www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology Ordination of Women to the Priesthood

Note to Sharon:

The software used to power this forum works differently with the various versions of Netscape and Internet Explorer and how each is configured. If you post a message and it does not appear your browser may be configured to display the page from cache rather than to go and get the entire page again.

For Netscape 4.7 you can check the following:

Edit -> Preferences -> Advanced -> Cache

Under "Document in cache is compared to document on network" check either "Every time" or "Once per session". Then click "OK" to save. If you choose "Every Time", Netscape will go and check the web server to see if the page has changed each time you load it. If you check "Once per session", Netscape will compare the document in your cache to the document on the web server only the first time you visit the page. But (in this case) hitting "Reload" will reload the entire page from the web server.


For Internet Explorer 5.0 you can check the following:

Tools -> Internet Options -> General -> Temporary ->

Under "Check for newer versions of stored pages:" choose "Automatically" and click "OK".


Please note that the directions vary a bit in the different versions of Netscape and Internet Explorer. If you are running a version of either that is below 4.0 then I strongly suggest that you upgrade (keeping in mind which versions work best with your computer). Some versions below 4.0 may display these pages very strangely and not allow you to post messages.

Dear Sharon,
My response was very authentic, kind, respectful and in conformity with the teachings of the Church regarding the role of women. My opinions do not count nor my will but that of God's will. Modernists and heterodox are always looking to reinvent the wheel when the wheel is just fine. It is those who are trying to subvert the Church who do not have a proper understanding of the preserved eternal truths. My statements should not have offended you on a personal level but I certainly do know where you stand on the spectrum. Many statements that came from the lips of our Lord were taking offensively because their hearts were malignant and stubborn. I highly suggest you speak to your bishop so you may know the truth inherent in my statements. Female eucharistic ministers are an abnormality found in the Roman catholic Church. You should not found them anywhere in the Eastern Churches. The truth must be heard and advanced at the cost of stamping out heretical teachings wherever they may be. Heterodox and heretics need to sincerely repent of such heresies and come back into the fold. If you feel the need for women to be ordained then welcome to the Protestant world. I truly am convinced that Roman Catholics and Protestants are one and the same breed if you do your homework and research. This is not the case for Byzantine Catholics in regards to theology and history and worship.

Dear Dragnani,
I have no impulse to respond to your outlandish remarks other than relax and have a shot of ouzzoo kid.

Sincerely a firm believer of truth,
Robert

A warning: I will henceforth delete any posts on this topic that are directed more to persons than to the issues. The usual abysmal standard of internet discourse is unacceptable in any forum of which I am moderator. The posts of Stuart and Dr. John reflect the opposing sides very well. I would suggest everyone re-read these posts and use them as a guide to their own reflections.

In Christ
unworthy monk Maximos

Glory be to Jesus Christ!

Speaking as woman, it was very hard for me at first to accept that women cannot be ordained as priests. But now I believe the ordination of women would be disastrous.
This issue has many layers and is difficult to explain, so please bear with me.
My husband is of Lenape Indian (Eastern Woodland) descent. When we got married I tried to learn as much about his culture as possible, and it was through the Lenape perspective that I learned to appreciate the balance between men and women and their respective roles in the Church.
Lenapes believe in one God, Creator of the universe and they believe their cultural and religious traditions were gifted to them by Creator.
It is hard to find a more egalitarian society. Women hold a very important role and are greatly respected, as mothers and as sages. However, there are certain ceremonies in which women do not take part, like the sweat lodge, for example.
This was very hard for me to accept at first. I thought, �Here we go again. Just another way to keep women down and apart.� But after time, and through the grace of God, I was able to understand.
Culturally, American Indians are more in tune to male and female energies and the life creating mysteries. Women are very proud of their role as mothers and educators and would think it preposterous to want to be like a man. They also recognize that women�s and men�s physical bodies are different and energy flows through them in different ways, especially during women�s �moon time.� (Just as a side note: The American Indian community of today is facing the same crisis as the Catholic Church in regard to the ordination of women. Many �born again Indians� who have been raised in Western ways find traditional women�s roles hard to accept and are losing the beauty of their inheritance.)
I believe modern women have been brainwashed into thinking that they have to be like men in order to be valued in society. They are wrong. The old expression, �The hand that rocks the cradle rules the world,� holds a lot of truth.
I think it is also a question of balancing Authority and Influence. Women hold a great deal of influence over their children and husbands. Eve did not order Adam to eat the forbidden fruit, she offered it to him. In modern culture we can see how much influence the commercial media has on our lives. Coca-Cola does not order us to drink their product, they merely suggest it repeatedly.
In my opinion, the ordination of women in the priesthood would downplay their very important role as the primary educator and major influence in the home.
I also accept that our Holy Tradition was �breathed into the Church,� as Anthony so eloquently put it, and tampering with the Holy Mysteries is extremely dangerous.
Thank you for indulging me. These opinions are my own and from my own experience. I pray they are useful to you in some way.

Your sister in Christ,

Marya

Dear Marya, Thankyou for your post, I appreciate your input. I would like to repeat the content of my original post. Being a parent and being a priest are separate issues. It is true that some women have the opportunity to be a wife. It is true that some women are capable of bearing children. It is true that some women work hard to be good mothers and wives. It is true that some men have the opportunity to be a husband. It is true that some men have the ability to father a child. It is true that some men work hard to be good fathers and husbands. So marriage and parenting is possible and successful for many. It is also true that the style or nature of marriage partnering and parenting differs among some men and women. There may even be some commonalities among styles of the sexes. I do not think that these facts can be used as arguments for or against the ordination of women. In Christ, Sharon

Some evidence of female priestly service:

Examples of Female Christian Leaders from the Archeological Record
Author Karen Jo Torjensen cites: 6

an ancient mosaic which shows four female figures. One is identified as Bishop Theodora. The feminine form for bishop (episcopa) is used.
A 3rd or 4th century burial site on the Greek island of Thera contains an epitaph referring to Epiktas, a "presbytis" (priest or presbyter). Epiktas is a woman's name.
a 2nd or 3rd century Christian inscription in Egypt for Artemidoras, whose mother is described as "Paniskianes, being an elder" (presbytera)
a memorial from the 3rd century for Ammion the elder (presbytera)
a 4th or 5th century Sicilian inscription referring to Kale the elder. (presbytis)

And yet more:

The Original Disciples: According to most Christians' interpretation of the Gospels, Jesus called 12 individuals to be his disciples. Most or all probably shared 9 factors in common. They were: bearded,
dark skinned,
Aramaic speaking,
married,
male,
Jewish,
residents of Palestine,
without much formal education and
the parent of one or more children.

Various Christian denominations have deviated from these factors in the selection of clergy. The Roman Catholic Church, for example, has ordained clean-shaven and bearded priests; candidates of all races, speaking many languages; usually single but sometimes married, etc. But Roman Catholic and many other conservative denominations still maintain the necessity that all of their pastors, priests and ministers be male.

Treatment of Women in Bible Times: Some liberal theologians point to differences in the treatment of women in the Bible. Before Jesus' ministry and women's roles were very severely restricted in Jewish society. During his ministry, he treated women and men equally, even though it offended many people. The Gospels describe about 10 of Jesus' followers in some detail. About half were men; the other half were women. After his execution, the growing Christian movements appear to have continued Jesus' practices towards women. But the church gradually reverted to the earlier practice of treating women as inferior beings, early in the 1st century CE. This led to the almost complete suppression of women in later centuries. The church and government reduced the status of women to the inferior standard of the Jewish, Roman and Greek societies of the time. Women were gradually denied access to positions of authority, and restricted to limited and rigidly defined roles. This largely continued into modern times, until the rise of the feminist movement.

General comments on 1 Timothy: Conservative theologians believe in the inerrancy of the Bible. The author of 1 Timothy unambiguously restricts the role of women to minor tasks within the church. Thus many believe that women must not be considered eligible for ordination today.
Liberal theologians regard 1 Timothy as a later forgery. They note the numerous references in the Bible, in early Christian writings that never made it into the Bible, and in archeological evidence which show that women did indeed play an active leadership, ministering and teaching roles in the very early Christian church. Quoting Elisabeth Schussler Fiorenza:

"The Pauline literature and Acts still allow us to recognize that women were among the most prominent missionaries and leaders in the early Christian movement, They were apostles and ministers like Paul, and some were his co-workers. They were teachers, preachers and competitors in the race for the gospel."

Liberal theologians believe that 1 and 2 Timothy were written by unknown authors in the second century CE, many decades after Paul died. Some further speculate that one of the purposes of the forgeries was to "subvert Paul's radicalism," and to reinstall "conventional patriarchal attitudes towards women." 10

General Comments on 1 Corinthians: Conservatives generally interpret 1 Corinthians 14 as limiting all women's speech during services. Paul's statement is clear and unambiguous. And if women are not allowed to speak, then they obviously cannot be pastors, ministers or priests.

Liberals might point out that St. Paul's statements would be in conflict with the historical evidence of female leadership in the early church. In other passages in his Epistles, Paul acknowledges that there were female apostles and ministers. They might conclude that the restrictions in Corinthians were most likely intended to control specific actions by some women, at some churches, and at a particular time. They would not necessarily have been intended to refer to the status of women today. Many liberals believe that the passage 1 Corinthians 14:34b-35 is a passage that was inserted into the original writing by an unknown person at an unknown date. Since it was not part of the original writing, it cannot be considered authoritative.

The Priestly Function: Those opposing the ordination of women would note that throughout the Hebrew Scriptures, and from the early Christian church to the present time, the priestly function has only been performed by men. In ancient times, only men of a specific Jewish tribe could act as priests. Those promoting female ordination point out that Jesus broke with the tradition of male superiority on numerous occasions, and that Paul acknowledge female apostles, co-workers and ministers. It was only in the 2nd century that the doors once more closed on women's ordination. By once more allowing women to be priests and ministers, they would argue, we are returning to Jesus' pattern of gender equality.
Effect on Denominational Stability: One argument that is often used against female ordination is that it might weaken or split the denomination.This is an argument that has considerable validity, as does the parallel arguments about ordination of gays and lesbians. In fact, every major ethical debate in recent decades has created major intra-denominational stresses: slavery in the 19th century, racial integration in the late 1950's, inter-racial marriage in the mid 1960's, and now ordination of women, gays and lesbians.
Representation of Christ: J.I. Packer argues 11 that a pastor or priest represents Christ when he ministers to individual members of his flock. Since Jesus was undeniably male, then the ideal form of the pastor is to also be male. "That one male is best represented by another male is a matter of common sense." Liberals might argue that God has traditionally male properties (lawgiver, judge, etc) as well as traditionally female properties (creator, healer, etc). Thus God can be represented by either a man or a woman. Also, the fact that Jesus became a human being is of primary importance; that he was male is incidental. If Jesus were female, the daughter of God; she could have been crucified and resurrected. Nothing fundamental really would change in the gospel.
Genesis 1:27 describes how "...God created man in his own image...male and female he created them." Thus a man reflects the image of God as much as a woman does. The ideal church structure would thus appear be to have both male and female pastors, in order to fully reflect the different aspects of God. A pastor must minister to both men and women. By both male and female clergy available, each church member has the opportunity to deal with a pastor of whichever gender they feel most comfortable. (12)
Alternate Roles for Women: Packer 11 cites Genesis 2:20, and suggests that women were created by God to be helpers to men. He feels that women should be confined to the roles of pastoral assistants, ministers of music, youth directors, [and] educational ministers. These roles have "the effect of supplementing and supporting [the male pastor's]...own preaching and teaching... None of this... requires ordination as a presbyter." Most English translations of Genesis 2:20 describe Eve as a "helper." And a helper is normally regarded as a person of lower stature to the "helpee." But some (e.g. New Living Translation, Today's English Version) use the term "companion." - thus indicating that Eve had an equal stature to Adam. The original Hebrew word does not have a connotation of inferiority.

Dear Maximos,

The evidence you provided on the female role in the episcopacy and the priesthood is misleading. The early Church never ordained women. Women who were wives of bishops and priests were presented with the similiar titles but they never substitued their husbands postions in administration of sacraments. If you ever decide to visit the Middle East and the Christian cemeteries there will be thousands of tombstones written in Arabic giving the indication that the deceased females were priests or bishops. The problem with westerners is that they are ignorant of the fact that these women did not perform priestly roles of their husbands. All they were were wives of the priestly husbands who helped in his ministry and in their families. The Arabic word for a male priest is Khouri and his wife is known as Khouria. Khouria was an honorary title for being married to a Khouri. I have relatives who are Khourias. In summary, your post on the evidence of female priests or bishops is misleading. Question: what was the title St. Peter's wife or any wife of an Apostle? The Eastern historical evidence supports the perception I gave. Gnosticsim ordained women and perhaps those who seek the ordination of women are reverting to an ancient heresy without knowing it. The problem here in this western society is that it goes to the extremes in trying to reinvent the wheel. May I be the thorn in your side in trying to overturn the truth that has been preserved in the Church.

>>>The Original Disciples: According to most Christians' interpretation of the Gospels, Jesus called 12 individuals to be his disciples. Most or all probably
shared 9 factors in common. They were: bearded,
dark skinned,
Aramaic speaking,
married,
male,
Jewish,
residents of Palestine,
without much formal education and
the parent of one or more children.<<<

I think that you have made a very broad and uncertifiable statement. Did the Twelve have beards? Probably, though John, being the youngest, may have had something more on the order of peach fuzz. Were they dark-skinned? Some might have been, but the Middle East is full of fair-skinned blonds, swarthy Arabs and black Ethiopians. Sorry, but we can't make any definitive statements about skin color. Aramaic speaking? Most definitely, and some may have had Greek (Matthew almost certainly), and a few Hebrew, too. Jewish? Yes. Palestine? Too general. With the possible exception of Judas Iscariot, they were Galileans, and there is a difference you know. Married? We have no way to tell. Peter, yes. Probably also Andrew. As for the rest, the record is mute. John almost certainly was not married. Neither was Paul, if we want to include him. Children? Probably for those who were married, but again, no way to tell. Not much formal education? Seems like a good bet, but again, be careful, especially when trying to judge education in the first century by 20th century standards. Paul, by the way, seems to have had a very good education by both Jewish and Hellenistic standards.

If you intended to make a point with that little diatribe, all you succeeded in doing was making a series of statements easily refuted. Not a good way to buttress your credibility for the remainder of you post.

>>>The evidence you provided on the female role in the episcopacy and the priesthood is misleading. The early Church never ordained women.
Women who were wives of bishops and priests were presented with the similiar titles but they never substitued their husbands postions in
administration of sacraments. If you ever decide to visit the Middle East and the Christian cemeteries there will be thousands of tombstones written
in Arabic giving the indication that the deceased females were priests or bishops. The problem with westerners is that they are ignorant of the fact
that these women did not perform priestly roles of their husbands. All they were were wives of the priestly husbands who helped in his ministry and
in their families. The Arabic word for a male priest is Khouri and his wife is known as Khouria. Khouria was an honorary title for being married to a
Khouri. I have relatives who are Khourias. In summary, your post on the evidence of female priests or bishops is misleading. Question: what was
the title St. Peter's wife or any wife of an Apostle? The Eastern historical evidence supports the perception I gave. Gnosticsim ordained women and
perhaps those who seek the ordination of women are reverting to an ancient heresy without knowing it. The problem here in this western society is
that it goes to the extremes in trying to reinvent the wheel. May I be the thorn in your side in trying to overturn the truth that has been preserved
in the Church.<<<

Amazing. I find myself in agreement with Mr. Sweiss. The saying about the stopped clock is right after all. Maximos has indeed erected a considerable rhetorical edifice, but it is constructed mainly of tissue paper. The witness of the early Church is pretty explicit: within the orthodox, catholic Church women fulfilled many roles and were ordained even into the diaconate, but they were never ordained to the episcopate or the presbyterate. On the other hand, the Montanists and Marcionites DID ordain women, and their status became an issue whenever Montanist and Marcionite communities tried to reenter communion with the catholic Church. And in all cases, while their male presbyters and even bishops were accepted in their existing status, the women presbyters were not. The details are laid out quite pursuasively in Hopko's "Women and the Priesthood (2nd Ed).

By the way, Maximos, did you Elizabeth Schussler-Fiorenza would carry much weight with a Byzantine audience?

Doxa Theo!

If I might add just a couple of observations.

First, it is clear from the writings of the early Church that there were women who were ordained and received a laying on of hands. However, it is unclear if what the early Church called "ordination" and what the Church today calls "ordination" are the same thing. Secondly, the Council of Laodicea, Canon 11, specifically prohibits the ordination of women. The councils were not in the habit of being proactive but, rather, reactive which means that they were reacting to events that were taking place.

Fr. Deacon Edward

>>>First, it is clear from the writings of the early Church that there were women who were ordained and received a laying on of hands. However, it is
unclear if what the early Church called "ordination" and what the Church today calls "ordination" are the same thing. Secondly, the Council of
Laodicea, Canon 11, specifically prohibits the ordination of women. The councils were not in the habit of being proactive but, rather, reactive which
means that they were reacting to events that were taking place.<<<

According to a number of scholars, the Council of Laodicea was reacting to the reception of priests from a number of Montanist congregations as they reentered communion with the orthodox catholic Church. The Montanists were in the habit of ordaining women to the priesthood, and while the ex-Montanist priests seem to have been received without reordination, there may have been some need to specifically prohibit the reception of Montanist priestesses into the Holy Orders. The matter is discussed in Hopko's "Women and the Priesthood", (2nd Ed.)