Among the Maronites, sub-diaconate is the last of the 3 Minor Orders, so it is an ordination and yes, there are “permanent” sub-deacons. I believe that if a “permanent” sub-deacon is to marry, he must be married prior to ordination. For details on the formation program, one would have to contact the Vocation Director.Currently only the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church to my knowledge has subdeacons ordained (“ordained” in the case of subdeacons pertains to cheirotesia rather than cheirotonia) and functioning only as subdeacons. I myself was one for a number of years before being called to the diaconate. There is a provision in the particular law for the UGCC in the USA for the formation and duties of subdeacons. I know of no other formal recognition and guidelines amongst other Greek Catholic jurisdictions.
For non-Constantinopolitan churches (Maronites, etc.) I am not familiar with their position. At one time the Armenian churches had a vibrant subdiaconate.
I don’t recall any specific formal provisions for a subdiaconate and specific formation for a restored subdiaconate in the BCCA Particular Law. I’ll post the corresponding paragraphs of the UGCC particular law in the USA later when I get to my copy.Ruthenian Particular Law permits it.
Of course all orders represent an “ordination” of some kind to get to that order. In the traditional Latin Rite and some others (the Armenians, I believe) subdeacon is actually a “major order” rather than a minor. In churches descended from Constaninopolitan usage, the ordinations are broken down to cheirotesia, a “lesser ordination” if you will, or *cheirotonia *, the “greater ordination”.Among the Maronites, sub-diaconate is the last of the 3 Minor Orders, so it is an ordination
Yes, of course it is. I should have multi-quoted in my last. The reference to “ordination” was in response to the OP where it was asked: “Do they still ordain (or is it "institute?) subdeacons …”Of course all orders represent an “ordination” of some kind to get to that order. …
The Chaldean Church maintains the sub-diaconate as well.For non-Constantinopolitan churches (Maronites, etc.) I am not familiar with their position. At one time the Armenian churches had a vibrant subdiaconate.
Some of us know that this subject is very close to your heart!The Chaldean Church maintains the sub-diaconate as well.
In fact, our Latin Parish has a Chaldean Sub Deacon who serves as a Reader and Acolyte.
CLERICSI don’t recall any specific formal provisions for a subdiaconate and specific formation for a restored subdiaconate in the BCCA Particular Law. I’ll post the corresponding paragraphs of the UGCC particular law in the USA later when I get to my copy.
Yes… RPL provides for it, but the bishops are not all cognizant of it. Bishop Gerald wasn’t.The Instruction from Rome exhorts all of the Eastern Catholic Churches to actively restore the minor orders. There has been a varied response from the particular Churches so far.
All ordinations are permanent… the question is is it the stepping stone on the journey to higher orders by intent…I don’t like to use the term “permanent” since both subdeacons and deacons can be called on to higher orders in our Church. I had intended to remain a subdeacon originally. God apparently had other plans.
CLERICS
Canon 327
§1. Men who are properly prepared can be ordained to the offices of acolyte, lector cantor and subdeacon, who are minor clerics.
I admit I have only looked at the BCCA particular law a few times when I was serving in a parish for them. I probably missed any specific discussion of subdiaconate since there is not one - this section composits all of the minor orders and does not indicate a specific role/formation for subdiaconate as does the UGCC particular law. I’ll post those provisions of the UGCC particular law when I get back to my books later on tonight.§2. Minor clerics will be governed by proper statute issued by competent authority.
byzcath.org/index.php?opt…sk=view&id=334
That is unfortunate that a hierarch does not know the provisions of a well-known instruction from Rome that directly pertains to Eastern Catholic Churches and specifically with the restoration of the authentic liturgical tradition of those Churches. He should have been very familiar with it even as the Proto-Syncellus of his former Eparchy.Yes… RPL provides for it, but the bishops are not all cognizant of it. Bishop Gerald wasn’t.
In the not-too-distant past, “permanent” sub-deacons were not unusual among the Maronites. ('m not sure about the Syriacs or the Chaldeans.) Such a sub-deacon was often the “mayor” or one of the village elders. The custom seems to have gradually faded and was probably in abeyance by the time of WWI.… I’ll stick with my dislike of “permanent” when specifically referring to Eastern Catholics, however, since it implies no possibility of a higher order. I have no problem with its use amongst the Latins who have their own canonical basis for the term.
Article 165:Men who have given evidence to the pastor and the congregation over the years of all the moral and religious qualities described above (Editorial note: Articles 147-163 explain the diaconate) as essential for a candidate to the diaconate…could be prepared for the subdiaconate with some practical courses and workshops…
Article 166:A subdeacon assists the pastor in services which do not strictly require the sacred order of a deacon…
There are other less specific references as well; for example Article 42, Section 3 provides for lectors and subdeacons as well as deacons and priests to wear the rason for services if not wearing the sticharion. And this, of course, assumes the traditional role of the subdeacon in hierarchal liturgical services.In non-liturgical services, the subdeacon can be of help to the pastor in the office and instruction of children and adults, and other such assistance…
That Rome has ordered it, is well known. That RPL was both on-line and included that provision, that isn’t.That is unfortunate that a hierarch does not know the provisions of a well-known instruction from Rome that directly pertains to Eastern Catholic Churches and specifically with the restoration of the authentic liturgical tradition of those Churches. He should have been very familiar with it even as the Proto-Syncellus of his former Eparchy.
That Rome has ordered it, is well known. That RPL was both on-line and included that provision, that isn’t.
??? I don’t see where the lack of something being on line should be a hindrance to its recognition, especially when it is specifically addressed to all Eastern Catholic Churches.It’s an issue of promulgation… It was promulgated by the Synod at the synodal meeting, following it’s recongnitio.
The import is that most of the Ruthenian Church are probably unaware of RPL. Those who were not at the synod meeting and didn’t know it was on-line probably haven’t actually read it, even if they are aware it was promulgated.??? I don’t see where the lack of something being on line should be a hindrance to its recognition, especially when it is specifically addressed to all Eastern Catholic Churches.
The Church has been able to promulgate things for many moons before the advent of the 'Net. I am pleased, however, that our UGCC Synod clarified the matter further by formally declaring it as one of the obligatory documents for clergy for the entire UGCC.