Minatasgeel- if you are going to critize without an argument, don't say anything at all because if you ever plan on convincing anyone on this forum that you have the right train of thought, its not going to work. With that kind of argument, you would be kicked out of any english class immediately.
Ilovesaintmark- first of all, the gay thing came from a previous thread where that username argued for homosexual rights in the church. Lets not just jump to conclusions. Secondly, do you take care of the pope's affairs? Because you seem to "know" a lot of his decisions and ideas. Yes, you are right in the fact that it hasn't been something that was discussed by the HolySynod and thats why, as it said in the first post of this thread, this is not a formal role yet. Deaconesses are not formally ordained in the church just as deacons are but are BLESSED. Maybe you should get your facts straight about the details behind this role you so passionately oppose before you come on here and go crazy. Additionally, St. Paul is very detailed and deliberate in his messages but this wasn't a pressing matter that needed to be discussed over a letter to the entire church. There were more pressing matters he needed to address such as matters of their SALVATION.
Where in this did anyone say that women are taking over the church? Is not the priest still in charge, and every rank in the church above that of the deaconesses?
[quote author=Phoebe4XC link=topic=10503.msg129041#msg129041 date=1296442155] Minatasgeel- if you are going to critize without an argument, don't say anything at all because if you ever plan on convincing anyone on this forum that you have the right train of thought, its not going to work.
there is a reason i stated that i will criticize.......i wasn't arguing at all because if you have read the thread properly (or atleast the first original post) you would of understood that you have no argument or it's actually that weak to even consider.
With that kind of argument, you would be kicked out of any english class immediately.
lol....it doesn't look like you have been to a lot.....the least that anyone needs to do in an english class is "read"
You are absolutely right. I'm an English major, we mostly read...the only time you have to "make an argument" per se is when you write a paper...you can make any argument you like (whether weak or strong) and as long as you support it and prove it as correct, you're good to go. You would pass any English class, don't worry :)
one thing you missed....you USE what you have read to back-up your argument.....
I'm illiterate. I don't know how to read, according to Phoebe, but I do know how to write. I guess that would make "writerate". Yet, another word I made-up to encompass my feelings.
I would recommend a re-reading of the entire thread, including the comments by Fr. Peter. You can put my obnoxious remarks to the side, as just fleeting thoughts from an exhausted male.
You must be a in one the orders of the priesthood (i.e. full deacon or archdeacon, priest, hegomen) to serve in the altar. Unfortunately there are almost no full deacons anymore so those in an order of deacons below the priesthood end up serving in the altar.
Essentially asking to enter and serve in the altar is asking to be a priest. As for having a female ecclesiastical choir, there are other Orthodox Churches that have this sort of thing. The role of epsaltos wasn't an original role and was only put there because of the lack of knowledge of hymns among the congregation, so there is the question of why we couldn't have them learn the hymns and pray them as normal members of the congregation.
I think that would be great. It would lead to the involvement of women in the liturgy without the need for much change. Afterall the liturgy is the work of the people and we all must participate. The best way to participate is to pray the hymns.
[quote author=anba bola link=topic=10503.msg129059#msg129059 date=1296444032] Essentially asking to enter and serve in the altar is asking to be a priest. As for having a female ecclesiastical choir, there are other Orthodox Churches that have this sort of thing. The role of epsaltos wasn't an original role and was only put there because of the lack of knowledge of hymns among the congregation, so there is the question of why we couldn't have them learn the hymns and pray them as normal members of the congregation.
I think that would be great. It would lead to the involvement of women in the liturgy without the need for much change. Afterall the liturgy is the work of the people and we all must participate. The best way to participate is to pray the hymns.
you contradicted yourself a little.
you said that the rank of epsaltos was revived to lead the people in chanting hymns and that just extended the role of deacons. so chanting hymns is the work of the people rather than the deacons...women are part of the poeple....as much as the men sitting on the other side of church. why would you need to have them be in a special rank to do what they are supposed to be doing in their current rank of mean the people in church?
The Sub-Deacons are allowed service in the altar. The protocol is Sub-Deacon or higher.
The Epsaltos was never a rank in the Church, and it is still not a rank.
As a matter of fact it was not even the Book of the Rites of Ordination. They took the Prayers for the Reader [Rank] and just removed the words: Reader and read and changed to Epsaltos and sing. They other difference is that the Epsaltos is not tonsured.
To follow your simplified logic, I can quote the great Yogi Berra: 'If it ain't broke, don't fix it.' Things that are 2000 years are quite valuable. Can you imagine a coin of that age, statue, artifact? What about a Faith and Tradition of 2000 yrs?
I won't pipe in with the complicated talk, I'll just take you on your own level.
Sorry to resurrect this thread but a quote by St. John Chrysostom applies very well here:
For those things which I have already mentioned might easily be performed by many even of those who are under authority, women as well as men; but when one is required to preside over the Church, and to be entrusted with the care of so many souls, the whole female sex must retire before the magnitude of the task, and the majority of men also; and we must bring forward those who to a large extent surpass all others, and soar as much above them in excellence of spirit as Saul overtopped the whole Hebrew nation in bodily stature: or rather far more
This is only a short extract from St John Chrysostom.
But we can note that he excludes almost all men as well as women from the task of the episcopate. It is therefore nothing to do with gender abilities in a mental or skill sense. Indeed he points to it being a spiritual pastorship in which only a very few are suited and able.
This is indeed the case. How few are able to be bishops. And how few among those few are truly excellent in all spiritual things. And even those who are not excellent are to be prayed for earnestly for it is a great burden and liable to terrible Divine judgement.
I don't see this passage is about women at all, or the vast majority of men also not called to the task. Rather it is pointing to the exceptional spiritual grace required for the episcopate. Indeed St John is clear that it has nothing to do with natural ability, such natural tasks are the least important of a bishop.
To follow your simplified logic, I can quote the great Yogi Berra: 'If it ain't broke, don't fix it.' Things that are 2000 years are quite valuable. Can you imagine a coin of that age, statue, artifact? What about a Faith and Tradition of 2000 yrs?
I won't pipe in with the complicated talk, I'll just take you on your own level.
Complicated talk? I think an advanced student with an average of 92%, can take on anything complicated. But please, there is no reason to complicate words when diminutive words would suffice. Einstein always emphasized simplicity. How bout the changes in our society? What made our fore fathers chose to not let women be deaconesses?
EDIT: ilovesaintmark, you are probably a university graduate with a high degree, lol, I shouldn't even be speaking to your honor!
Comments
Ilovesaintmark- first of all, the gay thing came from a previous thread where that username argued for homosexual rights in the church. Lets not just jump to conclusions. Secondly, do you take care of the pope's affairs? Because you seem to "know" a lot of his decisions and ideas. Yes, you are right in the fact that it hasn't been something that was discussed by the HolySynod and thats why, as it said in the first post of this thread, this is not a formal role yet. Deaconesses are not formally ordained in the church just as deacons are but are BLESSED. Maybe you should get your facts straight about the details behind this role you so passionately oppose before you come on here and go crazy. Additionally, St. Paul is very detailed and deliberate in his messages but this wasn't a pressing matter that needed to be discussed over a letter to the entire church. There were more pressing matters he needed to address such as matters of their SALVATION.
Phoebes,
I have been around since the first century.
I believe you.
If you want to bring St. Paul into the matter, well, I believe he said that women should not raise their voices above a male [in church].
I think that's detailed.
Minatasgeel- if you are going to critize without an argument, don't say anything at all because if you ever plan on convincing anyone on this forum that you have the right train of thought, its not going to work.
there is a reason i stated that i will criticize.......i wasn't arguing at all because if you have read the thread properly (or atleast the first original post) you would of understood that you have no argument or it's actually that weak to even consider. lol....it doesn't look like you have been to a lot.....the least that anyone needs to do in an english class is "read"
minatasgeel,
You are absolutely right. I'm an English major, we mostly read...the only time you have to "make an argument" per se is when you write a paper...you can make any argument you like (whether weak or strong) and as long as you support it and prove it as correct, you're good to go. You would pass any English class, don't worry :)
one thing you missed....you USE what you have read to back-up your argument.....
I would recommend a re-reading of the entire thread, including the comments by Fr. Peter. You can put my obnoxious remarks to the side, as just fleeting thoughts from an exhausted male.
Essentially asking to enter and serve in the altar is asking to be a priest. As for having a female ecclesiastical choir, there are other Orthodox Churches that have this sort of thing. The role of epsaltos wasn't an original role and was only put there because of the lack of knowledge of hymns among the congregation, so there is the question of why we couldn't have them learn the hymns and pray them as normal members of the congregation.
I think that would be great. It would lead to the involvement of women in the liturgy without the need for much change. Afterall the liturgy is the work of the people and we all must participate. The best way to participate is to pray the hymns.
Please pray for me
Essentially asking to enter and serve in the altar is asking to be a priest. As for having a female ecclesiastical choir, there are other Orthodox Churches that have this sort of thing. The role of epsaltos wasn't an original role and was only put there because of the lack of knowledge of hymns among the congregation, so there is the question of why we couldn't have them learn the hymns and pray them as normal members of the congregation.
I think that would be great. It would lead to the involvement of women in the liturgy without the need for much change. Afterall the liturgy is the work of the people and we all must participate. The best way to participate is to pray the hymns.
you contradicted yourself a little.
you said that the rank of epsaltos was revived to lead the people in chanting hymns and that just extended the role of deacons. so chanting hymns is the work of the people rather than the deacons...women are part of the poeple....as much as the men sitting on the other side of church. why would you need to have them be in a special rank to do what they are supposed to be doing in their current rank of mean the people in church?
The Epsaltos was never a rank in the Church, and it is still not a rank.
As a matter of fact it was not even the Book of the Rites of Ordination. They took the Prayers for the Reader [Rank] and just removed the words: Reader and read and changed to Epsaltos and sing. They other difference is that the Epsaltos is not tonsured.
Women are great chanters, why not let them be deacons? Do we really have to follow 2 thousand year old traditions? Things are meant to change.
To follow your simplified logic, I can quote the great Yogi Berra: 'If it ain't broke, don't fix it.'
Things that are 2000 years are quite valuable. Can you imagine a coin of that age, statue, artifact? What about a Faith and Tradition of 2000 yrs?
I won't pipe in with the complicated talk, I'll just take you on your own level.
But we can note that he excludes almost all men as well as women from the task of the episcopate. It is therefore nothing to do with gender abilities in a mental or skill sense. Indeed he points to it being a spiritual pastorship in which only a very few are suited and able.
This is indeed the case. How few are able to be bishops. And how few among those few are truly excellent in all spiritual things. And even those who are not excellent are to be prayed for earnestly for it is a great burden and liable to terrible Divine judgement.
I don't see this passage is about women at all, or the vast majority of men also not called to the task. Rather it is pointing to the exceptional spiritual grace required for the episcopate. Indeed St John is clear that it has nothing to do with natural ability, such natural tasks are the least important of a bishop.
Father Peter
Khas,
To follow your simplified logic, I can quote the great Yogi Berra: 'If it ain't broke, don't fix it.'
Things that are 2000 years are quite valuable. Can you imagine a coin of that age, statue, artifact? What about a Faith and Tradition of 2000 yrs?
I won't pipe in with the complicated talk, I'll just take you on your own level.
Complicated talk? I think an advanced student with an average of 92%, can take on anything complicated. But please, there is no reason to complicate words when diminutive words would suffice. Einstein always emphasized simplicity. How bout the changes in our society? What made our fore fathers chose to not let women be deaconesses?
EDIT: ilovesaintmark, you are probably a university graduate with a high degree, lol, I shouldn't even be speaking to your honor!