I don’t have much to add about what Father Z stated, but this topic has helped me learn new things. I did not realize many Catholic deacons are so elderly. The only Catholic deacon I have met in real life appeared to be in his early 40s at the latest, though I did not ask his age. His “day job” was being a physician, and he still had young children. The age of deacons appears to be yet another aspect of the Catholic church that can differ greatly from place to place.
I remember the first ordinations of deacons back at the beginning of the 1970s.
The minimum age for permanent deacons was fixed at 35…and, frankly, it was an exciting moment regarding the sacrament of sacred order. It had been contemplated and the Council Fathers approved it. It did not all unfold in the way it was thought back in the 1960s, however.
Among the things that happened was, as the early years passed, we had young deacons whose wives died…in accidents, because of illnesses, diseases and other medical issues, etc. While a married man can be ordained, an ordained man getting married is another matter entirely. The deacons were told in formation that, once ordained, if their wife should pass away, they would be obliged to celibacy since there was no provision for them, as ordained men, to marry.
The reality is – it is one thing to hear it and it is another to actually confront it. These men had the understandable expectation that, being young with young wives, they would not confront the loss of their wives for decades. But that is not how life sometimes happens.
For a number of men who confronted that reality, they petitioned [through their dioceses of incardination] that the Holy See [specifically the Holy Father via the dicastery] for laicisation so they could remarry. This was particularly seen in the case of those with young children, and that presented the Holy Father and the dicastery with a very atypical and problematic situation… It had elements of a very sticky wicket about it.
Often laity think of the process of laicisation relative to priests…but it does happen with deacons and not infrequently. It became an involved issue – more than needs to be discussed here – but there were bishops who decided that the wiser course would be to ordain older men only. It is, in fact, a judgement left to the discretion of the Diocesan Ordinary.
Another problem for the younger men was that they were balancing three very full and demanding responsibilities…their marriage and families [often with young children], their careers [which can be demanding at this time of life], and being an ordained cleric, without benefit of remuneration for what they did as deacons. That can be very stressful.
For some, the burden was more than they…and their wives…anticipated and that created its own set of problems. Which further fueled the move to ordain older men whose children were grown and whose career was either over, in retirement, or at least diminished as they moved toward retirement.
Of course, this brought a different set of problems. The older men may have less stamina and need lighter, even significantly lighter, workloads. For five years or more of study and formation, they may be in active service for only 10 or 15 years…some not even that long should they be hit by a major illness earlier than otherwise might be expected. In any event, it certainly means that one is confronting a much shorter cycle between ordination and retirement.
And, honestly, all this does have an effect on the profile of the vocation, when you move from a preponderance of permanent deacons being ordained from mid 30s forward and serving for a few decades to men in their mid 60s forward who will be in a parish far fewer years…it can cause the diaconate and deacons to be viewed very differently on the part of the lay faithful.
Additionally, there are bishops who establish mandatory retirement for the deacons in a way that was not envisioned in previous decades and that has to figure into the equation in its own way.
