ITT We Discuss Theology

[Psi U MC Vito]

Originally Posted by Drolefille

Too many terms are used for more than one thing. Anyway it'd be such a huge culture shift, I maintain you'd have better luck getting the overall Anglican church to recognize Rome.

I'm aware that some exist, that wasn't what I was saying.

Oh I know that which is why I said while I would like to see it happen, I doubt it ever will. Ideally I would love to see something like a return to the old Ecumenical Councils, but again doubt that will happen.

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by Psi U MC Vito

Oh I know that which is why I said while I would like to see it happen, I doubt it ever will. Ideally I would love to see something like a return to the old Ecumenical Councils, but again doubt that will happen.

It still seems weird to say, as a non-member, isn't that like me saying I wish that Reform Judaism would really go back to older traditions or something?

[Psi U MC Vito]

You have a point, but as a former Roman Catholic, and one who still considers myself a Catholic, I feel I have the right to have some opinion.

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by Psi U MC Vito

You have a point, but as a former Roman Catholic, and one who still considers myself a Catholic, I feel I have the right to have some opinion.

Oh i know, I have opinions too, it's just weird, ya know?

[SWTXBelle]

Poking around my parish website and found this interesting map of the emerging Anglican Ordinariate:

http://www.walsingham-church.org/site/Liturgy.html

fyi, I love Dr. Brand's discussion of the liturgy.

[Psi U MC Vito]

I found an interesting article on the Ordinates. http://www.theanglocatholic.com/2010...l-ordinariate/

[Psi U MC Vito]

Instead of continuing to derail the other thread I figured I would bump this. The comment on female deacons really confused me.

[preciousjeni]

Originally Posted by Psi U MC Vito

Instead of continuing to derail the other thread I figured I would bump this. The comment on female deacons really confused me.

I'd be interested to hear more about the female deacons as well. Just to give some background, clerical roles are traditionally only open to men across all the Orthodox groups.

However, there was a time that women could be ordained to the Minor & Holy Orders up to and including the role of Deacon. Back in the day, their responsibilities largely centered on ministering to women. Deacons can, of course, dispense pre-sanctified communion, among other things.

I have been very interested in the possibility of bringing female deacons back to the Russian Orthodox Church. I would, personally, be interested in assuming this role.

[Psi U MC Vito]

Not surprising since there are biblical references to female deacons.

[barbino]

Sorry about the further derailing of the other thread. We also have female deacons in one of the 2 churches that we attend/are members of (Korean Presbyterian pastor) but actually non-denominational evangelical.

My husband (a seminary student) says that per the Bible deacons should be men (Judges 6; 1 Timothy 5:17, 1 Timothy 3:1-7) but that there are deaconesses as the tradition varies from denomination to denomination. I try not to ask him for clarification too often but he does know where to find it.

[Psi U MC Vito]

In the bible there are also references to Deaconesses (sp?). I was just surprised that the Orthodox, who hold that it is not possible to ordain women, would have deaconesses.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by barbino

My husband (a seminary student) says that per the Bible deacons should be men (Judges 6; 1 Timothy 5:17, 1 Timothy 3:1-7) but that there are deaconesses as the tradition varies from denomination to denomination. I try not to ask him for clarification too often but he does know where to find it.

That's one reading of the passages you cite -- that deacons should be men -- but not the only reading of them. (The Timothy ones at least; I don't know what Judges has to do with it, given that (a) the office of diakonos is a New Testament concept, not a Hebrew one, and (b) there were female judges.) I know many seminary students, graduates and professors who would say it is not an accurate reading.

One could continue reading in 1 Timothy 3 to verse 11, which speaks of "the women" and seems to be talking about what kind of women should be deacons. (The other meaning would be that Paul is referring to deacon's wives, but that doesn't really fit contextually.) Then there's the case of Romans 16:1, where Paul specifically refers to Phoebe as a deacon. True, the word diakonos, from which we get the English "deacon" literally means "servant" or "one who waits on others," so Paul could simply be calling her a servant of the church. But what, then, do we make of the fact that Paul used the masculine diakonos rather than the feminine diakona? It would seem that if he simply meant "servant" he would have used the later. His use of the masculine in reference to a women could suggest that he did indeed mean it as a title or designation, not simply as a description. Literally, he says "I commend to you Phoebe, our sister, she is deacon (ousan diakonon) of the assembly (church/ekklesia) at Cenchrea."

I think one has to be careful about reading more into 1 Timothy than Paul intended. If indeed it is setting forth absolute requirements, then it would seem that deacons must not only be men, but must be married ("the husband of one wife") and fathers ("manage his children and his household well.") I think Paul's point was not that only men can be deacons (otherwise, why verse 11 about "the women"?), but rather one should be able to manage one's own affairs before one tries to manage the church's affairs, and that bigamists or polygamists need not apply.

It seems odd to say the least that a female diaconate would have existed under the early Church Fathers (which it did) if Paul had so clearly forbidden it. How these female deacons' roles compared to (or differed from) their male counterparts can certainly be debated, but it's pretty clear that Paul assumed women would be deacons.

[adventstoryAOII]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

One could continue reading in 1 Timothy 3 to verse 11, which speaks of "the women" and seems to be talking about what kind of women should be deacons. (The other meaning would be that Paul is referring to deacon's wives, but that doesn't really fit contextually.) Then there's the case of Romans 16:1, where Paul specifically refers to Phoebe as a deacon. True, the word diakonos, from which we get the English "deacon" literally means "servant" or "one who waits on others," so Paul could simply be calling her a servant of the church. But what, then, do we make of the fact that Paul used the masculine diakonos rather than the feminine diakona? It would seem that if he simply meant "servant" he would have used the later. His use of the masculine in reference to a women could suggest that he did indeed mean it as a title or designation, not simply as a description. Literally, he says "I commend to you Phoebe, our sister, she is deacon (ousan diakonon) of the assembly (church/ekklesia) at Cenchrea."

I second this (studying Classical Greek currently). Paul could also have potentially used another word for "servant" o doulos (yes, it is a masculine/neuter noun, but it can be used with the feminine form of "autos" for emphasis). That's pretty much my contribution, as small as it is.

[SWTXBelle]

It's happening! January 1, 2012

http://www.walsingham-church.org/site/Ordinariate.html

Interesting Q & A about what it all means:

http://www.theanglocatholic.com/

[Psi U MC Vito]

Went to the Akathist of St. Katherine today at the local Antiochian Orthodox mission in town. It was quite interesting.