Deaconesses in the Orthodox Church of Greece

[Theodore Janiszewski]

I was doing some reading about women in the priesthood, when I discovered much to my surprise and dismay that the Orthodox Church of Greece has resumed the practice of ordaining women to the diaconate [link (http://westernorthodoxy.org/pdf/restored.pdf)].

Am I mistaken? Can someone tell me more about this? And I'm curious – what do you non-Greek Orthodox think of this development?

[Justin]

If it's true, I wouldn't have a problem with it, as long as it's not just a step towards female priests (which I don't believe that it is).

[Herman Blaydoe]

I was doing some reading about women in the priesthood, when I discovered much to my surprise and dismay that the Orthodox Church of Greece has resumed the practice of ordaining women to the diaconate [link (http://westernorthodoxy.org/pdf/restored.pdf)].

Am I mistaken? Can someone tell me more about this? And I'm curious – what do you non-Greek Orthodox think of this development?

I say let the Greeks worry about the Greek Church. We have had them before and the Church "survived". If the Holy Spirit wills it, it will succeed. If it is not from God, it will pass.

[Dimitris]

Hallo!

I think, this is a misunderstanding. As far as I know, the deaconesse is not really a female deacon. but rather has special duties, like helping women during baptism. You might be interested in this topic: Female diaconate in the early church (http://www.monachos.net/forum/showthread.php?t=2548).

Kind regards,
Dimitris

[Andreas Moran]

If the Holy Spirit wills it, it will succeed. If it is not from God, it will pass.

I find this saying difficult. Many things which we are bound to believe cannot be from God, e.g. Islam, clearly do succeed.

[Herman Blaydoe]

I find this saying difficult. Many things which we are bound to believe cannot be from God, e.g. Islam, clearly do succeed.

But not within the Church. If my bishop tells me to believe in Islam, then we can revisit. Until then, I am content to let the Greeks sort it out for themselves. I'm not responsible for the Greeks or the Moslems.

Herman

[Andreas Moran]

But not within the Church.

Point taken.

[Eric Peterson]

Well, it depends on the definition of success. Some evil opinions are alive and well in the Church and have been so for many decades.

[Herman Blaydoe]

Well, it depends on the definition of success. Some evil opinions are alive and well in the Church and have been so for many decades.

And yet the Church struggles on, and has for centuries without your or my assistance, and will no doubt do so into the future. Decades are not such a long time to a Church that measures time in millennia.

We are not here to reform the Church, we are here to allow the Church to reform us.

Or so it seems to this bear of very little brain.

Herman the Pooh

[Theodore Janiszewski]

I say let the Greeks worry about the Greek Church. We have had them before and the Church "survived". If the Holy Spirit wills it, it will succeed. If it is not from God, it will pass.

This very same apathy lost us Northern Europe.


If it's true, I wouldn't have a problem with it, as long as it's not just a step towards female priests (which I don't believe that it is).

I strongly suspect that there are some in the Greek Church who want female priests. For example, the article above mentions a certain bishop agitating for a more visible role for deaconesses, who are currently only approved to serve in monasteries. It also makes clear that


Bishops who choose to promote women to the diaconate will use the ancient Byzantine liturgy that performs the same cheirotonia -- laying on of hands -- for deaconesses as in each major order: bishop, priest and deacon.I do not like this precedent at all. The Council of Nicaea, Canon 19, makes clear that


Similarly, in regard to the deaconesses, as with all who are enrolled in the register, the same procedure is to be observed. We have made mention of the deaconesses, who have been enrolled in this position, although, not having been in any way ordained, they are certainly to be numbered among the laity

In the Western Patriarchate (which some of you may know by the title "Roman Catholic"), it was decided during the pontificate of John Paul II to permit girls to serve as acolytes. There is no profound theological issue with a woman serving in a minor clerical order (that I am aware of), but it sends the wrong message. Serving as an acolyte has always been a kind of preliminary step into the priesthood, and the Catholic Church will never allow women priests.

Here in America, these altar girls are growing up with the firm belief that the Church doesn't permit women to be ordained because it is bigoted and unfair. We're going to lose an entire generation of women.

[Matthew Panchisin]

Dear Theodore,

Firstly, I must say, I know of no Orthodox Christian that wants female Priests, Greek or otherwise.

Unless I'm mis-reading things here, it seems that some things are not quite right. From what I can tell, if you look at that canon (and others) in context you should see that it speaks of the deaconesses of a heretical group, namely those that promoted monarchianism or some forms of it. Paul of Samosata being among them, termed the Paulianists. The canon you cited is speaking of the reception of those with Paul of Samosata into the Church. Hence your presentation of it in a way to suggest that it conveys that deaconesses are not ordained is actually the opposite of what it is saying. It seems to me, the Council of Nicaea, Canon 19, makes clear that deaconesses of the heretical group are not deaconesses because they come from a heretical sect, they did not receive the imposition of Orthodox hands so they are among the laity and thus they should be received in the same way as the laity. Others have studied these things in much depth here and should I be wrong I hope they chime in.

Anyway, you may read it in fuller context here:

Concerning the followers of Paul of Samosata who come over (meaning into the one true Church)

19. Concerning the former Paulinists who seek refuge in the Catholic Church, it is determined that they must be rebaptized unconditionally. Those who in the past have been enrolled among the clergy, if they appear to be blameless and irreproachable, are to be rebaptized and ordained by the bishop of the catholic church. But if on inquiry they are shown to be unsuitable, it is right that they should be deposed.

Similarly with regard to deaconesses and all in general whose names have been included in the roll, the same form shall be observed. We refer to deaconesses who have been granted this status, for they do not receive any imposition of hands, so that they are in all respects numbered among the laity.

Additionally, deaconesses have always been ordained in the Church. You may read the Apostolic constitution that is clear on that reality. I might also add that back when according to Latin thought and teaching of these days that Pope was dominantly in charge of the Church, deaconesses had been ordained. Hence I don't think that you can hold onto one position while rejecting another, that is without either imposing limitations of the Popes range of power extending to the east or else acknowledging the conciliar nature of the Church. That nature, not confused can see things clearly even during the times of trouble, divisions and even apostasy. The beauty of that nature turns out to be ascetical, hence the beatitudes which are liturgically expressed, move not away from their source. They remain related and united and are never to be detached from anybody including deaconesses. Efforts to do so often result in disturbances. The most interesting thing is the response, if one reads the prayers of the deaconesses one may find many disconnections. If one prays the prayers of the deaconesses that specific ordination is unique, limited and yet connected so that the Church often wounded from the outside. What man can pray the prayers the deaconesses pray? When the Church is wounded from the inside, we can see that it is often not intentional. Yet the true service of the deaconesses and all women would never seek that which could not be found like a female Priests. It is simply not part of the Orthodox tradition. When it is pushed for and even explored it is seen as strange particularly by monastics who are quick to suggest that such discussions are actually not articulated or pursued for pastoral reasons. The most serious monastic types are often interested in obedience. Really I think that this is something that all of us are to embrace as well. Nevertheless, we can see that different types of obedience can actually lead to different places. However, if we embrace the Spirit of Truth no doubt we will often be corrected no matter who we may be. So it is the Holy Spirit that guides the Church, the Spirit of Truth.

Anyway I have said enough, you may find the below of some interest.


Apostolic Constitutions III/15

"For which reason, O bishop, do thou ordain thy fellow-workers, the labourers for life and for righteousness, such deacons as are pleasing to God, such whom thou provest to be worthy among all the people, and such as shall be ready for the necessities of their ministration. Ordain also a deaconess who is faithful and holy, for the ministrations towards women."

ORDER FOR THE
ORDINATION OF A WOMAN DEACON

After the completion of the holy Anaphora and the opening of the doors, before the Deacon says, Having commemorated all the Saints,[1] the one to be ordained is brought before the Bishop. As he declaims the invocation, Divine grace,[2] etc., she bows her head, on which he lays his hand.

He makes the sign of the Cross three times over her and prays as follows:
Holy and All-powerful God, through the birth in flesh of your Only-begotten Son and our God from a Virgin you sanctified woman, and granted not only to men but also to women the grace and visitation of the Holy Spirit. Now, Master, look upon this servant of yours also, call her to the work of your service[3] and send down upon her the rich gift of your Holy Spirit. Guard her in your Orthodox faith in a blameless way of life in accordance with what is well pleasing to you, as she fulfils her ministry[4] at every moment.[5]
For to you belong all glory, honour and worship, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, now and for ever, and to the ages of ages. Amen.

After the Amen one of the Deacons prays as follows:

In peace, let us pray to the Lord. And the rest, as in the ordination of male Deacons, with the necessary changes of gender in the petition for the candidate.

While the Deacon is saying this, the Bishop, with his hand still resting on the head of the one being ordained, prays as follows:

Master and Lord, you do not reject women who offer themselves, and by divine counsel, to minister as is fitting to your holy houses, but you accept them in the order of ministers. Give the grace of your Holy Spirit to this servant of yours also, who wishes to offer herself to you, and to accomplish the grace of the diaconate, as you gave the grace of your diaconate to Phoebe, whom you called to the work of the ministry. Grant her, O God, to persevere without condemnation in your holy churches, to give careful attention to her way of life, to chastity in particular, and show her to be your perfect servant, that, when she stands before the judgement of Christ, she may also receive the fitting reward of her way of life.[6]
By the mercy and love for humankind of your Only-begotten Son, with whom you are blessed, etc.

And after the Amen the Bishop places the Deacon’s Orarion on her neck, under the Maphorion, bringing the two extremities round to the front.[7]

The other Deacon stands outside the Sanctuary and says:
Having commemorated all the Saints, again and again in peace, let us pray to the Lord, etc.

After she has received Communion of the holy Body and Blood, the Bishop hands her the Chalice. When she has taken it, she places it on the holy Table.

In Christ,

Matthew Panchisin

[Matthew Namee]

The question of deaconesses is en vogue in some Orthodox circles in the past few decades. There are several problems, of course. As has been noted above, deaconesses in the early Church were not simply "female deacons," and they certainly did not correspond to the modern position of deacon. Today, the diaconate is primarily a liturgical rank. The deacon reads the Gospel, chants parts of the Liturgy, and sometimes administers communion. Biblical deacons were ordained for totally different purposes, and deaconesses had their own specific function.

The only justification I can see for reviving deaconesses is if a very specific practical need arose (e.g. if adult female converts were baptized without any clothes on). Perhaps there might be some use for deaconesses in female prisons or shelters for abused women. If the people arguing for deaconesses were using those needs to justify their position, then I would be much more sympathetic. However, the pro-deaconess movement seems to have other ends in mind.

Finally, we should always be wary of the anachronistic tendency to "revive" things which have long since passed away. It's a bit like ecclesiastical archaeology, and I cannot see how it will have positive consequences.

[Matthew Panchisin]

Dear Theodore,

I have taken some time to read the link you provided regarding the Church of Greece and Deaconesses. I think it is wonderful, I hope after some further consideration you find it enjoyable as well. I enjoyed reading the Prayer for the Ordination of a Woman Deacon.

O Eternal God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Creator of man and of woman, who replenished with the Spirit Miriam, and Deborah, and Anna, and Huldah; who did not disdain that your only-begotten Son should be born of a woman; who also in the tabernacle of the testimony, and in the temple, did ordain women to be keepers of your holy gates - look down now upon this your servant who is to be ordained to the office of a deaconess, and grant her your Holy Spirit, that she may worthily discharge the work which is committed to her to your glory, and the praise of your Christ, with whom glory and adoration be to you and the Holy Spirit for ever. Amen."

-Apostolic Constitutions, No. 8 (late fourth century)


Theodore, I suspect if we could have a conversation with any of the Sainted Deaconesses we would see that they would not wither away under their wings. If Orthodox Bishops could have a conversation with any of the Sainted Deaconesses I think that they also would see that they would not wither away under their wings as well. I think if other 'bishops' that are not Orthodox could have a conversation with any of the Sainted Deaconesses I think that they also would see that they wouldn't wither away under their wings either. Surely we must come to the conclusion that they love and have the Holy Spirit the advocate and comforter on their side in the upper room. It seems to me this is clearly expressed by the Holy Synod of the Orthodox Church of Greece.

Dear Matthew Namee,

I was just about to post this and saw your recent post. I think that one of the things that is very important to remember is the communion of Saints is not subject to the opinions of men relative to their existence. Man can try to be attentive to the lives of the Saints, indeed the Church often suggest that reading those lives is of much benefit. Anyway I think a Deaconess is a Deaconess with liturgical service in retrospect and these days as well. While man certainly is capable of coming up with rational or even irrational arguments for one position or another, the Church seems to proceed throughout history with sanctified responses. In the past and present the sanctification of the Deaconesses comes from above as does every other perfect gift, as we hear in the Divine Liturgy of Saint John Chrysostom "from the Father of lights."

Saint John Chrysostom has friends that are Deaconesses, he needed some help in some situations. Women often are rather good at loving responses and directions for that matter in times of much stress. They have gifts that they can give, freely they have received freely they can give and often do. Let's face it they are blessed in many ways. If the Church decides to recruit them during these days then so be it. If women start applying for acceptance based on womens rights or secular views I suspect they would ended up being sanctified to some extent depending on thier dispositions. Free will is a gift as well that God can work with especially in the Church.

"Many women also supported the bishop [Chrysostom]. Chief among his true spiritual friends was his confidante Olympia, and the Deaconesses Pentadia, Procla, Sylvina, and Nicarete." - Ibid., p. 155

I have re-read what you have written and it seems to me that it is important to mention that the Liturgy is not confined, even when attempts are made to confine it's movements. I recall reading and I can't bring to mind now where exactly that there is a tradition that sometime when Christ past by even a tree they would bend or bow. That makes sense to me, living water that is given and so forth.

You have mentioned;


deaconesses in the early Church were not simply "female deacons," and they certainly did not correspond to the modern position of deacon. Today, the diaconate is primarily a liturgical rank.

The good works that Deaconesses embrace include much of what is prayed in the liturgical beatitudes, visiting the sick, helping with baptisms, making prosfora placing the seal upon them or to whatever extent the Church determines good to build up the body of Christ. Such responsibilities usually are revealed and end up fitting rightly in place within the Orthodox Church. I'm for many of the women here on Monachos to be Deaconesses, Greek Orthodox and otherwise. I have no doubt that they could do many good services. I think that they could have many positive consequences, should they be able to visit the sick, the suffering, those held in captivity and so forth.

Well those are just some thoughts, I have to get back to work now, have a good day.

In Christ,

Matthew Panchisin

[Theodore Janiszewski]

Dear Mr. Panchisin,

Your point on my quotation from the Council of Nicaea is well taken. It was quoted to me out of context, and I didn't realize that it had such a narrow application. I appreciate the charity with which you pointed that out to me – consider me well advised.

As for your other point, however:


Firstly, I must say, I know of no Orthodox Christian that wants female Priests, Greek or otherwise.

Come now, Mr. Panchisin. There is a civil war raging in the Church between those faithful to the Gospel revealed to the Apostles and those who want to modernize it. I would not consider myself a pessimist, but I'm far more inclined toward Mr. Namee's assessment that ". . . the pro-deaconess movement seems to have other ends in mind."

Let me tell you about the reinstitution of the position of deaconesses in the Coptic Church so that you have some grounds for comparison: "due to the urgent need for the service of women in church", Pope Shenouda III consecrated about 400 deaconesses in 1981. The Copts have clearly stated the following [source (http://sor.cua.edu/Ecumenism/20030626oorcconsultation.html)]:


The Coptic Holy Synod has made it clear that deaconesses may not in any way participate in service of the altar or sacerdotal service. The rite of initiation into the female diaconate is performed by a bishop without the laying-on-of-hands but with a signing of the cross three times over the candidate. In their ministry they are to work exclusively with women and children. They assist at the baptism of women, visit sick women in hospitals, supervise women's activities in parishes, and clean the church building except for the sanctuary area which they may not enter.For more information about the Coptic reinstitution, read here [link (http://www.copticchurch.net/topics/thecopticchurch/sacraments/7_priesthood.html)].

The way that the Greek Orthodox Church went about their reinstitution is entirely different. Bishops lay hands on women in an ordination ceremony. It prompts certain uncomfortable questions, like "Did that woman just receive the Sacrament of Holy Orders?" "So is she now the female equivalent of a deacon?"

The Greeks, I suspect, did not reinstitute the position of deaconess "due to the urgent need for the service of women in church." My suspicion is that there is a feminist lobby agitating for women in the priesthood. And if my suspicions prove to be well-founded, the feminist lobby in Greece just won a victory from which the faithful will be hard-pressed to recover.

[Matthew Namee]

Mr. Panchisin,

I'm afraid I don't follow you. My point is simply that deaconesses, historically, did not have the duties we currently associate with (male) deacons. The role of the deacon has evolved over time, perhaps more than any other rank of the clergy. What was, in the Apostolic age, a position of service has become almost exclusively a liturgical role. Deaconesses, when they did exist, had their own particular functions -- not the same functions as deacons at that time, and certainly not the same ones that deacons have today. The idea, then, that we could "revive" the rank of deaconess and then give to deaconesses the duties of deacons does not make sense, and this is why I used the word "anachronistic."

You point out the roles which you would envision deaconesses fulfilling: visiting the sick, assisting with baptisms, making prosphora, etc. But, aside from helping with baptisms, don't pious laypeople (men and women) do these things already? Why do they need to be ordained, and what would change with ordination?

As I said before, I am indeed open to the possibility of deaconesses, given the proper considerations. That is, if there was a real, practical need that only the revival of deaconesses could fulfill, such as ministering to abused women (in some way that lay women could not) or assisting with naked adult baptisms. But these don't seem to be the justifications advanced by those favoring deaconesses. Rather, I understand that the aim is to have deaconesses take on the same functions that deacons currently have: reading the Gospel, chanting litanies during the Liturgy, etc. When a deacon participates in the Divine Liturgy, he has a very central and visible role. Unless I am mistaken, most of those favoring deaconesses envision women taking on these tasks.

It seems to me that the vast majority of those favoring deaconesses are aiming to involve women more "fully" in the services of the Church. If so, this stems from a perceived psychological need (for involvement) rather than a tangible, practical one (the need of the Church for people to perform certain functions). If women don't feel welcome enough in the Church, the answer is not to create new clerical offices (for that is what we would be doing; "deaconess" would be a revival in name only) but rather to revisit the role of the laity and the vital place which women do in fact hold in the Church.

Finally, I am always uncomfortable with unilateral action in the Church. Unilateral, or mostly unilateral, actions, however "right," almost always create tension and schism. An example would be Patriarch Nikon's reforms in Russia, or, more recently, the adoption of the New Calendar by many Orthodox Churches at the behest of Patriarch Meletios II (Metaxakis). Regardless of whether deaconesses are a good idea, their adoption would undoubtedly cause turmoil and division in the Church. It's just not worth it.

[Ilaria]

If you allow me, I will just try to emphasis some practical issues regarding the need of "deaconesses" in the church
I do not know how much any of you here knows the needs of any church "behind the curtain"; as I am living in Romania, I do not know how the parishes outside are managing these practical needs - but any church has needs as any family or institution has.But because the church is not any family or institution - I mean, according to the orthodox tradition and rules - not just anyone can cook the "prescura" - which is the special bread for communion; not anyone can light the candles in the church and not any can take care of the church clothes and the objects needed for the services. it is difficult for a father priest to find in his parish some persons - free enough from their family or work duties - to look after these "details" - and prepared enough to do them as for the Church and God.
I think this is one of the reasons which probably led to the Greeks to restore the deaconesses; a practical one, not so important at a first glance, but sometimes, really critical for those "within";
besides...there are a lot of other reasons, much more deepened and spiritual...but I am not entitled to discuss over
by no means the deaconesses would have priesthood tasks! just see the primary church history, there a lot of resources on the net.
forgive me in case I am mistaken somehow
In Christ,
Ilaria

[Paul Cowan]

I mean, according to the orthodox tradition and rules - not just anyone can cook the "prescura" - which is the special bread for communion; not anyone can light the candles in the church and not any can take care of the church clothes and the objects needed for the services. it is difficult for a father priest to find in his parish some persons - free enough from their family or work duties - to look after these "details" - and prepared enough to do them as for the Church and God.In Christ,
Ilaria

I can't speak for other jurisdictions, but for mine, any baptised parishoner can make the prosphora and light candles outside the altar and under the supervision of the priest; wash the holy things. Delegation can be difficult for some, but my priest does not have this handicap.

Paul

[Matthew Panchisin]

Dear Matthew Namee,



You point out the roles which you would envision deaconesses fulfilling: visiting the sick, assisting with baptisms, making prosphora, etc. But, aside from helping with baptisms, don't pious laypeople (men and women) do these things already? Why do they need to be ordained, and what would change with ordination?

This I think is a wonderful question that is good to hear here.

Having given this a little more thought I think I might be seeing this correctly in a very positive way. We could not say an absolute solidification of piety. What is supposed to change is an increase of it, a solidification obedience to one's Bishop, Priest and all the laity for the sake of building up the body of Christ. I have seen the pious in action, sometimes or rather very often it is easier for them to remove themselves from suffering for the sake of themselves "peace" instead of accepting it for the sake of building up the body of Christ, the Church. When a pious woman is ordained a Deaconess I think that it is good for her and the Church. I have seen many pious women continue on in their lives while reducing their involvement in the Church because of problems that can come up from time to time that are difficult for them to go through. Human beings often would rather avoid stressful situations that are inevitable in the Church when people work for the Church. The devil often stirs up all sorts of trouble. The ordained are dug in usually, usually they stay at their post often out of a profound sense of obedience. Although sometimes they are thrown out or attempts are made. While the ordination of some woman to the obedience of being deaconesses would not guarantee an enhanced commitment, I think a deeper sense of responsibility would be cultivated within the persons heart for the building up of the Church. The vows they take are serious and are to be received seriously.

I realize that there are many different opinions on this subject and all have the best interest in the Church in mind, this is really a matter for the hierarchy it seems since it involves the laying of hands. The Church of Greece has addressed things there which is what they are supposed to do. If others from other traditions or even within Orthodoxy have a different take on matters, I would say that traditionally the Orthodox the Church is not a democracy.


In Christ,

Matthew Panchisin

[Matthew Namee]

The ordained are dug in usually, usually they stay at their post often out of a profound sense of obedience.
If I understand you correctly, you seem to be saying that we should have deaconesses so that pious women will not be tempted to reduce their involvement in the Church. I must respectfully disagree. There are indeed far too many priests and deacons who have succombed to weakness and lapsed in their duties. The fact that they were ordained has not prevented this. I don't think ordination is a barrier to failure.

If there is a problem with pious women (and men) reducing their involvement in the Church from time to time, then that can be dealt with in several ways: education, friendship, encouragement. Actually, the fact that a layperson may be forced to sometimes reduce his/her involvement in the Church is not necessarily a bad thing. If one wants to be able to wholly and completely devote one's time and attention to the Church, then one should become a monastic. If you're married -- even if you're a priest or deacon -- you will inevitably need to give much attention to your family. Many priests and many more deacons (certainly a majority, at least in America) have secular occupations. The family and work requirements on deaconesses would be no less than they are on lay women today.


I would say that traditionally the Orthodox the Church is not a democracy.
This is true; however, it isn't an oligarchy either. Throughout Church history, bishops and councils have made bad decisions. The people must ultimately confirm what the bishops do. Not that I'm comparing this to the Council of Florence, but bishops (lots of them) agreed to that council, and the laity rejected their decision. There are countless other examples. Bottom line, nothing can be imposed from above (i.e. from the hierarchy) in the Orthodox Church.

[Matthew Panchisin]

Dear Matthew,

I stand corrected then, the ordained are no more committed than the unordained in spite of vows taken and other very serious ramifications usually of consciences at some point in time that simply are not applicable to the non-ordained. I would say that the ordained have a higher calling in terms of responsibility. I have seen many go through things, to be frank with you no non-ordained person would stick around for.

I never said that ordination is a barrier to failure. I have seen a strengthening of the brethren as a result of well intended and received ordinations though. Conversely, one can see or rather experience very painful situations as well. It really is a matter of obedience to Orthodox traditions ultimately and is directly tied to ascetical living it seems to different degrees. The Churches services bring this about, however people do have shortcomings sometimes.

You have mentioned:


This is true; however, it isn't an oligarchy either. Throughout Church history, bishops and councils have made bad decisions. The people must ultimately confirm what the bishops do. Not that I'm comparing this to the Council of Florence, but bishops (lots of them) agreed to that council, and the laity rejected their decision. There are countless other examples. Bottom line, nothing can be imposed from above (i.e. from the hierarchy) in the Orthodox Church.

Do keep in mind that all the laity males, females, Bishop's and Priest's sing or say, "We who mystically represent the Cherubim, and so forth. So there is a right way of doing things in the Church, I think that is important. I don't see the services of a Deaconess as necessarily disruptive although I suppose it depends on how the matter is processed.

I can just imagine the YaYa's leading their families and running up to Saint Mark and venerating his hand and vestments upon his return.

I have to stay with the position that if the Church determines that deaconesses are good for building up the body of Christ then so be it.


In Christ,

Matthew Panchisin