Episkopos, Presbuteros, Diakonos

[NoelFitz]

Isa

You wrote:

Precisely my point: never for a Christian priest.

This is where we agree.

You might like to go back to some of my earlier posts in this thread.

The focus of this discussion is on the NT and the AFs, later developments were not the issue.

 

[NoelFitz]

Having discussed PRESBUTEROS in the NT and the AFs, it is of interest to discusse whether these studies tell us anything about the office of priest/presbyter at present.

Is it agreed that at present the function of the priest is changing?

Due to the lack of numbers the role of the priest is evolving. No longer is he the person who has sole responsibility for distributing communion, visiting the sick, preparing people for the sacraments, consoling people in difficulties and leading the Church in parishes. More and more lay people are taking over these functions.

The priests will become less influential. The problems with perceived child abuse will also lower the status of priests, as will the higher educational levels of many lay Catholics. Philosophers and theologians will be lay to a greater extent in the future.

These changes will be positive and will allow all the people of God to play their role in spreading the kingdom.

The importance of the prayers of all of us, priests and lait, will remain of vital importance.

The concept of seeking holiness in the vocation of each on of us will be acknowledged.

What do you think? Please comment.

 

[utunumsint]

I still believe that in such a discussion, we should consider what is actually said by the church on the office of presbyter and deacon. To that end, see the following for priests and deacons.

Lumen Gentium

20 Bishops, therefore, with their helpers, the priests and deacons, have taken up the service of the community, presiding in place of God over the flock, whose shepherds they are, as teachers for doctrine, priests for sacred worship, and ministers for governing. And just as the office granted individually to Peter, the first among the apostles, is permanent and is to be transmitted to his successors, so also the apostles’ office of nurturing the Church is permanent, and is to be exercised without interruption by the sacred order of bishops. Therefore, the Sacred Council teaches that bishops by divine institution have succeeded to the place of the apostles, as shepherds of the Church, and he who hears them, hears Christ, and he who rejects them, rejects Christ and Him who sent Christ.

1. Christ, whom the Father has sanctified and sent into the world, (176) has through His apostles, made their successors, the bishops, partakers of His consecration and His mission.(62*) They have legitimately handed on to different individuals in the Church various degrees of participation in this ministry. Thus the divinely established ecclesiastical ministry is exercised on different levels by those who from antiquity have been called bishops, priests and deacons.(63*) Priests, although they do not possess the highest degree of the priesthood, and although they are dependent on the bishops in the exercise of their power, nevertheless they are united with the bishops in sacerdotal dignity.(64*) By the power of the sacrament of Orders,(65*) in the image of Christ the eternal high Priest,(177) they are consecrated to preach the Gospel and shepherd be faithful and to celebrate divine worship, so that they are true priests of the New Testament.(66*) Partakers of the function of Christ the sole Mediator,(178) on their level of ministry, they announce the divine word to all. They exercise their sacred function especially in the Eucharistic worship or the celebration of the Mass by which acting in the person of Christ (67*) and proclaiming His Mystery they unite the prayers of the faithful with the sacrifice of their Head and renew and apply (68*) in the sacrifice of the Mass until the coming of the Lord(179) the only sacrifice of the New Testament namely that of Christ offering Himself once for all a spotless Victim to the Father.(180) For the sick and the sinners among the faithful, they exercise the ministry of alleviation and reconciliation and they present the needs and the prayers of the faithful to God the Father.(181) Exercising within the limits of their authority the function of Christ as Shepherd and Head,(69*) they gather together God’s family as a brotherhood all of one mind,(70*) and lead them in the Spirit, through Christ, to God the Father. In the midst of the flock they adore Him in spirit and in truth.(182) Finally, they labor in word and doctrine,(183) believing what they have read and meditated upon in the law of God, teaching what they have believed, and putting in practice in their own lives what they have taught.(71*)

Priests, prudent cooperators with the Episcopal order,(72*) its aid and instrument, called to serve the people of God, constitute one priesthood (73*) with their bishop although bound by a diversity of duties. Associated with their bishop in a spirit of trust and generosity, they make him present in a certain sense in the individual local congregations, and take upon themselves, as far as they are able, his duties and the burden of his care, and discharge them with a daily interest. And as they sanctify and govern under the bishop’s authority, that part of the Lord’s flock entrusted to them they make the universal Church visible in their own locality and bring an efficacious assistance to the building up of the whole body of Christ.(184) intent always upon the welfare of God’s children, they must strive to lend their effort to the pastoral work of the whole diocese, and even of the entire Church. On account of this sharing in their priesthood and mission, let priests sincerely look upon the bishop as their father and reverently obey him. And let the bishop regard his priests as his co-workers and as sons and friends, just as Christ called His disciples now not servants but friends.(185) All priests, both diocesan and religious, by reason of Orders and ministry, fit into this body of bishops and priests, and serve the good of the whole Church according to their vocation and the grace given to them.

In virtue of their common sacred ordination and mission, all priests are bound together in intimate brotherhood, which naturally and freely manifests itself in mutual aid, spiritual as well as material, pastoral as well as personal, in their meetings and in communion of life, of labor and charity.

Let them, as fathers in Christ, take care of the faithful whom they have begotten by baptism and their teaching.(186) Becoming from the heart a pattern to the flock,(187) let them so lead and serve their local community that it may worthily be called by that name, by which the one and entire people of God is signed, namely, the Church of God.(188) Let them remember that by their daily life and interests they are showing the face of a truly sacerdotal and pastoral ministry to the faithful and the infidel, to Catholics and non-Catholics, and that to all they bear witness to the truth and life, and as good shepherds go after those also,(189) who though baptized in the Catholic Church have fallen away from the use of the sacraments, or even from the faith.

Contiunued

 

[utunumsint]

1. At a lower level of the hierarchy are deacons, upon whom hands are imposed “not unto the priesthood, but unto a ministry of service.”(74*) For strengthened by sacramental grace, in communion with the bishop and his group of priests they serve in the diaconate of the liturgy, of the word, and of charity to the people of God. It is the duty of the deacon, according as it shall have been assigned to him by competent authority, to administer baptism solemnly, to be custodian and dispenser of the Eucharist, to assist at and bless marriages in the name of the Church, to bring Viaticum to the dying, to read the Sacred Scripture to the faithful, to instruct and exhort the people, to preside over the worship and prayer of the faithful, to administer sacramentals, to officiate at funeral and burial services. Dedicated to duties of charity and of administration, let deacons be mindful of the admonition of Blessed Polycarp: “Be merciful, diligent, walking according to the truth of the Lord, who became the servant of all.”(75*)

Since these duties, so very necessary to the life of the Church, can be fulfilled only with difficulty in many regions in accordance with the discipline of the Latin Church as it exists today, the diaconate can in the future be restored as a proper and permanent rank of the hierarchy. It pertains to the competent territorial bodies of bishops, of one kind or another, with the approval of the Supreme Pontiff, to decide whether and where it is opportune for such deacons to be established for the care of souls. With the consent of the Roman Pontiff, this diaconate can, in the future, be conferred upon men of more mature age, even upon those living in the married state. It may also be conferred upon suitable young men, for whom the law of celibacy must remain intact.

God bless,
Ut

 

[NoelFitz]

Ut

many thanks for your detailed replies. I want to read them carefully and send you a considered reply.

I am very grateful to you for your thoughtful views.

 

[utunumsint]

Ut

many thanks for your detailed replies. I want to read them carefully and send you a considered reply.

I am very grateful to you for your thoughtful views.

I’m sorry that I can’t offer a more detailed response. I do not have access to the internet at home, and I have a limited amount of time at work to respond.

Where I would like to go with the quotes I’ve provided is to see what scriptural and AF is used by LG to support the assertions made.

God bless,
Ut

 

[NoelFitz]

Ut

Again, many thanks. Your posts have given me deep food for thought.

In this thread I have tried to give a rigorous study of the use of three terms in the NT and the AFs. Then I considered the use of two of these terms in modern times. The second part reflected personal searchings and views, which are more controversial and I had thought there would be more disagreement. This second part is based on opinions, rather than facts.

I admire and appreciate your loyalty, love and commitment to the Church. I am impressed by your knowledge of the Church throughout its history.

I also have limited time, at present, even though I am retired. I really do not want to go into a study of Lumen Gentium, (vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19641121_lumen-gentium_en.html) even thought I admit a deeper knowledge and appreciation of it would be helpful for me.

Once again, thank you for your courteous replies and insights and I hope to reply in detail as soon as I get time.

Some preliminary remarks
LG (No 4)

The Church, which the Spirit guides in way of all truth(15) and which He unified in communion and in works of ministry, He both equips and directs with hierarchical and charismatic gifts and adorns with His fruits.

And also No 5

The mystery of the holy Church is manifest in its very foundation. The Lord Jesus set it on its course by preaching the Good News,

These quotes show that in the Church is hierarchical and its basis is embedded in the NT.

 

[NoelFitz]

In this thread Episkopos, Presbuteros and Diakonos were discussed in the NT and in the AFs. This study was rigorous and was followed by a discussion on how the concepts of deacon and presbyter/priest discussed in ancient times might tell us about present and future developments in the roles of the clergy. The final consideration is to see how the ideas about EPISKOPOS in the NT and the AFs might help us to see the present and future role of bishops. The views here may be controversial.

In the AFs there are three views of EPISKOPOS. Polycarp considered EPISKOPOS and PRESBUTEROS as equivalent. Ignatius considered the EPISKOPOS/bishop as the head of the Church in an area/city, while Clement seemed to consider the Bishop of Rome as the Head of the Church. These views are not universally accepted.

At present there are two models of the Church, the older one is of the Mystical Body of Christ, and the newer one is of the Church as the* People of God*. The former tends towards seeing the Pope as the supreme head of the Church, while the second sees a collegiate Church , with the Pope as the first among equals – primus inter pares.

Vat II favoured the collegiate model, but perhaps JP II rolled back the Church to a more autocratic model.

However at present the position is not too clear. The Pope is also a head of state, with its diplomatic service, thus papal nuncios (ambassadors) play a role.

As well as the three offices discussed the church has cardinals, archbishops, patriarchs, metropolitans, vicar generals, auxiliary bishops, assistant bishops, monsignors, etc… Some abbots and the prelate of Opus Dei are similar to Bishops.

In the future will the authority of bishops change? National Conferences of Catholic Bishops do not have any canonical basis. They are modern pragmatic developments.

However the Holy Spirit will continue to guide the Church and it will help people to love God and their neighbour.

 

[NoelFitz]

Ut
You quote “29” which discusses the new office of deacon in the Church. Traditionally there were only transitional deacons in the Church, the permanent ones are a new development.

In Acts deacons (although the word was not used) were to devote themselves to charitable work, corporate works of mercy, not to religious ministry.

In Ireland we do not have permanent deacons. Many of the functions of deacons listed can be carried out by lay folk, even women and married people.

You quote:

to administer baptism solemnly, to be custodian and dispenser of the Eucharist, to assist at and bless marriages in the name of the Church, to bring Viaticum to the dying, to read the Sacred Scripture to the faithful, to instruct and exhort the people, to preside over the worship and prayer of the faithful, to administer sacramentals, to officiate at funeral and burial services. Dedicated to duties of charity and of administration,

In Ireland lay folk, as extraordinary ministers of the Eucharist, give Communion, visit the sick and give them the Eucharist. Lay peope also read the scripture (except the Gospels), instruct and prepare people for the sacraments, comfort the bereaved etc. Their roles could easily be extended. Thus here is really no need for permanent deacons.

 

[utunumsint]

In this thread Episkopos, Presbuteros and Diakonos were discussed in the NT and in the AFs. This study was rigorous and was followed by a discussion on how the concepts of deacon and presbyter/priest discussed in ancient times might tell us about present and future developments in the roles of the clergy. The final consideration is to see how the ideas about EPISKOPOS in the NT and the AFs might help us to see the present and future role of bishops. The views here may be controversial.

In the AFs there are three views of EPISKOPOS. Polycarp considered EPISKOPOS and PRESBUTEROS as equivalent. Ignatius considered the EPISKOPOS/bishop as the head of the Church in an area/city, while Clement seemed to consider the Bishop of Rome as the Head of the Church. These views are not universally accepted.

At present there are two models of the Church, the older one is of the Mystical Body of Christ, and the newer one is of the Church as the* People of God*. The former tends towards seeing the Pope as the supreme head of the Church, while the second sees a collegiate Church , with the Pope as the first among equals – primus inter pares.

Vat II favoured the collegiate model, but perhaps JP II rolled back the Church to a more autocratic model.

My view on this is that one of the few things considered in Vatican I was the role of the Pope, despite the fact that the original scope of the council was supposed to be much larger. Vatican I was interupted by the Franco-Prussian war (perhaps providentialy), and was only closed in 1960 by Pope John XXIII. Because we only got two constitutions promulgated, one against various heresies, and one defining the role of the Pope, the next 80 years or so after the council were somewhat lopsided in favour of ultramontanism.

In my opinion, this situation was balanced out during Vatican II, but the reformers took it to the opposite extreem after the council. I believe Pope John Paul II played a central role in bringing order out of the chaos.

My hope is that the church finds some kind of equalibrium between the two extreems. A reasonable submission to authority, coupled with a willingness to consider new things.

However at present the position is not too clear. The Pope is also a head of state, with its diplomatic service, thus papal nuncios (ambassadors) play a role.

As well as the three offices discussed the church has cardinals, archbishops, patriarchs, metropolitans, vicar generals, auxiliary bishops, assistant bishops, monsignors, etc… Some abbots and the prelate of Opus Dei are similar to Bishops.

If it does, hopefully it will do so very slowly.

In the future will the authority of bishops change? National Conferences of Catholic Bishops do not have any canonical basis. They are modern pragmatic developments.

This is interesting, especially since we find such local councils thoughout the history of the church fathers.

However the Holy Spirit will continue to guide the Church and it will help people to love God and their neighbour.

Perhaps we need to pray for more saints to guide the way. That seemst to have been the way things have changed in the past. For example, Gregory the Great made vast changes to the church. His monasteries in Sicily were governed by an Arch-Deacon, who also had very great authority over bishops, priests and deacons. This would seem to place the deacon at the head of the church.

Gregory the VII also brought about great changes in society and to church order or a more political nature (good or bad is still debated). He was very imaginative in harnessing the energies of the emerging knightly class, defining them in a quasi religious sense, and motivating them in the crusades. He also used the new monastic movements in this task, such as the Cistercians with Bernard, to name only a few.

My point with this is that there is room for change and creativity in how the church is structured.

The need to freedom must be balanced out in some way by the requirements of order and good governance. However, as you say, the church must be responsive to current situations, and also pragmatic in its solutions. Order should not crush out new charisms.

God bless,
Ut

 

[NoelFitz]

Ut

You wrote:

My hope is that the church finds some kind of equalibrium between the two extreems. A reasonable submission to authority, coupled with a willingness to consider new things……My point with this is that there is room for change and creativity in how the church is structured.

I agree fully with you. Any extreme is wrong. A balance is needed and the Church will get that balance for the time and circumstances we are in.

There is always a need for change in the Church.