Deaconess

MARIA GWYN MCDOWELL

An ordained female member of the priestly order, at the level of diaconate. The office reached its zenith in the early Byzantine period, though it has never been altogether abandoned.

Phoebe, commemorated as “equal to the apostles,” is referred to by Paul as a deacon (diakonos, Rom. 16.1) and is the proto­type of the later office of the deaconess. The church also commemorates as dea­cons Tabitha (or Dorcas, Acts 9.36), Lydia (Acts 16.14), Mary, Persis, Tryphosa and Tryphena, Priscilla and Junia (Rom. 16.3–15), the daughters of Philip (Acts 21.9), Euodia and Syntyche (Phil. 4.2–3), all of whom were fellow-workers with Paul and laborers in the gospel; 1 Timothy 3.8–11 pre­sents the requirements for diaconal service. An array of early theologians such as Clement of Alexandria (Stromateis 3, 6, 53.3–4), Ori- gen (Commentary on Romans 10.17), John Chrysostom (Homily 11 on 1 Timothy), Theodoret of Cyrrhus and Theodore of Mopsuestia, all interpret 1 Timothy 3.11 as referring to female deacons. The 4th-7th centuries are rich in archeological, epi- graphical, and literary references in which diakonos with a feminine article and diakonissa are used interchangeably.

There is no evidence of significantly different functions between male and female deacons in the earliest church, a time when the diaconate itself was rapidly evolving. By the 3rd century the liturgical function of ordained women mirrored the culturally normative public/private segregation of roles and functions. Early deaconesses assisted in the baptism and anointing of adult (naked) women, and engaged in cate­chetical, pastoral, social, and evangelistic work among women. Like the male deacon, they were liaison officers for the bishop, specifically with a ministry to the women among whom it would have been inappro­priate for a man to venture. The rise of infant baptism reduced their baptismal role but they continued to supervise the liturgical roles of women, to lead them in liturgical prayer, to chant in the church, participate in liturgical processions, and like the other priestly orders, the deaconesses all received the Eucharist at the altar with their fellow clergy. The deaconess did not lead worship in the same manner as male deacons reciting the Ektenies. However, in absence of male clergy, monastic deaconesses read the gospel and scriptures among women, and evidently poured water and wine into the chalice (Madigan and Osiek 2005: 6–7).

The requirements and regulations governing deaconesses were far stricter than for men, a double standard accounted for by ancient cultural biases regarding women’s abilities and their supposedly over-sexualized nature (Karras 2004: 294). Regulations were modified and not always strictly observed. Deaconesses were mostly, though not entirely, celibate (Justinian, Novellae 6.6), and were permitted ordina­tion at 60 years of age, a requirement later reduced to 40 or younger.

There is no clear reason for the order’s decline, and no canon forbids its existence. Late-Byzantine speculations reflect stereotyp­ical misogyny. The 12th-century canonist Theodore Balsamon declares Canon 15 of Nicea outdated based on his own experience that a deaconess is merely a titular honor for monastic women. The 14th-century canonist Matthew Blastares acknowledges an earlier role in baptism, noting “others say that they were allowed to approach the holy altar and perform nearly all the functions done by male deacons” (Alphabetical Collection 11; Madigan and Osiek 2005: 138). Both medi­eval canonists attribute the order’s decline to menstruation, but expand their reason­ing by commenting on women’s general impurity, weakness and inability to teach publicly. This reasoning coincides with the developing theological typology of the Eucharist as a Temple sacrifice requiring cultic purity, and ignores the ancient canonical denunciation of any reimposition in the church of Levitical notions of purity. The order has never lapsed in the Arme­nian, Coptic, and Ethiopian Churches.

Ordination prayers for female deacons, the earliest ones appearing in the Didascalia, remain in the Euchologion today, and are consistently placed in conjunction with prayers for the male dea­con. The 19th and 20th centuries saw a debate elevating a distinction between the terms cheirotonia, an “ordination,” and cheirothesia, a “blessing” (i.e., if the female diaconate was a cheirothesia it would be a minor order different from the male diaconate). In fact these terms were historically used interchangeably until only recently (Fitzgerald 1998: 111–33). More impor­tantly, like ordination to other major orders, female ordination occurs at the altar during the divine liturgy (Karras 2004: 298). The prayers for male and female deacons are distinct but structurally similar, with an epiclesis, reference to God’s call, and an identical litany. Textual differences lie in a reference, calling on the example of Phoebe rather than Stephen, and other female predecessors, and the mention of purity language which may reflect late- antique beliefs regarding women’s sexuality. Variance in rubrics reflects different liturgi­cal functions as well as Byzantine ideas of gender propriety (Karras 2004: 302–8). The deaconess’s participation in the Eucharist with fellow clergy is a clear demonstration that this office was considered in the Byzantine era a major order of the clergy.

Revitalizing the order has been repeat­edly proposed among the Orthodox churches during the 19th and 20th centu­ries, most frequently in Russia, spearheaded by female royalty (Fitzgerald 1998: 149–51). In 1911 in Greece, Bishop Nektarios ordained a nun to the diaconate, an act poorly received by some. Continued ambiv­alence towards its restoration is evident in St. Nektarios’ later public downplay of an act which bore all the marks of an ordina­tion, and in the 2004 ordinations to the female diaconate in the Church of Greece. The press releases announcing the decision to restore the office of female diaconate there used ambiguous terminology, perhaps intentionally, simultaneously acknowledg­ing the historical facticity of deaconesses while denying any priestly role for them. The current state of impasse remains despite many international conferences, sponsored by various patriarchates and regional churches, which have repeatedly called for the restoration of the order as one of the three recognized priestly orders of the church. These conferences were held at Agapia, Romania (1976), Rhodes, Greece (1988), Crete, Greece (1990), Damascus, Syria (1996), Istanbul, Turkey (1997), and Volos, Greece (2008).

Many Orthodox today believe that the restoration of the female diaconate should be implemented in a way that appropriately addresses contemporary cultural expecta­tions and needs, just as the ancient order did. The restored office would be as similar to and different from the early church practice as was the Byzantine practice in its time. Its full restoration would make a positive statement about how Orthodoxy respects the dignity and ministry of women, and genuinely recognizes their ongoing contribution. The restoration of the order would revitalize the pastoral ministry of the diaconate itself; a role that has frequently been reduced to the liturgical margins or used as a mere stepping stone on the way to presbyterate. It would also accord to women the privileges and responsibilities of a clerical office that many fulfill in all but name.

SEE ALSO: Deacon; Episcopacy; Ordination; Women in Orthodoxy

REFERENCES AND SUGGESTED READINGS

Fitzgerald, K. K. (1998) Women Deacons in the Orthodox Church: Called to Holiness and Ministry. Brookline, MA: Holy Cross Orthodox Press.

Karras, V. A. (2004) “Female Deacons in the Byzantine Church,” Church History 73: 272–316.

Madigan, K. and Osiek, C. (2005) Ordained Women in the Early Church: A Documentary History. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.