Comments on: Re-thinking about the diaconate in Germany

By: Peter Rennie

Peter Rennie — Fri, 06 Feb 2009 08:47:14 +0000

Note from the editor: the original text of this article was posted on 3 February from the deaconsplace forum. The text has been updated on 6 February by Dr Collins to make the language more suitable for a public website as opposed to a private forum.

For this reason, some of the earlier comments may now appear out of step with the text of the article as it now stands.

By: John N Collins

John N Collins — Wed, 04 Feb 2009 11:21:09 +0000

Lucky I checked in here – first time – after Peter Rennie’s indication to me a day or two ago that he intended to post my Australian blog about ‘a re-think in Germany’. However, I am sad that my slack expression has given some offence to Richard Gaillardetz. I do apologise to Richard for the apparent slight of his contribution. I say apparent because my intention was actually the opposite to what the text appears to say. The comment was undrafted, and one can see that the language needs editing. In particular in regard to the nature of Richard’s contribution. I did identify him as ‘up-to-the-minute’, by which I was alluding to his distinctively collaborative attention to my research, and I was meaning to single him out as a significant voice different from the normal. A great pity I did not recheck my unfinished sentence.

So I seize this opportunity to state clearly how appreciative I have long been of Richard’s endeavours. To re-inforce that, may I cite my comment on his essay in the 2005 book by Cummings, Ditewig, Gaillardetz, Theology of the Diaconate: State of the Question (Worship, May 2006, 277):

“A different direction opens with Richard Gaillardetz’s resolute pursuit of a diaconal identity – again in the midst of “a startling diversity of theological understandings” – in the deacon’s ecclesial relationship with the bishop and his episcopê. This is “not by way of exercising pastoral oversight” but of “assisting or serving the needs of pastoral oversight as determined by the one who exercises that oversight”. Along such a way we reach something like the broad pastoral role envisaged by Owen Cummings but, theologically, we are more securely belted in.
“At this point, in a quite singular gesture for these times, Gaillardetz declines to base his theology on the iconology of “Christ the Servant” and does so by reason of my critique of diakonia as service.”

And this is not the only place in which I have alluded to his liberating approach.

Such are the dangers of blogging!

By: Richard Gaillardetz

Richard Gaillardetz — Tue, 03 Feb 2009 20:11:05 +0000

If I may offer a brief post in my defense, I disagree with Prof. Collins that his research has not been received in the United States in general. I was particularly surprised that he cites my work as an explicit example of the way in which in the US “the diaconate has not exposed itself to the implications of the now full accredited re-interpretation of diakonia.” In my main contribution to a theology of the diaconate, I cite Prof. Collins research and conclude that, in the light of his research “it is no longer acceptable to try to define the ministry of the deacon in terms of such service, as many have done in the past…” I then propose a theology of the diaconate grounded in the ways in which the historical diaconate was configured generally toward service of the bishop’s ministry of episkope. He may not approve of this constructive theological trajectory, but he cannot responsibly accuse me of failing to take into account his work, unless of course, the only appropriate way to take into account his research is to agree with his every conclusion.