Is the Restoration of the Permanent Diaconate "the biggest thing to hit the Church since Martin Luther?"

[Cristiano]

Your concern re. an intermediary vocation is a big problem, and it stems from having an incomplete understanding of who a deacon is and what he does. We were spoken to very bluntly about this in the inquiry meetings. People see the deacon raising the chalice, reading the gospel and baptizing babies but that is the cherry on top of the icing on the cake. Every deacon helps in the liturgy, proclaims the word, and helps in the parish, but he does much more out in the world that most never see. I can tell you that anyone who considers the diaconate as “having their cake and eating it too” will get a rude awakening when he finds himself in a state prison conducting bible study or walking into a funeral home with a mother and father to help them pick out a casket for their son

The diaconate has been a stopping point for men on their way to the priesthood for the past 1000 years. The permanent diaconate hs only been restored for the past 50 years. There are many misconceptions about who the permanent deacon is. Any discussion of the merits of a permanent diaconate has to start with an understanding of it first.

At it’s heart, the deacon is the sacramental presence of the visible Church serving the world.

We heard stories of men in the past who were not screened well enough, and some of these got through to ordaination. They told us the story of one guy who put on his collar right after ordaination and said, “Now I can’t wait to tell the people what they need to know.” That’s not service.

Now there is a peer review process, where the other members of your cohort, the people who spend every Saturday with you in class and know you the best get to provide feedback. Archbishop Gregory in Atlanta where I live actually authored much of the "National Directory for the Formation, Ministry and Life of Permanant Deacons in the United States" when he was president of the USCCB. and he addresses many of these issues in formation, at least in our Archdiocese.

Obviously I’m right with you when you say that service “needed to be brought up to much higher levels both in the ordained life and among the laity.” A greater understanding of the role of the deacon in the early Church and how it has been and contiues to be restored will go a long way toward that, and toward dispelling misconceptions that a deacon is a married priest-lite.

Incidentally, I am not married. Unless God puts a woman in my life and makes it crystal clear that I am to be married, there will be no cake for me. I will be celibate. That is my intent for now, anyway.

-Tim-

I quite agree with you that the Church does a good job at making sure that the applicants clearly understand what the diaconate is about. However, the problem happens before that, when man automatically reject the priesthood because they could be married and deacons later in life. I think that the we, the Church, are still doing a poor job at explaining vocations to young people.

 

[mozier]

One thing that does get overlooked is how the process of deacon formation is run. Do not presume that those in charge of this formation have God’s interests in mind.

 

[TimothyH]

I quite agree with you that the Church does a good job at making sure that the applicants clearly understand what the diaconate is about. However, the problem happens before that, when man automatically reject the priesthood because they could be married and deacons later in life. I think that the we, the Church, are still doing a poor job at explaining vocations to young people.

I see your point. They reject an early call to the priesthood because they can always become a deacon later, therefor affecting the number and quality of priests.

That is actually quite insightful, because two or three of the deacons we met said they were in seminary when they were younger.

In the early Church the diaconate was more of a seperate and unique vocation in-and-of itself. The idea of cursus honorum or rising through the ranks was more of a secular idea borrowed from politics and the Roman military and adapted to the Church after Christianity was legalized. The idea is embedded in the Church and we need to do more to explain that this isn’t what the diaconate is about.

-Tim-

 

[Cristiano]

One thing that does get overlooked is how the process of deacon formation is run. Do not presume that those in charge of this formation have God’s interests in mind.

That is why we have to trust in the Divine Providence and we should never allow people in formation to live in a religious vacuum, we should participate in their formation life.

 

[Julia_Mae]

Does anyone agree that the reinstatement of the permanent deacon is the biggest thing that has hit the Church? If so, why?.

Could be if it happened in the idealized form of the quote. But not unless they let women do it, too, as they did in the NT times. Otherwise, it’s just a way to shore up the Priesthood.

 

[TimothyH]

I’ve completed the application process for the Diaconate and am just waiting for the letter from the diocese.

I didn’t know. Wonderful!

Is it safe to assume that you are married? I’ll pray that God gives you and your wife strength.

-Tim-

 

[TimothyH]

Could be if it happened in the idealized form of the quote. But not unless they let women do it, too, as they did in the NT times. Otherwise, it’s just a way to shore up the Priesthood.

This is based on an incomplete or incorrect understanding of a deacon’s role in the Church.

What you see at Mass and around the parish is only a very small part of who they are and what they do.

-Tim-

 

[Cristiano]

One thing that does get overlooked is how the process of deacon formation is run. Do not presume that those in charge of this formation have God’s interests in mind.

Could be if it happened in the idealized form of the quote. But not unless they let women do it, too, as they did in the NT times. Otherwise, it’s just a way to shore up the Priesthood.

I think that here we are talking about ordained people and not about instituted people. Maybe it would interesting to discuss which difference in service would call for ordination.

 

[triumphguy]

I was in a seminary for years. I completed the training but was not called to celibacy.

I struggled with my vocation while in seminary - I knew I was called to follow Christ, just not alone.

I was in a religious order at the time and that didn’t fill the void either.

Having a wife and kids is my vocation and I feel called to the diaconate too.

Not as second best or could’a been but as a call to service.

I might have been a poor priest, but I pray I can be a good deacon.

 

[TrueLight]

My wife actually understands this really well. She comes from a protestant background, where the pastors are married. The role of a pastor’s wife is a tireless one, one that’s pretty much a job in itself. In this sense, she totally understands the practical reason why the Western Church has celibacy for priests.

A deacon isn’t a pastor in the same sense, but a deacon does have a lot of shuffling that might need to happen. They’re assigned to parishes (and it could be one further from their house), they do diocesan ministries. They handle all sorts of events. Their family would likely get involved too, and it would also affect the family dynamic.

Being an ordained man, while working full time, with teenagers, and a wife. That’s a lot. So the unofficial official rule around here is that a man needs to have a stable environment, and with older children before being considered.

There are deacons in the evangelical church (women and men), so that’s why I’m confused as to roles. They are usually involved in managing church business, leading some prayer services and distributing communion.

 

[YoungTradCath]

I do not understand this reply.

Why the dig?

How does this further the discussion?

What does this have to do with the restoration of the permanent diaconate?

My post was a legitimate reply to:

Does anyone agree that the reinstatement of the permanent deacon is the biggest thing that has hit the Church?

 

[TrueLight]

I think that here we are talking about ordained people and not about instituted people. Maybe it would interesting to discuss which difference in service would call for ordination.

I didn’t realize there was a difference. Can someone touch on this?

 

[EcceAgnusDei]

I think it is wonderful that the Deacon is being honored as a specific Order apart from Priest. Deacon, Priest, and Bishop were all instituted by Christ and therefore should all receive their due honor.

As a side note, I say we bring back the minor orders, too!

• PAX

 

[Melchior_1]

There are deacons in the evangelical church (women and men), so that’s why I’m confused as to roles. They are usually involved in managing church business, leading some prayer services and distributing communion.

Oh, in the post the deacons I was referring to are Catholic deacons. A Catholic deacon is not the same as a protestant pastor, was what I was saying.

 

[Usbek_de_Perse]

I think modern architecture is.

I copied this from another thread. I find what Tim had to say very interesting.

I’m not really sure of the role of the permanent deacon as I don’t encounter any permanent deacons in the EF’s I have attended.

Does anyone agree that the reinstatement of the permanent deacon is the biggest thing that has hit the Church? If so, why?

Why do traditional parishes not have permanent deacons?

All thoughts appreciated.

 

[arkwright]

Does anyone agree that the reinstatement of the permanent deacon is the biggest thing that has hit the Church? If so, why?

.

I don’t see the restoration of the permanent diaconate , good and beneficial as it is , as the biggest thing to hit the Church since Martin Luther .

Above it I would place the Ecumenical Movement , the reform of the Liturgy , and the emphasis that the call to holiness is for every person in the Church .

But sadly I believe that the biggest thing to hit the Church since Martin Luther is the child abuse crisis .

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

My post was a legitimate reply to:

I believe it is called “baiting”.

 

[TimothyH]

I believe it is called “baiting”.

No, I should have used something more positive than Martin Luther as a milestone.

My choice was an occasion for sin.

-Tim-

 

[TrueLight]

No, I should have used something more positive than Martin Luther as a milestone.

My choice was an occasion for sin.

-Tim-

Well I started the thread even though I was quoting you.

 

[Cristiano]

I didn’t realize there was a difference. Can someone touch on this?

Instituted people are laity that has been instituted by the bishop to do something but they have not received the holy orders, no ontological change. For example acolytes in my parish are instituted men, and because they are instituted by the bishop they can purify the sacred vessels if needed. Lectors are instituted but readers are not. EMHC are not instituted but deputized (?) by the pastor. In my diocese students in the diaconate formation are also instituted by the bishop as acolytes and lectors. In the early Church bishops instituted women, by a blessing with imposition of the hands, into service to assist other women entering the Church. However, such a blessing is not an automatic ordination, otherwise I have been ordained too when the bishop imposed his hands on my head to grant a simple blessing upon my request.