Deaconesses and Chalcedon

[suissemissed]

The ecumenical Council of Chalcedon says in Canon 15: “A woman shall not receive the laying on of hands as a deaconess under forty years of age, and then only after searching examination. And if, after she has had hands laid on her and has continued for a time to minister, she shall despise the grace of God and give herself in marriage, she shall be anathematized and the man united to her.”

Doesn’t this show that women can be ordained as deaconesses? Thoughts, anyone?

 

[WetCatechumen]

The ecumenical Council of Chalcedon says in Canon 15: “A woman shall not receive the laying on of hands as a deaconess under forty years of age, and then only after searching examination. And if, after she has had hands laid on her and has continued for a time to minister, she shall despise the grace of God and give herself in marriage, she shall be anathematized and the man united to her.”

Doesn’t this show that women can be ordained as deaconesses? Thoughts, anyone?

I think that we should go back to having converts baptized naked, because it more properly symbolizes the rebirth. And then, of course, we’d need deaconesses to do the baptisms.

 

[JohnDamian]

I think that we should go back to having converts baptized naked, because it more properly symbolizes the rebirth. And then, of course, we’d need deaconesses to do the baptisms.

That’s just odd… There are male midwifes…

 

[Third_Day]

The ecumenical Council of Chalcedon says in Canon 15: “A woman shall not receive the laying on of hands as a deaconess under forty years of age, and then only after searching examination. And if, after she has had hands laid on her and has continued for a time to minister, she shall despise the grace of God and give herself in marriage, she shall be anathematized and the man united to her.”

Doesn’t this show that women can be ordained as deaconesses? Thoughts, anyone?

According to this article, deaconesses disappeared, for the most part, around the 11th century. It alludes to the fact that adult baptism became rare and I would assume that women were needed for that purpose if a women was baptized by immersion and without clothes. The article points out that the ordination formula used for deaconesses was different than that for men showing that they had a distinct function. Perhaps they were considered to be the "nuns’ of their time.

newadvent.org/cathen/04651a.htm

 

[Zooey]

This question gets asked from time to time. I actually know about this, because my grandmother was a Methodist deaconess.
A deaconess is **not **ordained. They do, however, receive the laying on of hands, as a blessing for them to carry out various works of charity. My grandmother’s assigned duties were:

1. 
   *]Teaching a Sunday school class for young women.
   *]Visiting the sick.
   *]Visiting the elderly.
   *]Leading a ladies’ prayer group.
   
   These were decided by her pastor at the time. He was exceptionally busy, & he had to travel a good deal (in the age of horses & buggies!!). Also, as you will notice, she worked with women, in women’s groups.
   This sort of thing is, from what it seems to me, traditionally done among by religious sisters. Therefore, the office of deaconess seems to have ceased to be active in the Catholic Church. (Actually, there are very few deaconesses in Methodism these days).
   HTH.

 

[rwoehmke]

The article points out that the ordination formula used for deaconesses was different than that for men showing that they had a distinct function. Perhaps they were considered to be the "nuns’ of their time.newadvent.org/cathen/04651a.htm

As a matter of fact a little more research (I did this internet searching several years ago and no longer have the references.) would show exactly that. The deaconess served a function very much like some of today’s orders who are not cloistered. Nursing, teaching, etc. Basically they were vowed religious.

 

[Spencerian]

The ecumenical Council of Chalcedon says in Canon 15: “A woman shall not receive the laying on of hands as a deaconess under forty years of age, and then only after searching examination. And if, after she has had hands laid on her and has continued for a time to minister, she shall despise the grace of God and give herself in marriage, she shall be anathematized and the man united to her.”

Doesn’t this show that women can be ordained as deaconesses? Thoughts, anyone?

No. That is not the proper conclusion based on this Catholic Encyclopedia article.

The earliest use of the concept of deaconess involved the baptisms of women by women for the sake of cultural modesty (in early Church times, many baptisms were done in the nude).

It appears that some members not in authority had given these early religious women a form of ordination, but such acts were misconstrued as the receiving of Holy Orders, which cannot be done, as seen in a decision of an earlier Council of Nismes in 394 (and certainly other earlier and later councils). The Council of Chalcedon appeared to try to define some roles of women religious–but without an monastic order’s vows.

The terms that are rooted in “deaconess” were also often confused with widows. The age and marital requirements imposed by these early councils seemed less to support the idea that women ordination was allowed or even possible, but that woman had a special role in dedicated religious life.

In short, the practice of deaconesses in the early Church were an early example of what we now call nuns. The various religious orders of the monks soon began to take hold for women religious and their orders, who continue the role once known as the “deaconess.”

 

[Just_Lurking]

Theologically, it is still an open issue whether historical deaconesses received the sacrament of Holy Orders. There are arguments on both sides of the issue. The Vatican just finished a 5 years study of the issue in 2002 or 2003, but was unable to provide a definitive answer.

 

[suissemissed]

Thanks for your answers, everyone! Gosh, if the top theologians in the Vatican spent 5 years researching the issue and can’t come to a definitive conclusion, then I guess I’m not going to either!