What is diakonia? (The following text is extracted from No Boundaries to Compassion? An exploration of women, gender and diakonia, by Myra Blyth and Wendy S. Robins (1998, WCC Programme Unit on Sharing and Service). In this chapter, we attempt to come to some understanding of the meaning of diakonia in the late twentieth century. This will be done by considering the comments of women from around the world on diaconal service and relating these to definitions used in current ecumenical and theological discussions. Introduction One of the first hurdles in trying to come to a definition
of diakonia is the obvious one of overcoming the word itself. To some,
in some contexts, it means a lot. But, it clearly does not mean the same
thing to everyone, and to some the word means almost nothing at all, although
the concept itself is real. Thus, in this opening chapter we have chosen
to focus on diakonia as Christian service. We have come to this working
definition in conversation with the women from around the world with whom
we have been working. As we have noted as the chapter progresses we will
work from the comments of the women to help us to move towards a contemporary
definition of diakonia. |
||||||||||||||||||
What is Christian service? There exists, from the ecumenical perspective, a clear challenge to the churches to reclaim an understanding of service, not only for the church, but for the world. An International Consultation on Diakonia was held in Larnaca in 1987. Known as Diakonia 2000 it's message can be summarized in the following: Larncaca affirmed the poor, the oppressed and marginalized as the centre of Christian diaconal concern. Diakonia is the 'active expression of Christian witness in response to the needs and challenges of the community in which Christians and the churches live'. Or, in Orthodox terms Diakonia at heart, is the sharing of suffering, the carrying of one another's hurdens, thus fulfilling the law of Christ". Diakonia in all its many authentic forms cannot be separated from the struggle for justice and peace; from the empowering, transforming, liberating and suffering Diakonia. Diakonia as the expression of Christian love and sharing is inclusive; 'it includes social struggles and development activities as well as environmental concerns, as witness in action.' (Report to the first meeting of the Sharing and Service Commission after the Canberra Assembly, 1992) The experiences of this group of women from around the world would seem to echo the need for and desirability of holistic definitions of diakonia:
As is evident from the quotations the group of women who discussed these issues together believed that the work of service encompasses the whole of women's lives. Gathering things together, making the best of what they have and sharing with others defines who they are and how they live. For them diakonia does not have simply to be the service which the church considers it offers. It can be any form of service that they offer to other human beings, any expression of love and concern for another. Diakonia and koinonia The actual expression of the definition of diakonia that each women
would give is understandably different. However, it would seem that for
women the interconnection between diakonia - Christian service - and koinonia
-fellowship - is very strong. This notion gains approval and acceptance
regardless of the women's context. For them service is complementary to
the building up of the community. The effect of the service which is called
for by their Christian commitment is only really worthwhile if it helps
to ensure the growth and development of the community and benefits all.
Service is not self-serving; not designed to make those who serve feel good.
This may be a side effect but it's aim is to bring greater well-being and
justice to those who are served.
Their sense might best be
summed up in the words of Bishop Leslie Boseto of the Solomon Islands
who says:
Koinonia without Diakonia is dead. A community which does not understand itself in and through service for the other is without value.For the women in the group koinonia and diakonia are part of an inseparable whole. Diakonia does not exist outside of fellowship and fellowship which does not find within itself an expression of diakonia is impaired and incomplete fellowship. Service which does not arise from spirituality runs a great risk of being functionalist and worse still self serving. A fascinating phrase which sticks with us is that of the Orthodox notion of 'the liturgy after the liturgy'. Here is a very clear indication of the notion that the Christian should be motivated to serve because of their faith and the response to God that this demands. The liturgy gathers together the worship of the community and feeds the individuals of which it is composed. It prepares them for what follows and causes them to continue their praise and worship in the service that they offer throughout the week.
In various parts of the world and in different confessional situations the expressions of diakonia are different and in some senses the women's understandings are varied. Yet, whatever their experience or understanding of diakonia the women sensed common threads in the way that they understood the need to stand alongside those who suffered and or were in need and to utilise the resources within a community to their best effect. Alternative models of diakonia In seeking to discover a working definition for diakonia it is important
not to ignore the history of the word and the concept with which we are
dealing. It would seem that traditionally the word diakonia has been clearly
related in people's mind, if at all, with the notion of the servant. The
diakonos - those engaged in diaconal service - are seen as the servants
of the community. They are seen as those who work to ensure that the necessary
social tasks are carried out and that those in need both within and outside
of the community, are cared for and remembered.
Much has been written about
Christian service and here the group would like to refer to the work of
John N.Collins in his book 'Diakonia'8 In this publication alternative
models of diakonia are explored. Collins is concerned not simply with
the definition of those who are engaged in diaconal action being seen
as servants. Rather, his intention is to try to uncover, possibly even
to recover, a broader set of meanings to the word.
His exposition of diakonia
is based upon an exhaustive study and re-interpretation of ancient sources
and his findings lend strong support to the WCC's ecumenical search for
alternative models of diakonia. As we have seen earlier the WCC has recently
searched for a working definition of diakonia. In so doing, the eleven
ecumenical guidelines were developed as an attempt to express this difficult
and varied concept for today's world. As a whole they try to give a way
of approaching Christian service which takes account of the nuances which
are necessary if one is to give a rounded picture of the concept today.
In his book Collins' work
suggests that the current usage of the word diakonia arose from erroneous
dictionary meanings propagated in the 1930's. His work presents a challenge
to re-think the idea of the ministry of diakonia, and to redraw the profile
of 'the servant church'. Here it is clear that in seeking to re-define
diakonia Collins is looking for a way to reclaim the perception of the
churches role. Certainly the church, the gathered worshipping community
of God is to serve, but this task, both for the individual and the community,
should not be seen as menial Rather, as one of the reasons for the churches
existence, it should be seen as strength and not as a sign of weakness.
Collins suggests that the word diakonia and related words can be seen in ancient sources, including scripture to have three meanings: The most popular perception of diakonia throughout history has been that of the third meaning, waiting at table. As such it has been little valued and primarily regarded as women's work. It is always difficult to ascertain why one meaning took ascendancy over others and the reason for this may not be especially significant. However, in seeking to understand the three strands of meaning which can be found in ancient sources it might be that we can find new ways of understanding diakonia and Christian service for today. The other two roles which Collins outlines, that of the diplomatic-mediator role, or the agent of social change, are not popularly seen as diaconal functions. Nor are they popularly perceived as features of a servant church. Meaning one: the go between: delivering a message, spokesperson, courier Plato's Republica speaks of a group of people who
are constantly communicating things to us, as the diakonos. These
persons, Plato says, 'are beyond the functionaries of life'. Amongst these
persons whose roles he deems political rather than functionary, are the
diviners and priests. Plato writes that 'divining or soothsaying is part
of the diakonic skill'. Plato goes on to place soothsaying within the larger
function of mediation and even of communicating between heaven and earth.
This image of the diakonos
as the go between carrying or bearing a message has strong echoes with
Bishop John Taylor's book The Go-between God9. In this book the
whole creation-salvation story is re-told in terms of a God whose essence
is communion/communication. Diakonia conceived as a service of mediation,
going between peoples and communities is not menial, but godlike.
In many situations of conflict
the church can be seen to have a role as 'mediator'. Here, those from
the Christian community will be motivatecl to seek ways of ensuring and
enabling justice for all. Yet, many times the part played by the church
is not acknowledged for what it is. That is the part played by faith based
motivation is often ignored. Indeed, in some situations where the church
seeks to become involved in difficult social and political situations
the charge is made that the church should not involve itself in such matters.
There are times, however,
when a service of mediation has taken place and is acknowledged to have
done so that, in terms of a gender analysis, it is clear that the specific
experiences of women have not and do not get taken into account. In many
situations in recent history women have stood as messengers and mediators
between communities, national, religious and ethnic. They have tried to
hold up before humanity the horrors of chauvinism, national, religious
and gender related.
Women in Bosnia Herzgovina
worked for peace throughout the war. But, they were not part of the final
negotiations which designed the peace. Women who have sustained the agricultural
base of communities for hundreds of years are not consulted when new plans
and projects are developed and the result is that development projects
go disastrously wrong. In most examples the women who work the land do
not own it and as such are powerless in the face of negotiations with
agencies who can bring resources to agricultural projects.
In both scenarios a lack of
gender awareness brings yet more troubles. Women who are much involved
in advocacy for what is just, find empowerment for themselves in what
they do, but rarely gain structural power.
Thus, in seeking to reclaim
the first of Collins definitions of diakonia it is important to help the
Christian community to recognize the importance of the role and value
it as diaconal service. It is also important to enable the church and
the community at large to recognize and value the role of women as mediators.
As we have seen women have
a particular concern for the whole of life. They wish to build holistic,
integrated lives and communities. This fitsthem particularly to be mediators;
to seek the good of all. For women the reclamation of this notion of the
work of diakonia as the work of thego-between, envoy or messenger is particularly
important. Once recognized and recognized as one of women's particular
gifts, its importancecan help to enable women to value themselves more
and for their roles to be more valued by the community.
Meaning two: agents of change The second notion or activity which Collins ascribes to diakonia is that of agent to effect, officiate at, or mediate the execution of a task. The activity not of diplomat but manager, a change maker. Someone who doesn't simply talk but gets something done, who makes a difference. If service in the world and the community is to effect real change then it must begin somewhere other than with project management. It must have an energy and a passion which is only possible when the people who are to be served take centre stage.
Again, we have seen from the women's words earlier, they often help to initiate and manage change. In many instances women are responsible for managingthe affairs of their households and of the local community. This too, is part of their diaconal service. Part of the work that they clo in response to God. Able to see the need for just, equal, sharing, women can often develop ways of working which are communitarian, involving as many people as possible in thedecision making and this helps to develop the life of the community. Once again this is not a passive menial task of 'doing for others'. Rather, it is an empowering task in which others are also enabled to share in the necessarytasks of the community, gaining self-esteem and worth as a result. Meaning three the servant The third activity which Collins describes is the most traditional and
accepted meaning of diakonia, that of one who attends upon a person or in
a household.
The picture is of one who
is attending, fetching, going away to do something. The action of waiting
at table is dignified because it reflects the central action ofChrist's
work of mediation between us and God. It is at one and the same time liturgical
and practical, sacred and secular.
Yet, whilst this role deserves
to be valued because of its reflection of Christ's work, it is this, more
traditional, servant-like role of diakonia which has on occasions so diminished
the notion of the servant and of women. For, whilst the servant should
be valued for the tasks they do and the contribution they make to the
community, often the role of servant is seen as menial and demeaning:
inconsequential.
This perception has helped to diminish the status of women because, often in the church, the home and community, the woman is the one who organizes and serves. In seeking to broaden the definition of diakonia for the beginning of the new millennium it will be important not to lose the notionof diakonia as service, of the diakonos as servant. But, it will be even more important to ensure that the role and function of the servant is properly evaluated, understood and valued.
Here we can see that the women believe that diakonia can be motivated both by the interests of others and in the interests of fulfilling their own identity and calling. As you can see many of the quotations that we offer could easily be examp les of a number of the different types or definitions of diakonia which Collins outlines. However, to bring this material from Collins to bear on the eleven guidelines offered by Unit IV of the WCC it is helpful to look at some of the practical applications of the three definitions. Definitions into praxis The eleven guidelines ondiakonia are essentially eleven ethical or descriptive statements. They seek to describe the ethical values inherent in Christian diakonia and are offered for refelction locally to test whether diakonia is experienced differently or similarly in a wide variety of social contexts. In relation to Collins threefold ddefinition of the functions of diakonia, the eleven ecumenical guidelines cold be categorised as follows: the go-between
This chapter has sought to offer contemporary definitions of odiakonia
from women from around the world; to link these definitions into a look
at one commentator's work on reclaiming diakonia. Collins' work is laid
in turn against the eleven guidelines on diakonia.
In doing this, we have tried
to give evidence of the breadth, depth and holistic nature of diaconal
service.
In moving into the next part
of this exploration we will seek to add a further shaft of light in the
the discussion of what it means for the Christian community to be diakonos,
to be engaged in diakonia - Christian service - by seeking to explore
the notion of diakonia in the Bible.
This chapter begins from the premise that women share a capacity to give life and nurture. They also share the feeling that they are marginalized in all spheres of life. The chapter will seek to analyse the causes behind such feelings in relation to women's experience of diaconal work. In order to do this the chapter will offer a definition of gender and a model for gender analysis before proceedingto consider women and diakonia in the light of contemporary experience. Marginalized women The eleven guidelines on diakonia are ambiguous and take little account
of women directly or indirectly. Despite differences women share their gender
in common and as such share a capacity to give life and to nurture. Whether
biological mothers or not, women in a variety of life experiences, at home
and in the work place, experience being nurturers. It appears to be true
also that despite geographical and cultural dissimilarities women feel that
they are marginalized in all spheres of life.
This chapter will seek to
analyse the causes behind such feelings particularly in relation to women's
experience of diaconal work. In order todo this the chapter will offer
a definition of gender and a model for gender analysis before proceeding
to consider women and diakonia in the light of contemporary experience.
A definition of gender The World Council of Churches Unit IV - Sharing and Service, defines gender as:
In the light of this definition and rationale for a gender approach, it will be helpful to lay the definition and rationale alongside the experience of women today in order to see for ourselves the effect of gender on society, and in this instance particularly the church. In order to undertake this task it is important to adopt a model for gender analysis. A model for gender analysis In seeking to find a model for gender analysis we have chosen to use the following which suggests that the only essential difference between men and women is the biological one, which means that women bear children. Certainly, our discussions with women seem to suggest that their experience as nurturers is of great significance to their way of seeing themselves and how they experience themselves in relationship to others.
Gender studies suggest that the ways in which girls and boys are nurtured and the expectations of society are what determines the behaviour patterns in gender roles. According to this school of thought, as the WCC Guidelines quoted above state, the patterns of behaviour are learned so they can be unlearned. The model that we have adopted analyses this situation in the following manner: although traditionally men and women have different roles it is possible for each of them to undertake the roles of the other except in the reproductive sphere. What happens, however, is that the majority of the roles which women fulfil are in the private domain and those in the public domain, which are more highly respected, are undertaken by men. The model suggests that if we are to work for a more just and equal society then what needs to happen is for women to become more involved in public roles in society and for men to become more involved in private roles within society and admit to doing this. So, for example, it is possible to see that many men in certain cultures take increasing responsibility for child care matters. Yet, they are often reluctant to admit to this publicly thus perpetuating the notion of the women having the main responsibility for this aspect of family life.
The diagram (above) indicates that gender is socially constructed and can therefore be changed; that sex roles (male/female) are biological and cannot (easily or often) be changed; Women often participate in all the roles in the private and social/public spheres, but whilst their private roles are visible and recognized those public roles are less often acknowledged. Therefore it is suggested that for society to change women's roles must be made more visible.
These quotations illustrate women's experience in both private and public spheres and demonstrate, to a large extent, how they feel that they have been socialized into these gender defined roles. In most cases women would wish for public roles to be open to them and for their participation in them to be more freely acknowledged. But, the quotes above also show that in some societies and confessions the role of women as it exists is thought to be acceptable even though other women, from different contexts, would not find it to be so. The question here becomes why this is? Is it possible to suggest that some women, as some men, are afraid to confront the realities of trying to change society and thus shy away from such feelings. Or, would it be right to suggest that differing contexts mean that different realities are proper and acceptable. It is this sort of tension which will exist throughout any discussion on the nature of a just and equal participatory society, where faith, theological insight and social context meet and react together. Having briefly examined the use of this model of gender analysis to show that women's experience is one of being marginalized within the church and society as a result of their gender, it is perhaps important to recall that the Gender Guidelines suggest that gender roles are learned and therefore can be unlearned. This model of analysis would suggest that the biological function of being male or female should make no difference to the possibilities open to both men and women. Before moving on to look further at how we move to a more just and equal society for men and women, it would seem important, simply to consider briefly whether it is possible to say that biological differences really have no effect at all on the roles that men and women fulfil except in terms of reproduction. Limitations to the model The model which has been outlined above seeks to suggest that the only
biological difference between men and women is their different roles in
the reproductive cycle. Clearly, this is the only absolute difference. However,
it would seem to be important to consider the effect upon this model of
some recent, and rather unpopular, research which seeks to suggest that
the development of the person from the womb is slightly different for each
biological sex. This research goes on to suggest that the effect that this
has is that some men and women might, naturally, have somewhat different
gifts and abilities.
What is certain is that individuals
are born (mostly) with a clearly definecl biological sex. They are not
born with a gender ancl all the socially constructed assumptions that
this brings but rather have a gender and its social assumptions assigned
to them as a result of their biological sex.
In suggesting that research
might prove that there may be more innate differences between men and
women than the reproductive cycle, we are not suggesting that such differences
mean that men and women are not equal. Relating it to the model, it might
suggest that in seeking to find ways to move towards a more just and equal
society it is necessary to take account of more than the differences brought
about by the reproductive functions of men and women.
Simply put it might be that,
no matter how awkward the notion that there are certain other developmental
differences between men and women is, it might be that in seeking to balance
society we need to take into account the fact that everyone is different
and has different skills which come to them easily. What the current research
may suggest is that certain men and women might learn to do certain tasks
more easily because of the way in which their brain works. This is not
to deny that all can learn to undertake all tasks but to ask the question
concerning how this may be accounted for in a model which seeks to re-balance
the power structures of society.
As we move on through this
book we shall see that women often feel cut off from the power structures
which exist. But, in saying this it will be important to ask what type
of power women want.
The argumentation in the book will suggest that most women want to see different uses of power and authority - different power structures. They are asking for a change in the way things are done, not simply in the focus of who has the power. It could therefore be suggested that they naturally do things differently from their male counterparts and one must ask the question why this might be so. It might be that the current research may help to provide some of the answers to such questions.
Not only do women often seem to feel disenfranchised from the power structures but they often seem to feel that they are responsible for much of the diaconal activity in their churches without this being recognised, or, if it is recognised, it is devalued.
As we have seen in Chapter Two: The Bible and diakonia, Jesus' attitude to women would seem to suggest that he would wish to give them equal status to men and an equal right to make decisions about their own destinies. It could be argued therefore that Jesus would wish to see the role and status of women and their diaconal work fully valued and recognized, not least by giving them an equal place in the decision making processes, within the diaconal and other work of the church. Throughout his ministry, as we have seen, Jesus was willing to challenge the roles and traditions dictated by his society. He was more than willing to turn these roles on their head and to point people to new ways of being which led to full humanity for all. Conclusion So far in this text the authors have tried to show an historical and biblical view of diakonia influenced and shaped by the experience of women today. The group which met and talked together came to believe that Jesus requires a greater degree of justice in society than is evident at present. The group feels a call to help in the development of more just and participatory structures and the use of power. It is this which we will discuss further in the next chapter as we seek to discuss women and power.
|