This will not be a post about why women can’t
become priests. Although an interesting and underdeveloped topic, understanding the reason behind the Church having always maintained an all-male priesthood requires an in-depth
investigation into the very nature of the priesthood, liturgical service,
symbol and reality, prophecy and revelation, and the relationship between
Christ and the Church, which is beyond the scope of this post. Rather, I wish
to make a point about the creation of a false and unjustified male-female
divide in so much of our liturgical life which, despite having no Biblical or
patristic basis, has become part of Orthodox “general ignorance” (if I may
borrow a QI-ism). Such things as entering the altar, preparing the censer,
carrying candles or banners, reading the Epistle, holding the communion cloth
while the priest distributes the Holy Gifts, are all regarded as “men’s jobs”
from which women are prohibited. Indeed in many parishes, the sanctuary has
become a gentlemen’s club, where the holy utterances of the priest are drowned
out by continuous chatter about business, family, fishing, and, if it’s a
Cypriot church, wild vegetables. When questioned on why this is so, well
meaning and pious Orthodox, keen to defend what they believe to be Holy
Tradition, resort to the most absurd feats of mental gymnastics when the answer
is really quite simple: it isn’t supposed to be that way.
In addition to the three biblical orders of the
priesthood - bishop, presbyter and deacon - the Church also has several ranks
of lower clergy, in order that “all things be done decently and according to
order,” as the holy Apostle instructs us in his First Epistle to the Corinthians
(14:40). Most commonly mentioned in the canons are the orders of chanter,
reader and subdeacon. The chanters lead the people in the liturgical responses
and sing those hymns not appropriate for lay participation (the Cheruvikon, for
example). Readers, as the name suggests, read the appointed portions from the
Holy Scriptures and other appropriate parts of the daily services. Today, the order for
tonsuring a reader also incorporates that of appointing a taper-bearer, whose
job it would be to hold candles during processions or the reading of the
Gospel, what we might call an acolyte or altar-boy. Subdeacons serve in the sanctuary and may touch the holy altar and
handle the sacred vessels when necessary. The modern practice of allowing
laymen to do all these things is quite simply wrong.
Canon LXIX of the Quintisext Council is very
clear on the matter: “It is not permitted to a layman to enter the sanctuary.”
In other words, if you have not been tonsured/ordained to the appropriate office,
the fact that you happen to have a penis is utterly irrelevant. Naturally there
are situations when the akrivia, or
strictness, of the canons cannot be adhered to and it is necessary for a
layperson to fill in where needed (though in well-established parishes I can
really see no good reason why this should be a frequent occurrence). One such
example, of course, is the convent, where the nuns (i.e. women) will sing, read, carry
candles, and even enter the altar when necessary. Now, in a parish setting it might make sense to delegate such responsibility to individuals who might be
ordained to the appropriate rank in the future, and who must therefore be male,
but to turn what is quite clearly a distinction between clergy and laity into
one between men and women is both dishonest and harmful, as it unnecessarily reinforces false stereotypes of Orthodoxy as backward and misogynistic.
Now, just because I think greater importance
should be placed on the roles of the minor orders in the Liturgy, this does mean I agree with the emphasis certain
people, particularly in American convert circles, place on them outside a liturgical context. The teenage
wannabe priests who wear their cassocks out on the street without being told to
do so by their bishop or who introduce themselves to others as “Reader so-and-so”
aren’t quite what I have in mind.
No comments:
Post a Comment