Ancient Faith investigates deaconesses

Some weeks ago Ancient Faith was going to have a chat with a proponent of deaconesses in the Orthodox Church. I commented on it elsewhere (X) and, my goodness, did it raise a ruckus. AFR got punched in the nose both for the proposed talk by opponents and by proponents for eventually pulling out of the talk. There was a general distrust in what was going to be broadcast and people let them know about it. It got quite personal and not a little destructive, but I didn't see much sign that it was AFR's intent to subvert traditional orthodoxy and inaugurate some great feminizing Council of Portland that would forever change the Church. But, where things like this are on the table, people are going to respond viscerally.

They later announced a reformulated discussion with a very much expanded production. It became a 10-hour documentary which brought John Maddex out of retirement and involved interviews with fourteen people (clergy and theologians). Last night they hosted a two and a half hour preview of that documentary with some commentary by Mr. Maddex and Fr. Tom Soroka between segments. It finished with some call-in questions and a chat with Fr. John Whiteford before the episode ended.

I listened to it while I put kids to bed, tried unsuccessfully to move the dog off the couch, debated a grocery shopping list, and extemporaneously summarized it for my wife who had enough interest to want such a précis but not enough patience to endure the entire 180 minute event. It allowed both "sides" of the argument to speak. And, with a very active YouTube live chat, was much like reading the comments on a political debate with a mix of zingers, insults, and careful parsing of the issue. 

The primary complaint was that by even bringing up the topic Ancient Faith was giving an alien presence purchase on the Body of Christ (pictured right; see Life for cinematic treatment). I think if the current deaconess movement were not receiving some jurisdictional, financial, and academic backing this might be true. And there were also several (lightly attended) Zoom events and a conference as well in the mix putting the idea out into the world. In this case I don't believe engaging with the topic strengthened it at all. The more people heard, the more entrenched those in the live chat seemed to become in their positions. This might be a situation where daylight served as cleansing treatment on the topic.

The YouTube event touched on the historical deaconess role, what the church has been discussing on the topic in recent councils, what is being demanded by proponents, and what would happen if some or all jurisdictions brought in this role in any of the proposed forms. There was not agreement in what the historical role was. There was not agreement on what shape the "revitalized" form would take. There was not agreement on a safe way to roll this out should a bishop or synod choose to do so.

I could summarize this thing for pages, but I do encourage you to listen to it all the way through. Fight the urge to fast forward through some people. For me it was worth hearing how strong some positions were and comforting to see how weak others were. You also learned where things might go next, which might prove helpful at a future coffee hour discussion on the topic.

Did you listen? What were your thoughts?