Catholic priest from Taos, New Mexico, helps a parishioner value his land.
A very interesting podcast from a Catholic prospective, including an interesting item on the history and early purpose of the diaconate.
The office of Deacon goes back to the very early days of the Church. Indeed, the creation of the diaconate is described in the Acts of the Apostles.
At that time, as the number of disciples continued to grow, the Hellenists complained against the Hebrews because their widows were being neglected in the daily distribution. So the Twelve called together the community of the disciples and said, “It is not right for us to neglect the word of God to serve at table. Brothers, select from among you seven reputable men, filled with the Spirit and wisdom, whom we shall appoint to this task, whereas we shall devote ourselves to prayer and to the ministry of the word.” The proposal was acceptable to the whole community, so they chose Stephen, a man filled with faith and the holy Spirit, also Philip, Prochorus, Nicanor, Timon, Parmenas, and Nicholas of Antioch, a convert to Judaism. They presented these men to the apostles who prayed and laid hands on them. The word of God continued to spread, and the number of the disciples in Jerusalem increased greatly; even a large group of priests were becoming obedient to the faith.
Act of the Apostles, Chapter 6. As can be seen, in the very early days of the Church, Deacons hold what we might regard as a a temporal service role to their congregation, as well as a spiritual role, which we will discuss below. And as we can also see from the above, they were ordained in that role.
The qualifications they had to hold from their office were set out from the earliest days.
Similarly, deacons must be dignified, not deceitful, not addicted to drink, not greedy for sordid gain, holding fast to the mystery of the faith with a clear conscience. Moreover, they should be tested first; then, if there is nothing against them, let them serve as deacons. Women, similarly, should be dignified, not slanderers, but temperate and faithful in everything. Deacons may be married only once and must manage their children and their households well. Thus those who serve well as deacons gain good standing and much confidence in their faith in Christ Jesus.Timothy, Chapter 3.
We know that they preached, and in fact we know that the first Christian martyr was a Deacon.
Now Stephen, filled with grace and power, was working great wonders and signs among the people. Certain members of the so-called Synagogue of Freedmen, Cyrenians, and Alexandrians, and people from Cilicia and Asia, came forward and debated with Stephen, but they could not withstand the wisdom and the spirit with which he spoke. Then they instigated some men to say, “We have heard him speaking blasphemous words against Moses and God.” They stirred up the people, the elders, and the scribes, accosted him, seized him, and brought him before the Sanhedrin. They presented false witnesses who testified, “This man never stops saying things against [this] holy place and the law. For we have heard him claim that this Jesus the Nazorean will destroy this place and change the customs that Moses handed down to us.” All those who sat in the Sanhedrin looked intently at him and saw that his face was like the face of an angel.Acts of the Apostles.
We also know that they preformed Baptisms,.
As they traveled along the road they came to some water, and the eunuch said, “Look, there is water. What is to prevent my being baptized?” Then he ordered the chariot to stop, and Philip and the eunuch both went down into the water, and he baptized him.Acts of the Apostles, regarding Philip the Evangelist, who is not to be confused with Philip the Apostle.
They occupied a role different from that of the Priests, but still an ordained one, with, at first, a service role that freed the Priests from that same role. Quite soon, the Deacons obtained an assisting role to the Bishops, and assisted the Bishops in liturgy, administration, and distribution of alms to the poor. St. Ignatius of Antioch noted about them, in his Letter to the Trallians;
Let everyone revere the deacons as Jesus Christ, the bishop as the image of the Father, and the presbyters as the senate of God and the assembly of the apostles. For without them one cannot speak of the Church.The association with the Bishops resulted in their office, in the early centuries of the Church, growing in importance and they became the local representative of the Bishops, something that was restored when the diaconate was restored in recent decades. I.e, they work for the Bishops, not the local Priest, at least in a technical sense. In the very early days, and indeed for a very long time, we need to keep in mind that there were many more Bishops per parishioner capita than there are now, although its been suggested that this situation also be restored to a more prior patter. In the Latin Church, however, the diaconate began to decline in the 400s, something that did not occur in the Eastern Rites however. To some extent, moreover, the rise of monasticism in the West and its strong emphasis on taking care of the poor caused their role to decline. By 800 their role was reduced to being a temporary one on the way to ordination as a Priest. Again, this was not something that was experienced in the East.
Concerns over various things, most interestingly the overstretched burdens of Priests in South America, lead to a restoration of the office in the 1960s in the Latin Rite. Now Deacons are once again common as a third order of ordained clergy in the Latin Rite of the Catholic Church. A rarity even in the 1980s, they are fairly common now. As a rule, they're from the local community they serve.
So, in this interesting podcast with a complicated name, a Catholic Priest discusses possibly restoring their original role in an updated format, replying on the work of another Catholic Priest from some decades back:
07 FEB 2019 · #376 PAROCHIAL SOLIPSISM
Highly decorated Belgian Priest during World War One.
The thing I'd add to this, is that what's discussed here probably not only explores "why your priest friends don't call each other", but also why they don't call you either. I.e., Catholic priest are incredibly busy, but also incredibly isolated.
I have another post I've semi drafted regarding Pope Benedict's recent article, and in some ways this is vaguely related to that one, but I'll plow forward none the less rather than wait, which would possibly be a more prudent thing to do.
Anyhow, one of the things I've noted over the half century that I've been around is that Priests of more recent generations can be really hard to get to know, at least if they're Americans. I've probably only known three Priests fairly well, and I'd state that this observation was true of 1/3d of those Priests, which when I state that somewhat cuts against what I just stated. Of those three, one was from the region and was very easy to know. A fourth I can claim to quasi know. A second had come out of Sub Saharan Africa and was also easy to get to know, ironically in fact because his rural African origin made him a lot more like a lot of us around here than Priests who come from elsewhere. The other one I'd say was extremely difficult to get to know. Of the one I can state to have quasi known, it was simply his highly unique and aesthetic personality that probably contributed to that.
In contrast to this, when I was a kid I recall my father being very good friends with a Priest who had a lot of the same outdoor interests and who in fact grew up in the same region as my father had. He'd come over for dinner and a frequent conversation of their topics was bird hunting. Perhaps somewhat related to this, I can also recall my father picking up two Priests and the Bishop when their car broke down on the highway and we happened to drive by. The conversation on the way home was about fishing.
If all this seems odd and has a "where is this going"? quality to this, it's this. I've also observed that the administrative burdens of a Parish are enormous and I really don't think that the average Priest probably enters the seminary with that in mind. If we regard the Priesthood as not only a vocation, but an occupation, it would share that feature with a lot of other occupations. Lawyers, doctors, dentists, accountants, etc. etc., don't enter their fields of professional responsibility thinking that they're going to be office managers, but very frequently that takes up a lot of their daily tasks.
But because Priests aren't simply an occupation, it makes sense to me that this could indeed become a problem in more ways than one. Indeed, most parishes have a parish administrator of some sort and is assisted by a Parish Council and a Finance Council. But the administrators are in turn oddly burdened as their secular role doesn't feature a clerical one at all.
I guess that the podcaster in this instance received a fair amount of flak from his fellow Priests for this suggestion. But in my view, as a layman, it's one worth considering. The substantial problem I see with it from the onset is that almost nobody who is currently a Deacon would have entered that state with this role in mind, and therefore may be no more prepared for it than the Priests may be. On the other hand, as they are otherwise laymen, they likely have more day to day experience in the administrative role than Priests would ever have. The ones I know off hand, and I don't know very many well, would tend to potentially demonstrate that, as they've occupied such varied roles as insurance broker to lawyer. And indeed I've seen a couple of them take the position of Parish Administrator when it came open, so perhaps things are somewhat headed that way by default.
When the Permanent Diaconate was established following the 1960s it didn't mean that those seminarians progressing towards ordination in the Priesthood no longer experienced that stage, so we already have two types of Deacons in the Church now. Perhaps establishing a third type of sorts, a Permanent Deacon with a permanent administrative role, a servant of the Bishop but serving on a career basis locally, is a good idea. He could assist the Priest in the clerical areas he's entitled to, and free up the Priest in the administrative role so that the Priest could be focused only on the spiritual mission he's charged with. Perhaps then, a Priest could find the time to "call his friends", or even go fishing or bird hunting now and then.
And I think, frankly, that's important for a variety of reasons. And one is this. It's been common to note that while the Church has an all male Priesthood, women occupy lots and lots of the various roles in the daily role of the Church and accordingly men can feel they don't identify well with things (something that's claimed not to be the case in the Eastern Rite or in the Orthodox churches). If a Priest joined you at the fishing hole or in the bird fields now and then, I suspect that might be a bit different. Christ, it might be noted, had a group of dedicated male friends.
Something to consider.
Anyhow, one of the things I've noted over the half century that I've been around is that Priests of more recent generations can be really hard to get to know, at least if they're Americans. I've probably only known three Priests fairly well, and I'd state that this observation was true of 1/3d of those Priests, which when I state that somewhat cuts against what I just stated. Of those three, one was from the region and was very easy to know. A fourth I can claim to quasi know. A second had come out of Sub Saharan Africa and was also easy to get to know, ironically in fact because his rural African origin made him a lot more like a lot of us around here than Priests who come from elsewhere. The other one I'd say was extremely difficult to get to know. Of the one I can state to have quasi known, it was simply his highly unique and aesthetic personality that probably contributed to that.
In contrast to this, when I was a kid I recall my father being very good friends with a Priest who had a lot of the same outdoor interests and who in fact grew up in the same region as my father had. He'd come over for dinner and a frequent conversation of their topics was bird hunting. Perhaps somewhat related to this, I can also recall my father picking up two Priests and the Bishop when their car broke down on the highway and we happened to drive by. The conversation on the way home was about fishing.
If all this seems odd and has a "where is this going"? quality to this, it's this. I've also observed that the administrative burdens of a Parish are enormous and I really don't think that the average Priest probably enters the seminary with that in mind. If we regard the Priesthood as not only a vocation, but an occupation, it would share that feature with a lot of other occupations. Lawyers, doctors, dentists, accountants, etc. etc., don't enter their fields of professional responsibility thinking that they're going to be office managers, but very frequently that takes up a lot of their daily tasks.
But because Priests aren't simply an occupation, it makes sense to me that this could indeed become a problem in more ways than one. Indeed, most parishes have a parish administrator of some sort and is assisted by a Parish Council and a Finance Council. But the administrators are in turn oddly burdened as their secular role doesn't feature a clerical one at all.
I guess that the podcaster in this instance received a fair amount of flak from his fellow Priests for this suggestion. But in my view, as a layman, it's one worth considering. The substantial problem I see with it from the onset is that almost nobody who is currently a Deacon would have entered that state with this role in mind, and therefore may be no more prepared for it than the Priests may be. On the other hand, as they are otherwise laymen, they likely have more day to day experience in the administrative role than Priests would ever have. The ones I know off hand, and I don't know very many well, would tend to potentially demonstrate that, as they've occupied such varied roles as insurance broker to lawyer. And indeed I've seen a couple of them take the position of Parish Administrator when it came open, so perhaps things are somewhat headed that way by default.
When the Permanent Diaconate was established following the 1960s it didn't mean that those seminarians progressing towards ordination in the Priesthood no longer experienced that stage, so we already have two types of Deacons in the Church now. Perhaps establishing a third type of sorts, a Permanent Deacon with a permanent administrative role, a servant of the Bishop but serving on a career basis locally, is a good idea. He could assist the Priest in the clerical areas he's entitled to, and free up the Priest in the administrative role so that the Priest could be focused only on the spiritual mission he's charged with. Perhaps then, a Priest could find the time to "call his friends", or even go fishing or bird hunting now and then.
And I think, frankly, that's important for a variety of reasons. And one is this. It's been common to note that while the Church has an all male Priesthood, women occupy lots and lots of the various roles in the daily role of the Church and accordingly men can feel they don't identify well with things (something that's claimed not to be the case in the Eastern Rite or in the Orthodox churches). If a Priest joined you at the fishing hole or in the bird fields now and then, I suspect that might be a bit different. Christ, it might be noted, had a group of dedicated male friends.
Something to consider.
No comments:
Post a Comment