The CBE Scroll

Comment by LJR

November 10, 2006 @ 10:26 am

Thanks for posting this, DP! I have been going to Greek festivals and learning more about Eastern Orthodoxy as a result over the last few years, and I love it… except for the exclusion of women from the ministry. Knowing that there is some dialogue beginning in this area is exciting, and I’m hoping for some positive developments from it.

Comment by Kathryn

November 10, 2006 @ 10:27 pm

Do these Orthodox churches uphold sound doctrine? Salvation by grace through faith in Christ, not works? Confessing with your mouth the Lord Jesus, and believing in your heart that God raised Him from the dead (Romans 10:9). That should be the litmus test for any church. As a woman, I could surely preach that! I hold out great hope for their support for biblical equality.

Comment by Fr. Dcn. Raphael

November 12, 2006 @ 8:44 pm

So basically, we Orthodox should not only submit to modern day Evangelical ecclesiology, but also to Evangelical doctrine and interpretation of Scriptures?

No thanks, I’ll take the 2,000 years of faith, that was once and forever delivered to the Apostles.

Comment by Kathryn

November 13, 2006 @ 7:50 pm

The thrust of my remarks was not aimed at any particular church or denomination; it was simply to say that we must insist upon correct doctrine as well as gender equality. The doctrine of salvation by grace through faith only (Romans 10:9, Ephesians 2:8,& 9) is an integral and vital part of the faith “once delivered to the saints (Jude 3)”. If we could be saved by our works, Christ would not have had to die. Come to think of it, biblical equality for women and men is also 2,000 years old, although it is not necessary to believe in it in order to be saved. I repeat, a woman can preach correct doctrine as well as a man can.

Comment by Gina

November 15, 2006 @ 6:03 pm

Knowing that there is some dialogue beginning in this area is exciting, and I’m hoping for some positive developments from it.

The beginnings of such discussion was in the fifth century, when a few bishops tried to install women into ordination and this was rejected and condemned in the Ecumenical Councils.

St. Nina’s Quarterly represents a tiny minority in the Orthodox Church and not a mainstream voice even of Orthodox women. By all means “taste and see” the Orthodox Church, but do so for the right reasons or it will be a waste of your time. In other words, you would do well to look elsewhere for people to “reach,” because hell will freeze over before there is ordination of women to the Orthodox priesthood (as if that were the pinnacle of service to God anyway… what is loftier than motherhood?). We don’t need your “evangelism.” The ministry of the Holy Theotokos is the model for the potential impact of women and that far outshines anything modern egalitarianism promises.

Comment by DP

November 16, 2006 @ 6:57 am

Fr. Dcn. Raphael and Gina: I certainly meant no disrespect to Orthodoxy by this post. The “evangelism” language would likely stick in my craw as well. Please accept my apologies, and please do continue to offer your gentle voice of correction to attenuated (or nonexistent!) Evangelical ecclesiology.

I am still curious, however, about how one might address the topic of women’s ordination from an orthodox perspective–regardless of the likelihood of prevailing in the debate. I’m sure you’re aware that Bp. Kallistos Ware has examined all of the possible lines of Orthodox argument against women’s ordination and finds most of them unconvincing. I find this intriguing from an anti-women’s ordination Orthodox theologian.

Comment by LJR

November 16, 2006 @ 11:57 am

I wasn’t thinking anything about “evangelism,” personally. I’m more interested in learning about church traditions and history that the Western church doesn’t teach, but that some newer churches and denominations are trying to rediscover. Fellowship and finding common ground have been far more interesting than any effort to get another Christian to switch churches.

That said, some things said in response to DP’s post and my reply are to the letter the same things an old pastor of mine would have said; so maybe Eastern church life isn’t nearly as different from the Western church as either side would like to believe. *shrug*

DP: I read some of the things Bp. Ware wrote (and would like to get my hands on some of his books as a result). He gets props for not buying into that idea of a separate “women’s spirituality” and recognizing the common humanity of men and women. If only much of the Western church could get even that much right, conditions for women would improve.

Comment by Gina

November 16, 2006 @ 9:15 pm

Thank you for the gracious response.

That most definitely is not Bishop Ware’s position on the matter, as he lays out at length in “Man, Woman, and the Priesthood of Christ.” To quote a piece: “The priest is an icon of Christ; and since the incarnate Christ became not only man but a male—since, furthermore, in the order of nature the roles of male and female are not interchangeable—it is necessary that the priest should be male. Those Western Christians who do not in fact regard the priest as an icon of Christ are of course free to ordain women as ministers; they are not, however, creating women priests but dispensing with priesthood altogether.”

What Bishop Ware has said is that the issue of women’s ordination could be taken up at a truly Ecumenical Council. But of course this applies to anything in Orthodox dogma and practice. In the Coptic Orthodox Church, of which I’m a member, the office of deaconess has always been present, resembling what the Bible describes as the consecrated widows. They are not ordained, but consecrated.

This brings up something else that should be considered. Until Protestant churches restore the ministry of nuns, abbesses, and the presbytera (priest’s wife, who has title and great influence in her own right), and venerate even half the female saints that the Orthodox and Catholics do, it is hypocritical to look upon these churches as being demeaning of women. However the bottom line is that Orthodoxy comes at these issues from a completely different paradigm. A paradigm which, as I said above, gives such a vision of heaven and earth from which vantage point these controversies are simply foreign and irrelevant.

Comment by Kathryn

November 17, 2006 @ 6:48 pm

Comment # 5: Luke 11:27 says: “And it came to pass as he (Jesus) spake these things, a certain woman of the company lifted up her voice and said unto him Blessed is the womb that bare thee, and the paps which thou hast sucked. Vs. 28: But he said: Yea, rather blessed are they that hear the word of God, and keep it.” Jesus expressly said that there was something greater than motherhood: being His follower.

Re: comment #8: In I Peter 2, the Apostle Peter, speaking to folks scattered from Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, says: (Vs 5) “Ye also, as lively stones are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God by Jesus Christ”. In verse 9, he says: “But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people, that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvelous light.” We are all priests before God. The practice of ordaining earthly priests to stand between humanity and God is unscriptural. The Apostles were not ordained to be priests for anyone else. They were called to be evangelists. “Apostle” means “sent one.” There is only one High Priest, and His name is Jesus (Hebrews 9:24-28).

Comment by Kathryn

November 17, 2006 @ 6:55 pm

One more thing regarding comment # 8: Jesus’ 12 disciples were not only all men, they were all Jews. If a priesthood must remain all-male, shouldn’t it remain all-Jewish too? It makes sense, doesn’t it?

Comment by Big Daddy

November 19, 2006 @ 7:57 am

Dude,

You err because you know not the scriptures. Your ’signature’ scripture is actually teaching us the exact opposite of what you claim. The verse “There is neither Jew nor Greek, male nor female…” is teaching us that in the anointing (in Christ) it’s irrelevant what you are. But, it OBVIOUSLY does not mean there are no differences. In fact the pairings offered are amongst the most different in human existence. Every cell of a man is different from a woman’s. A Jew and gentile are not the same. Trust me. I’m a Jew. I know. lol!

And there could not possibly be any different experience than that of a free man and a slave. To close your eyes to the multitude of New Testament verses that give gender specific directions to the Body and just try to wash it all away with that Galations verse is laughable. The New Testament, perhaps more than any other notable book makes huge distinctions between men and women, especially in the realm of leadership. To completely miss the point of the “Neither male nor female…” verse and then try hang an entire ministry on this misunderstanding is just sad.

The more we learn, the more we know that men and women are more different than we ever imagined. God told us that a long time ago. Per usual, science is confirming it for us today. Even hard core liberals know that men and women are very different. Yet you, claiming to be guided by the scriptures, want to pretend that there isn’t any? Sorry, but hiding behind the fair sounding guise of
‘egalitarianism’ doesn’t obscure the deep and grave distortion of the leadership mandate given to the church.

Comment by Kathryn

November 19, 2006 @ 10:53 pm

Re: Comment # 11: As a born-again Christian, I stand before God as a priest, with only my High Priest Jesus the Anointed One between us. Therefore, you could not possibly be my spiritual leader, even though you are a man and I am a woman.

Comment by Craighton

November 19, 2006 @ 11:17 pm

But Big Daddy, that’s just the point, isn’t it. Of course there are differences, physically, socially (societal socializations), etc., but before God, in Christ, there are to be no distinctions. Yet making a distinction about women, because of some role or rule, not being able to preach or teach spiritual content, is doing exactly that — making a spiritual distinction.

I doubt that science is going to have a whole lot to say about women not being able to lead. A scientist who said that would be laughed out of the academy. No women academics, scientists, CEO’s, politicians? Of course there should be. Then why not women theologians, evangelists, and pastors? Surely the place where the clearest insight into ethics and moral law should reign — within and among the followers of God’s own Son — should be able to make the distinction that if something is a great good (a real good) in the profane world, then it ought to be as great a good in the sacred.

How sad that the gospel that was given to free us from the bondage of sin, death, and the law, is still being entangled by modern-day versions of Judaizers.

Comment by Kathryn

November 19, 2006 @ 11:27 pm

Psalms 37:4 says:” Delight thyself also in the Lord and He will give thee the desires of thine heart.” I Timothy 2:5 says that there is only one mediator between God and humanity, Jesus the Christ. Hebrews 4:16 says: “Let us therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace that we may obtain mercy and find grace to help in time of need.” The religious priesthoods established here on earth do not reflect the teachings of the early Apostles. Quite apart from the issue of women’s ordination, these priesthoods serve only to remove ordinary people from the direct presence of God by placing too many priests between people and God. I don’t care if the practice is 2,000 years old, it is still error. This is not the church for which Jesus died. Jesus did not die so that we could be removed further and further from the presence of God. We are to go “boldly” into the presence of God. The same thing happens when we teach that the husband is the “priest” of the home. It removes women from God’s presence. This is unacceptable. Moreover, we know that there were women leaders in that early church. Junia, Priscilla, Lydia, and Phoebe are only a few examples. Differences do not mean that one sex rules over the other.

Comment by Sue

December 1, 2006 @ 5:41 pm

Did anyone hear Kevin Giles presentation at the Evangelical Theological Society? Comments? Were there complimentarians in the room?

Comment by Gina

December 24, 2006 @ 12:28 am

Quite apart from the issue of women’s ordination, these priesthoods serve only to remove ordinary people from the direct presence of God by placing too many priests between people and God.

Kathryn, this is an issue you will have to take up with our Lord Jesus Christ, who commanded St. Peter to feed His sheep. Apparently He did think He needed some help with the job after all.

The same thing happens when we teach that the husband is the “priest” of the home. It removes women from God’s presence.

I think you can only say this if you’ve never experienced the ministry of a good priest. Or that of any good spiritual father or mother.