Traditionalism and the Permanent Diaconate

[Brendan]

Deacon2006:

The permanent diaconate, including as married clergy, was approved at the Council of Trent and then again at Vatican II

God Bless

I’m not too sure that is true.

Trent did re-establish the permanent diaconate, and re-interated that the minor orders were open to married men

23th Session - CHAPTER XVII.

In what manner the exercise of the minor orders is to be restored.
That the functions of holy orders, from the deacon to the janitor,-which functions have been laudably received in the Church from the times of the apostles, and which have been for some time interrupted in very many places,-**may be again brought into use in accordance with the sacred canons; and that they may not be traduced by heretics as useless; ** the holy Synod, burning with the desire of restoring the pristine usage, ordains that, for the future, such functions shall not be exercised but by those who are actually in the said orders; and It exhorts in the Lord all and each of the prelates of the churches, and commands them, that it be their care to restore the said [Page 187] functions, as far as it can be conveniently done, in the cathedral, collegiate, and parochial churches of their dioceses, where the number of the people and the revenues of the church can support it; and, to those who exercise those functions, they shall assign salaries out of some part of the revenues of any simple benefices, or those of the fabric of the church,-if the funds allow of it,-or out of the revenues of both together, of which stipends they may, if negligent, be mulcted in a part, or be wholly deprived thereof, according to the judgment of the Ordinary. And if there should not be unmarried clerics at hand to exercise the functions of the four minor orders, their place may be supplied by married clerics of approved life; provided they have not been twice married, be competent to discharge the said duties, and wear the tonsure and the clerical dress in church.

 

[Deacon2006]

Generally I believe that the interpretation holds that all those who would not be elevated in Orders to that of a priest would be allowed to marry in keeping with ancient Traditions that they were trying to reinvigorate and in replication of the those Catholic Churches that did not interrupt the practice. The problem, it is moot. We really can’t be sure how the Pope(s) would have handled the issue. The PD sat on the shelf for a few hundred years. However the point is Traditionalist should have no problem with Deacons they are scriptural, Trentonian and faithfully Catholic. Oh yes they are also Vatican II as well.

God Bless

 

[Brendan]

Deacon2006:

However the point is Traditionalist should have no problem with Deacons they are scriptural, Trentonian and faithfully Catholic. Oh yes they are also Vatican II as well.

God Bless

And one more thing, In his Confession, St. Patrick states that his father Calpornius, was a deacon (and the grandson of a priest).

I am Patrick, a sinner, most unlearned, the least of all the faithful, and utterly despised by many. My father was Calpornius, a deacon, son of Potitus, a priest, of the village Bannavem Taburniæ; he had a country seat nearby, and there I was taken captive.

 

[Chatter163]

I don’t think so, because these men are vested in dalmatics. While priests may perform the functions of a deacon, they are forbidden to vest as one (I can’t speak as to whether this happens or not, though).

The current missal does not permit priests to act or vest as deacons, as clarifying the orders and ministries was one of the central themes of the reforms. HOWEVER, in the Tridentine Mass (which is what the topic was about), priests were permitted to–and commonly did–both act and vest as deacons. It was/is more common to see a priest act as deacon or subdeacon at a Tridentine Solemn Mass than it was/is to see those actual orders represented.

And the two deacons referred to several times in this thread are both deacons, who act as deacon and subdeacon at Solemn High Mass. They are not priests.

 

[Andreas_Hofer]

Chatter163:

The current missal does not permit priests to act or vest as deacons, as clarifying the orders and ministries was one of the central themes of the reforms. HOWEVER, in the Tridentine Mass (which is what the topic was about), priests were permitted to–and commonly did–both act and vest as deacons. It was/is more common to see a priest act as deacon or subdeacon at a Tridentine Solemn Mass than it was/is to see those actual orders represented.

And the two deacons referred to several times in this thread are both deacons, who act as deacon and subdeacon at Solemn High Mass. They are not priests.

Thanks for that clarification on my blending of the two sets of rules.

Also, thanks to everyone contributing to the thread. I really appreciate the conversation.