Perhaps a more robust understanding of the office of deacon would prove helpful.
The apostolic teaching and patristic tradition treat deacons as ministers of word and mercy. One reason they are required by St Paul to hold the mysteries of the faith with good conscience is because they preached and baptized. See the Book of Acts and pastoral epistles.
Modern deacons are not ministers of the word — they change lightbulbs and maintain property and crunch the numbers. It’s much harder to argue against deaconesses / for male deacons only if that (managerial, janitorial, custodial) is the crux of the office.
While the Church historic and catholic has at times recognized an order of deaconess, women have never been *ordained* to the office in the more historic and catholic traditions — excluding liberal and progressive sects that disregard far more than the ordination of faithful Christian men.
That said, perhaps a more robust understanding of ordination would prove helpful.
I think that's a good point. A 1st century understanding of the office of deacon, applied to modern women would look different than the way it's generally practiced. Women who lead women's Bible studies, or minister in crises pregnancy centers, or in biblical counseling could be understood as doing the work of a deaconess.
I think this question is another form of a more basic question; that of the role of women in the Church in general.
In the Innocent Creation God created humans 'male and female'. No differentiation there in chapter 1. In chapter 2 God creates Adam, and then Eve as a 'helper'. But that word in the Hebrew is also use of God as 'helper of Israel'; it doesn't mean a subordinate, but a powerful person who aids someone with insufficient power to act alone.
This is further supported in the Fall. It is not until the Fall, when the various curses are being placed on Adam, Eve, the snake and the ground that Eve is made subject to Adam. Female subordination is NOT a 'Creation Ordinance', but a 'Fall Ordinance'.
Now we have Christ who died and rose again for us. Just as the curse on Adam (death) is swept away by Christ's work, so is the curse on Eve (subordination). To say that female subordination remains is to assert that Christ's Work is incomplete.
A reading of Paul's letters with proper attention to context will support this. In the classical world, daughters were never adopted. They were given, sometimes sold, but never adopted. Even the word Paul uses for adoption (huiothesia) literally means 'make a son'. This is clear in Gal. 4:4-7:-
"But when the time had fully come, God sent forth his Son, born of woman, born under the law, to redeem those who were under the law, so that we might receive adoption as sons. And because you are sons, God has sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, crying, “Abba! Father!” So through God you are no longer a slave but a son, and if a son then an heir."
Or are we to suppose that this applied only to the men?
Certainly Paul asks women to act submissively, especially in public, because the culture of the times held a non-submissive woman to be scandalous, bringing shame to her and her husband, in much the same way that a modern female swimwear would have been considered scandalous in Victorian England. But conformity with the surrounding culture for the sake of avoiding scandal is not the same as an Eternal Decree. Also, consider that Paul always asked the women to be silent; it was their gift to comply. He never told the men to "Keep your women under control!"
And finally, we are all, male or female, to 'be subject to one another out of reverence for Christ'. (Eph. 5:21) This phrase is NOT the start of a series of commands aimed at women, as implied by some modern versions. It is a participial phrase, part of a chiastic structure in a single sentence starting in in v. 19. Why it was split away into its own sentence and linked to wives is an example of doctrine dictating translation.
To continue to hold to female subordination is to imply that Christ's work incomplete.
Perhaps a more robust understanding of the office of deacon would prove helpful.
The apostolic teaching and patristic tradition treat deacons as ministers of word and mercy. One reason they are required by St Paul to hold the mysteries of the faith with good conscience is because they preached and baptized. See the Book of Acts and pastoral epistles.
Modern deacons are not ministers of the word — they change lightbulbs and maintain property and crunch the numbers. It’s much harder to argue against deaconesses / for male deacons only if that (managerial, janitorial, custodial) is the crux of the office.
While the Church historic and catholic has at times recognized an order of deaconess, women have never been *ordained* to the office in the more historic and catholic traditions — excluding liberal and progressive sects that disregard far more than the ordination of faithful Christian men.
That said, perhaps a more robust understanding of ordination would prove helpful.
I think that's a good point. A 1st century understanding of the office of deacon, applied to modern women would look different than the way it's generally practiced. Women who lead women's Bible studies, or minister in crises pregnancy centers, or in biblical counseling could be understood as doing the work of a deaconess.
This is what comes to mind when I imagine deaconess — https://recdss.org
I think this question is another form of a more basic question; that of the role of women in the Church in general.
In the Innocent Creation God created humans 'male and female'. No differentiation there in chapter 1. In chapter 2 God creates Adam, and then Eve as a 'helper'. But that word in the Hebrew is also use of God as 'helper of Israel'; it doesn't mean a subordinate, but a powerful person who aids someone with insufficient power to act alone.
This is further supported in the Fall. It is not until the Fall, when the various curses are being placed on Adam, Eve, the snake and the ground that Eve is made subject to Adam. Female subordination is NOT a 'Creation Ordinance', but a 'Fall Ordinance'.
Now we have Christ who died and rose again for us. Just as the curse on Adam (death) is swept away by Christ's work, so is the curse on Eve (subordination). To say that female subordination remains is to assert that Christ's Work is incomplete.
A reading of Paul's letters with proper attention to context will support this. In the classical world, daughters were never adopted. They were given, sometimes sold, but never adopted. Even the word Paul uses for adoption (huiothesia) literally means 'make a son'. This is clear in Gal. 4:4-7:-
"But when the time had fully come, God sent forth his Son, born of woman, born under the law, to redeem those who were under the law, so that we might receive adoption as sons. And because you are sons, God has sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, crying, “Abba! Father!” So through God you are no longer a slave but a son, and if a son then an heir."
Or are we to suppose that this applied only to the men?
Certainly Paul asks women to act submissively, especially in public, because the culture of the times held a non-submissive woman to be scandalous, bringing shame to her and her husband, in much the same way that a modern female swimwear would have been considered scandalous in Victorian England. But conformity with the surrounding culture for the sake of avoiding scandal is not the same as an Eternal Decree. Also, consider that Paul always asked the women to be silent; it was their gift to comply. He never told the men to "Keep your women under control!"
And finally, we are all, male or female, to 'be subject to one another out of reverence for Christ'. (Eph. 5:21) This phrase is NOT the start of a series of commands aimed at women, as implied by some modern versions. It is a participial phrase, part of a chiastic structure in a single sentence starting in in v. 19. Why it was split away into its own sentence and linked to wives is an example of doctrine dictating translation.
To continue to hold to female subordination is to imply that Christ's work incomplete.
The Presbyterian Church in Ireland still commissions deconessess. This really gives some food for thought!
Thank you for this helpful and clarifying series, Thomas.