“Father Simeon Odabashian of the Eastern Diocese of the Armenian Church noted that while his church technically prohibits marriage after ordination to the sub-diaconate, this rule has generally fallen into disuse and deacons are allowed to marry up to the point of their priestly ordination.”I came across a reference to the Armenian tradition allowing Deacons to marry after ordination. Is this true? When did this practice start and how does it play out in the church today?
Thanks!
It should be noted that he’s Armenian Apostolic Orthodox, not Armenian Catholic.“Father Simeon Odabashian of the Eastern Diocese of the Armenian Church noted that while his church technically prohibits marriage after ordination to the sub-diaconate, this rule has generally fallen into disuse and deacons are allowed to marry up to the point of their priestly ordination.”
June 2003
sor.cua.edu/Ecumenism/20030626oorcconsultation.html
I’m firmly of the belief that the Deaconess was in fact a female deacon, ordained to holy orders, but of a different and uniquely female order that had many but not all the same duties as a Deacon.Hmm… what are your thoughts on this Aramis and Vico?
What do the other oriental orthodox think about this?
This is more of a Latin question than an Eastern one, but was the ordination of deaconesses a sacrament, like that of a deacon, or a sacramental, like that of a subdeacon. The Latin Church counted subdeacons as a major order for many centuries, but it was still understood, theologically, the ordination of a subdeacon was quite distinct from the ordination of a deacon, priest, or bishop. Even today, the blessing of an abbot shares many ritual aspects in common with the consecration of the bishop, but it is understood that the spiritual realities are vastly different. If the East does begin to ordain deaconesses and understands it as a degree of holy orders, like the male diaconate, it will be a theological stumbling block for the West…I’m firmly of the belief that the Deaconess was in fact a female deacon, ordained to holy orders, but of a different and uniquely female order that had many but not all the same duties as a Deacon.
Which, by the way, is pretty much what the Apostolic Constitutions imply; what they state clearly is that they have duties between those of the subdeacon and deacon, and the same ordination mode as men, aside from the prayer of consecration being devoted to St. Phoebe rather than St. Stephen.
And, if they restrict it to the same requirements as the Apostolic Constitutions, we’ll see many more than antiquity, but only because life expectancy of adults is 20-30 years greater than in antiquity.
Only when the laity misread sacerdotal for major… the prohibition is on women having sacerdotal (=presbyteral &/or episcopal) ordination.This is more of a Latin question than an Eastern one, but was the ordination of deaconesses a sacrament, like that of a deacon, or a sacramental, like that of a subdeacon. The Latin Church counted subdeacons as a major order for many centuries, but it was still understood, theologically, the ordination of a subdeacon was quite distinct from the ordination of a deacon, priest, or bishop. Even today, the blessing of an abbot shares many ritual aspects in common with the consecration of the bishop, but it is understood that the spiritual realities are vastly different. If the East does begin to ordain deaconesses and understands it as a degree of holy orders, like the male diaconate, it will be a theological stumbling block for the West…
Also twf:Only when the laity misread sacerdotal for major… the prohibition is on women having sacerdotal (=presbyteral &/or episcopal) ordination.
Rome has studiously avoided answering with finality on deaconesses, simply repeating the mantra-like refrain of them not being needed anymore.
A more authoritative English version… the Vatican’s: vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/apost_letters/documents/hf_ben-xvi_apl_20091026_codex-iuris-canonici_en.html
Thank you for the better translation.A more authoritative English version… the Vatican’s: vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/apost_letters/documents/hf_ben-xvi_apl_20091026_codex-iuris-canonici_en.html
And I agree it makes much more clear the distinction subtly made in Ordinatio Sacerdotalis by the absence of deacons being mentioned.
and for the latin purists:
vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/apost_letters/documents/hf_ben-xvi_apl_20091026_codex-iuris-canonici_lt.html
vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/apost_letters/documents/hf_jp-ii_apl_22051994_ordinatio-sacerdotalis_lt.html
Then we can change our name to the Roman Episcopal Church and follow their theological decline.This is more of a Latin question than an Eastern one, but was the ordination of deaconesses a sacrament, like that of a deacon, or a sacramental, like that of a subdeacon. The Latin Church counted subdeacons as a major order for many centuries, but it was still understood, theologically, the ordination of a subdeacon was quite distinct from the ordination of a deacon, priest, or bishop. Even today, the blessing of an abbot shares many ritual aspects in common with the consecration of the bishop, but it is understood that the spiritual realities are vastly different. If the East does begin to ordain deaconesses and understands it as a degree of holy orders, like the male diaconate, it will be a theological stumbling block for the West…