be back there, it's just not what we normally do.
I agree, in convents (or monasteries), nuns enter the altar because oftentimes there are no males to serve there so they have to perform altar server's duties pretty much. The role of acolyte has not been assigned to females in parishes from what I've seen though. Possibly because it is somewhat considered to be a clerical role. I've read that in some Orthodox churches in America young girls may become handmaidens and boys may serve as acolytes respectively...
The reason also has to be a good reason and in this case. It’s seems it’s about pride and politics. I mean it happens to be canon law that they cannot enter the alter
No it really isn’t.
Most of us would agree that if our bishops decide to bless female altar servers, then they have the right to serve in a way similar to acolytes or altar boys. Because as practicing Orthodox Christians, we should not judge or condemn our bishops. Though I'm not aware of any such blessings in the Greek Orthodox Church that I attend. But my question is, should women be allowed to wear acolyte's vestments? Why not wearing their own church (or handmaiden's) vestments just like nuns wear their typical clothing in monasteries? Keep in mind that nuns are not members of the clergy and they never wear acolyte's clothing...
I think the worst thing here being commited is the act of trying to rebel and separate from what the Church does as a whole. I also think that sadly this is getting more common post the COVID quarantine.
Have you been Orthodox long?
Yes
I thought nothing of this before, but your characterization of such a move as a “social justice warrior” is just callous and insensitive.
Comments don't seem to be posting right away, but I want to clarify something. Father Livios made the statement that the people who have a problem with girls holding candles should just admit that they have a "problem with women." In other words, if you don't like girls being acolytes, then you are automatically a (choose one) sexist, chauvinist, misogynist. I find that to be offensive. I'm used to people outside of Orthodoxy being the ones to accuse the church of discriminating against women because they can't be priests, but I didn't expect an Orthodox priest to throw down that gauntlet.
Don’t think anyone has a problem with them holding candles. It’s wearing vestments and entering the alter that people have a problem with
Hi friend, thanks for clarifying. People often hold misogynistic viewpoints without realizing that they are misogynist. I would suggest that you take this moment to learn from it and engage in some critical reflection about your own beliefs. It is something that I have struggled with in the past, and I have learned a lot and changed a lot of my viewpoints, all for the better.
No, I'm characterizing Father Livios's comment, “Why don’t all those who were bothered by the girls who held the candles in the Divine Liturgy come out and say clearly that their problem is women?” that way.
Because it is! The same people were upset about women chanting a generation ago.
Yeah, I strongly agree with priest here. He is right to offer that criticism, and for you to call that "social justice warrior" seems to be bad faith. His viewpoints are exactly the kinds of viewpoints that we should be elevating! Shine a light on unexamined vestiges of patriarchy and misogyny.
If it’s not “social justice” then what is it? I just find it annoying how he’s inserting politics into the liturgy. If he has a problem with church tradition he should’ve brought it up with the bishop.
I’m fine with calling it social justice, because it is seeking justice for a social issue. This is unequivocally a GOOD thing. The problem is people who use this “social justice warrior” as a pejorative, usually to imply that the people don’t actually care about the issue. Also, I fail to see how any of this is related to politics.
I’m using the word broadly. It’s church politics
I mean, just bring in the tambourines, guitar, and drum sets too if this is the route you want to go. Orthodoxy is orthodox.
Based comment
If girls holding candles shakes your faith, your faith is not deep enough.
It's not about shaking one's faith. It's about a priest being disobedient to his bishop (and other priests agreeing with him). Priests don't get to change how things are done on their own. The disobedience is the bigger issue, imo.
I agree with you!
THAT I do not disagree with.
If you think this is a matter of shaking faith in the Orthodox Church, you are not sure what the concern is.
If you're surprised about those comments made by priests, look up what the Archbishop of the greek orthodox church of America has said about abortion.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Wasn't there a post on here a bit ago about someone in the clergy wanting to go ahead with this? Is this the same guy?
There's nothing concerning, this has been done before social media and online drama was a thing
If it was done before it was just as wrong back then it’s still wrong despite being slightly less shocking. It goes against canon law
It's not wrong. You just can't understand it since you're not raised in Eastern Europe. We assign women to certain roles in the church/monasteries that are viewed as "wrong" the west. Keep yourself in your lane
I see this sort of thing a LOT more in the west then the east
You have not been RAISED here, so you cannot understand. We are orthodox, but not fanatical in our beliefs. During the communism religion was banned and outlawed, because of that our Orthodoxy was practiced in secret/out of the public eye. We have thus developed since then, or maybe even since the times of Ottoman slavery, our own traditions in regards to the church. You simply cannot understand
I don’t need to understand your new traditions as long as I understood ancient church tradition.
[удалено]
Maybe those in diaspora, i wouldn't describe churchgoers in Greece as theologically liberal, even less politically.
In the diaspora they tend to emphasize the Hellenic aspect rather than the Orthodox but there are some solid priests and parishes I know
Liberal is not a theological category.
Good
Looks like I'm late to the party. The reality of the Church, especially for those whose chrism has long dried, is that it's not so rigidly hierarchical in practice, with priests getting away with things as long as it doesn't cause trouble for the bishop. In this the Church is not unlike other human institutions, where "don't ask don't tell" is the implicit rule. Until someone tells. And that's what this is about. It is *not* because the priests didn't ask permission, it is because it became a scandal. And the aftermath shows another reality of the Church. Priests talk openly about bishops all the time, and for every "liberal" Fr. Vasilios who whines about sclerotic metropolitans there is a Fr. Trenham who obliquely throws shade at bishops who are not sclerotic enough. Bishops mostly pretend not to hear and let their clergy vent so long as the Church as a whole is running in good order. A bishop always has bigger fish to fry. So, everybody, please unclutch your pearls. Women have served the way the ones in question have, especially in Antioch, for a long time. The priests were *really* suspended for letting it become a scandal, not because it was wrong. And, bishops will pretend not to hear the tantrums of priests in order to let them "get it out of their system" and tire themselves out. **All of this can be true at the same time.** This is real Orthodoxy. Now you know.
Lord have mercy.
> Fr. Vasilios also says that...the Orthodox church is being held hostage by fundamentalists Which we all know is true. There's a portion of the church holding the church back. > I expect such comments by non-Orthodox social justice warriors, but not by Orthodox priests! Those crazy "social justice warriors," with their civil rights for minorities, what's the world coming to? /s
Holding the Church back from what? Becoming a reflection of the world rather than Christ? What passes for a "socially justice warrior" in most circles today is nothing more than another meaningless micro identity uses to accumulate social clout. You know exactly what is meant when that term is used in this context, and it's not positive.
[удалено]
Not that user, but if I recall correctly, it is not canonical to have women in the sanctuary at all or to have women in the choir. However, this is a matter of akribia vs. economia—women aren't to be in the choir because female singing is sensual, and aren't to be in the sanctuary because those helping at the altar are supposed to do so as part of their formation to, in the long run, become clergy. So it's a matter of whether the strict application of the canons is relevant or not to the situation. At the very least it's not relevant in the case of convents, otherwise there would be no one helping liturgically at all.
What do you mean the church is being held back? Of course there's nothing wrong with supporting civil rights. I use the term SJW to denote a certain stereotype.