That is what I was thinking. I made the comment to the deacon that now he’s had all seven sacraments (he is married, and I asked if he’d had annointing of the sick, he has), and the priest was very stern that priests have Holy Orders, but deacons do not. I told him that deacons DO have Holy Orders, but not in the same way as a priest. I admit to being a bit perplexed on why a priest would think this way.
Straight from the source (CCC):
Maybe your priest was just confused or maybe the topic was more specific. Each degree of Holy Orders imparts specific “powers”. A deacon is not empowered to grant absolutions or to confect the Eucharist. That’s not because he hasn’t received Holy Orders but because the degree of HO he has received does not include that “power”.
So yes, if a Deacon is married to a baptized person, and has been the recipient of the Sacrament of the Sick, he has received all 7 Sacraments.
Indeed. I thought that was a really cool thing and that’s why I brought it up with him to begin with.
Yeah, that’s what I was thinking. Although, his first language is Polish (though he apparently speaks better German). I speak NO Polish, but I would imagine, that, since he was ordained in my American Diocese, that he would have been taught what the Catechism says about it in English. I am not angry at him or anything (though I was at first). I hope he realises what he said was not quite accurate. I don’t think he was trying to make light of the deacon’s ordination, though. I think it was an honest mistake on his part.
Cultural issue? Has Poland chosen to implement the permanent diaconate? There is an ethnic Polish parish nearby (Historically Polish but now with many non-Polish parishioners) staffed by a Polish religious order; a friend of mine (not Polish) who is a deacon was assigned there after his ordination, and ultimately asked for a transfer because of how badly he felt he was treated, demeaned, and excluded from parish life.
It could be that, but I think he was raised mainly in Germany, but I don’t discount the possibility. I mean, the deacon says he has Holy Orders, and I imagine he’d know since he’s a deacon.
Either way, the priest himself should know, as he too would havebeen ordained aDeacon.
Yeah, I was thinking that myself. I mean, there’s a reason deacons are ORDAINED and not simply appointed.
So, maybe it was just a misunderstanding.
I suppose it possible, but the priest out-and-out said that deacons don’t have holy ordersSo, maybe it was just a misunderstanding.
Yes, deacons have received Holy Orders and have all the rights, duties, and privileges of any other ordained cleric. Why a priest would somehow believe that deacons are not ordained (particularly as he was ordained a deacon himself) is beyond me.
You and me both
Subdeacons were also ordained.
Right, but I’m guessing that the misunderstanding had already happened by that point, so that when the assertion was made, he was still responding to what he’d already heard wrong.
To clarify a bit, the conferral of each of the four minor orders also was called an ordination but it was (is) only at the level of the deaconate that the individual received the sacrament of Holy Orders.
And, even then, that Moto Proprio only applied to the Roman Church. The other Catholic Churches retain the Subdiaconate.