Dear Ruth, this is a most thoughtful and provocative comment,both good things. The fact that you go straight to the point with the question how a woman’s ordination into a rank of clergy (Deaconess) would be of some greater spiritual benefit than her work of service as a layperson (I’m paraphrasing your question) has stumped me, not having sought this rank for myself. I’ve just gone along with the argument advanced by the movement for ordination, that a deaconess, the female equivalent of a deacon, should also be able to assist the priest and the bishop during church services. Women currently are prohibited from such a role. This is an issue of liturgy, and just plain fairness given the history of deaconess in the Byzantine churches. Why should women be excluded if they want to have that liturgical role? Or from teaching catechism or assisting in baptisms?

Let me quote from an article in the National Catholic Reporter (yes, they follow this issue): “Marilyn Rouvelas, chair of Orthodox Deacons, a women’s ordination ministry in Virginia, said deaconesses are desperately needed in the U.S.

“’It’s hard for a priest to serve an entire community,” said Rouvelas. “They’re already overworked.’

“But each branch of Orthodoxy doesn’t necessarily recognize that need. ‘It’s a very arduous ladder to climb to convince bishops that the needs of the church are very great and women can help with that need and serve in those capacities, she said.”

But, as you point out, does such a role bring the body of believers closer to “the meaning of Christ’s life?”

As it happens, a friend of mine, Rev. Marie-Louise Ternier, who was recently ordained a priest in the Anglican Church of Canada, lived most of her life as an observant Roman Catholic. She recently blogged about why she left the RC church instead of joining the movement of Roman Catholic Women Priests (excommunicated, of course). In her response, she does acknowledge the fruitfulness of church ministry without ordination, although in the end the call to vocation was too great. Perhaps she answers your question.

“I discovered that, despite the prohibition on ordination, my ministry career could be surprisingly fruitful. This was possible in part thanks to a deepened understanding of sacraments, encompassing every occasion in which I could facilitate an embodied encounter between God and a person in need. I learnt that priestly ministry need not be limited to
the institutionally ordained, that it could be deeply life-giving and love-giving even in the most restrictive
circumstances.”

Here’s the link. https://graceatsixty.wordpress.com/

What a story!And way back in 1965. I’ve known about the Marcus Garvey Back to Africa movement but had no idea women’s ordination into the diaconate in Ethiopia could be folded into it, if only in one woman’s fecund imagination. I wonder how she conducted the services before she received the Ethiopian Orthodox one? (And I don’t suppose we Ukrainian Orthodox are in communion with her?)At a conference of the Sophia Institute for Orthodox Thought and Culture at Columbia University, I made the acquaintance of an African-American woman who said that many African-Americans have been attracted to the Orthodox Church because it is so colourful and ceremonial. I’m not sure she praised the music, having a superb tradition of her own.

I too saw Judy Chicago’s installation, in Toronto, but I don’t remember the female pope – Pope Joan, I believe. However, I did learn of her in other contexts, namely our young and excitable feminist critique of the crimes of patriarchy, wherever they were committed – and, correspondingly, our thrilling sense of discovery (or recovery) of women whose stories had been suppressed, this Pope Joan among them. Wikipedia now tells us that “Pope Joan, 855–857, (Ioannes Anglicus) was, according to popular legend, a woman who reigned as pope for a few years during the Middle Ages. Her story first appeared in chronicles in the 13th century and subsequently spread throughout Europe. The story was widely believed for centuries, but most modern scholars regard it as fictional.” The “legend” seems to have been contained within Roman Catholic Europe, both Protestants and Orthodox Christians “laughing” at the credulity of Catholics, according to a scholarly source. Another source states that her “real” gender was revealed when she gave birth in a procession. Nowadays, the possibility of her/his being a trans man should not be discounted.

Thanks for “tuning in”, Stephen. Yours is such a welcome voice on these subjects. I feel much encouraged.

Thank you, Betty. But don’t let us hold our breaths. I received this note from a man who knows his Orthodox theology and church history:
“I enjoyed your blog on Deaconesses very much. One thing – the photo of the Patriarch of Alexandria is very positive but when you ask what is not to love – I have to say that, yes, his hand is on the head of the candidate but the photo clearly shows that this beautiful prayer is happening OUTSIDE the Altar and so the candidates are a possible type of sub-deacons but not Deaconesses as in the early Church, who were always ordained in the Altar as befits true Clergy. What happened there is an important step and should be welcomed joyously but we have not as yet “seen the Promised Land” – we have only seen a misty glimpse from the side of the mountain which is still left for us to climb.” Still, I love that “joyously.”