P
puer.dei
Guest
Apples & oranges. The world was much different then.
- Status
M
Maximian
Guest
Yes it was. In those days priests had only the Latin Mass and the fire of faith.
O
OrbisNonSufficit
Guest
There were subdeacons and deacons. They weren’t permanent but they surely existed, and with number of Priests around or people studying for Priesthood, you would almost always have Deacons.
Fact Deacons are necessary as more than step for Priesthoood is obviously in the Bible. Apostles wouldn’t establish something unnecessary.
T
TheMarriedKnight
Guest
I agree, I was saying the same thing in these thread.
O
OldCAFMember
Guest
The subdiaconate already existed in the year 250, so it is ancient. Its suppression in 1972 was therefore a tragic loss.
C
commenter
Guest
Your post is validated and supported by the witness of the permanent deacons in my diocese, some of whom I know very well.
C
commenter
Guest
What kinds of things would you want them to do now, if restored beyond the EF communities? Were you thinking only of transitional subdeacons, or something else, now that permanent Deacons exist?
Last edited:
P
phil19034
Guest
Well… Deacons really haven’t been an apprenticeship to priests since the Council of Trent standardized seminaries.
Few Transitional Deacons are apprentices to priests. They might have a parish they are assigned to, but they are not there full time.
I would argue that the permanent Diaconate is more of an apprenticeship than the transitional one. Today, good permanent deacons can become priests if they become widowers. I can also foresee in the future good permanent Deacons who are still married and can really balance their marriage and ministry becoming priests
U
Usige
Guest
That is one of the most overlooked aspects of the diaconate as a permanent order. Ordination isn’t strictly about what a man can do in the parochial context, but what he becomes: configured to Christ as the servant of all.
Priests and Bishops are often separated from their flock (generally through no fault of their own) because they occupy a sphere within the context of the Church. Deacons live their lives straddling both the secular and sacred realms. As such they can carry the Gospel message outside the Church walls in ways that are sometimes difficult for those in the higher levels of the hierarchy. One thing that was emphasized in our formation was that once we are ordained we remain a deacon regardless of where we are. it’s not something we put on or take off when we lay aside vestments or clerical attire.
Priests and Bishops are often separated from their flock (generally through no fault of their own) because they occupy a sphere within the context of the Church. Deacons live their lives straddling both the secular and sacred realms. As such they can carry the Gospel message outside the Church walls in ways that are sometimes difficult for those in the higher levels of the hierarchy. One thing that was emphasized in our formation was that once we are ordained we remain a deacon regardless of where we are. it’s not something we put on or take off when we lay aside vestments or clerical attire.
Last edited:
U
Usige
Guest
That unfortunately is true; it is a little difficult to see some parishioners treat second year seminarians in higher regard than deacons that have been ordained for 20+ years.
There are definitely clergy that hold Deacons in high regard, but I think we are still in the early stages of fleshing out the theology of the diaconate. The wide disparity in how deacons are utilized from parish to parish and diocese to diocese contributes to that lack of clarity about the role of deacons in the plan of salvation. It doesn’t help when some deacons say that they aren’t really clergy and are unsure themselves of what place they occupy.
I think back to Ignatius’ letter to the Church at Tralles where he says: “In like manner let all men respect the deacons as Jesus Christ, even as they should respect the bishop as being a type of the Father and the presbyters as the council of God and as the college of Apostles. Apart from these there is not even the name of a church.” (Trallians 3:1). At least the first generation of Church leaders after the apostles seemed to believe that deacons were essential to the Church.
P
phil19034
Guest
I think a big part of the problem is that after seminaries became the norm, the parish role of the deacon became part of the priest’s day to day job (eps if the parish had more than one priest)phil19034:
That unfortunately is true; it is a little difficult to see some parishioners treat second year seminarians in higher regard than deacons that have been ordained for 20+ years.
There are definitely clergy that hold Deacons in high regard, but I think we are still in the early stages of fleshing out the theology of the diaconate. The wide disparity in how deacons are utilized from parish to parish and diocese to diocese contributes to that lack of clarity about the role of deacons in the plan of salvation. It doesn’t help when some deacons say that they aren’t really clergy and are unsure themselves of what place they occupy.
I think back to Ignatius’ letter to the Church at Tralles where he says: “In like manner let all men respect the deacons as Jesus Christ, even as they should respect the bishop as being a type of the Father and the presbyters as the council of God and as the college of Apostles. Apart from these there is not even the name of a church.” (Trallians 3:1). At least the first generation of Church leaders after the apostles seemed to believe that deacons were essential to the Church.
So today, people expect the priests to do certain tasks that were historically the deacon’s job
So true!
Many of the jobs priests have been doing are ‘using’ his deaconate orders, rather than his priestly orders.
T
TheMarriedKnight
Guest
That’s exactly how I feel as someone that knows holy matrimony is my vocation and am discerning a call to the permanent diaconate as well. I would never want to be a priest.
D
dochawk
Guest
less rare for EC.
The longtime Deacon at the other Byzantine parish here was ordained a priest after his wife died.
We chatted with him (not having known this) when we stopped at his parish for liturgy while traveling.
He described an incident years earlier, where upon getting home, his wife snapped at him to get his collar off, as it made him look like a priest.
His response was to the effect, “Wait a minute, the black dress doesn’t bother you, but the collar does?”
:crazy_face: 
He very possibly could have been ordained a priest earlier if his wife had felt differently.
And we have someone in our parish with the very strong support from his wife, currently discerning for both.
And I’d be surprised if our imminent deacon isn’t ordained a priest as well in a couple of decades. (of course, at the rate his paperwork is processing, conditional approval tomorrow might meen a 2040 ordination)
And there’s a couple of others that sure seem to be likely eventually.
Chatting with our former bishop on a visit, he said that the hardest part in brewing in a married priest from Europe was healthcare for the wife!
The longtime Deacon at the other Byzantine parish here was ordained a priest after his wife died.
We chatted with him (not having known this) when we stopped at his parish for liturgy while traveling.
He described an incident years earlier, where upon getting home, his wife snapped at him to get his collar off, as it made him look like a priest.
His response was to the effect, “Wait a minute, the black dress doesn’t bother you, but the collar does?”
:crazy_face: He very possibly could have been ordained a priest earlier if his wife had felt differently.
And we have someone in our parish with the very strong support from his wife, currently discerning for both.
And I’d be surprised if our imminent deacon isn’t ordained a priest as well in a couple of decades. (of course, at the rate his paperwork is processing, conditional approval tomorrow might meen a 2040 ordination
)And there’s a couple of others that sure seem to be likely eventually.
Chatting with our former bishop on a visit, he said that the hardest part in brewing in a married priest from Europe was healthcare for the wife!
U
Usige
Guest
While I don’t disagree, you will find a ton of push back from all sides on any normalized path from “permanent deacon“ to priest. I place permanent deacon in quotes because it implies that permanent deacons are somehow a distinct vocation from transitional deacons and therefore the diaconate character depends on one’s ultimate goal.
There is this idea that permanent deacons and priest receive two distinctive calls. I would argue that they are the same call to service with a different focus. The call also doesn’t need to be fixed for all eternity. For instance I know a couple deacons who were ordained as “transitional” deacons, but then discerned that they would not continue on to priestly ordination. Some see that as sad and treat them as somehow failing or not having had a true calling. In the same vein, some treat permanent deacons as somewhat deviant if they feel called to the priesthood sometime after their diaconal ordination.
That is not to say that married men should become deacons with the plan of priestly ordination if their wife should die. It’s really more that I wish people would realize that there is one sacrament of Holy Orders and that men don’t have two distinct calls that might rarely overlap.
T
TheMarriedKnight
Guest
There may be one sacrament of Holy Orders, but there are three vocations (or two, since two of the three falls under priesthood and the other is the diaconate) that make it up and they are different vocations.
Last edited:
U
Usige
Guest
Yes and no. It depends on how granular you define vocation.
Strictly speaking there is only one vocation in Holy Order’s. It is the vocation of service to God’s people through the church. How that vocation is expressed is different between the 3 grades, but they are all rooted and stem from the same call (that is what vocation means - a calling).
Just as man is a unity of the spirit and flesh, the service of holy orders is a unity that should not be seen as calling to sacredotal ministry vs ministry of charity. The two are interwoven much more tightly than people like to admit. If one ministers to the flesh without also accounting for spiritual needs then one is a social worker and not God’s minister. Similarly if one only looks at spiritual or sacramental needs but discounts the corporal they are not fully serving the calling Christ gave them. This is why I say it is not separate vocations so much as different focus on the single vocation of service.
P
phil19034
Guest
I do not disagree with this.
However, there are SOME Deacons (perhaps a very small percentage) who missed their calling to the priesthood, got married and later became a Deacon.
These widowed Deacons who missed their priestly call (regardless of how small) should be allowed to become priests if they & their bishops discern they actually have a call to the priesthood.
God bless
However, there are SOME Deacons (perhaps a very small percentage) who missed their calling to the priesthood, got married and later became a Deacon.
These widowed Deacons who missed their priestly call (regardless of how small) should be allowed to become priests if they & their bishops discern they actually have a call to the priesthood.
God bless
P
phil19034
Guest
I don’t think there should be a “normalized path.” I think it should still be the exception, rather than the norm. But I do think that there are a few Deacons who missed their calling to the priesthood and would have become priests if they were still single.
T
TheMarriedKnight
Guest
You just said ordaining widower deacons into the priesthood should only be an exception not the norm, most people that become deacons are happy staying at that place in holy orders. I have hard time believing that God chosen priests can miss their calling tbh.
- Status