What is the responsibility of a Deacon?

[whatevergirl]

woah…I leave for a few…come back…what happened to my thread? lol I will have to start over, but looks like things have settled down. Always good to be reconciled with our neighbor.

 

[whatevergirl]

Not trying to get pesonal here, but just wondering if this kind of public display of temper, shouting, and free-floating sarcasm should give you or your instructors pause regarding any possible call to the diaconate.

This looks settled…but could you explain why you said this? I didn’t see any sarcasm or temper raising in his thread? Help…am I missing something?

 

[ThuribleGuy45]

This looks settled…but could you explain why you said this? I didn’t see any sarcasm or temper raising in his thread? Help…am I missing something?

Maybe it had something to do with the 24-point italicized type and statements like “You poor child . . . imagine those mean protestants.” IMHO it was an inappropriately-framed response to Aramis’ posting of his own perceptions and feelings.

 

[stbruno]

One item that may have been overlooked, is the amazing ministry deacons perform with personal experience…marriage prep.
That is one thing, that couples appreciate a great deal…marriage prep as well as baptismal prep if the deacon has children.

Also, if a deacon becomes widowed, he cannot remarry except in extenuating circumstances…say he has small children…and that requires permission from his bishop or even Rome. Otherwise, he must remain celibate.

Plus if a single man is ordained to the diaconate, he cannot marry later since he takes a vow of celibacy at the time of his ordination.

 

[whatevergirl]

Maybe it had something to do with the 24-point italicized type and statements like “You poor child . . . imagine those mean protestants.” IMHO it was an inappropriately-framed response to Aramis’ posting of his own perceptions and feelings.

Oh…Ok. I saw that, but then I saw another statement, and became confused. Thanks for the clarity.

stbruno–I thought only priests took the vow of celibacy???

 

[stbruno]

Not at all. Deacons do as well. When I was ordained, 12 of us were married and the 13th was single, he took the vow of celibacy at our ordination.

 

[whatevergirl]

Not at all. Deacons do as well. When I was ordained, 12 of us were married and the 13th was single, he took the vow of celibacy at our ordination.

why is that required of a single man…why wouldn’t he choose to become a priest…you know what I mean? Just trying to understand.

 

[stbruno]

ewtn.com/library/PRIESTS/DEACON1.TXT

That is a matter of their choice. There are men who become religious brothers too and they take a vow of celibacy as well.

Each vocation is different and a man has to discern what he where God is calling him. That is why there is a serious time of discernment and study before ordination. As well as spiritual direction with a spiritual director.

 

[THurifer2]

why is that required of a single man…why wouldn’t he choose to become a priest…you know what I mean? Just trying to understand.

Because a deacon and a priest are TWO different things…

A hippo is not a half elephant…it is a hippo

 

[whatevergirl]

ewtn.com/library/PRIESTS/DEACON1.TXT

That is a matter of their choice. There are men who become religious brothers too and they take a vow of celibacy as well.

Each vocation is different and a man has to discern what he where God is calling him. That is why there is a serious time of discernment and study before ordination. As well as spiritual direction with a spiritual director.

I have often wondered the difference between discerning to be a brother…or a reverend? Am I stating that correctly?

 

[Aramis]

Also, if a deacon becomes widowed, he cannot remarry except in extenuating circumstances…say he has small children…and that requires permission from his bishop or even Rome. Otherwise, he must remain celibate.

Not quite. He has to have permission from the Pope. It’s in the code of cannon law.

I’ve also known a couple deacons who have been widowed. One was laicized and permitted remarriage; the other has not pursued it.

And as to T’s comments, an apology has been tendered and accepted.

It is important to remember, when dealing with married clerics, deacon or priest, or even widowed priests elected bishop in the eastern rites, they have TWO vocations: Cleric AND parent. Plus, often, a day job, too!

It’s a hard balance. If you’re discerning, please, think about how it will affect your children, both during formation, and after. Don’t just talk to the extant married clerics, talk to their children, and have your children talk to those whose fathers have been ordained.

Knowing the changes ahead of time reduces the stress. I didn’t have that knowledge, nor did any other Deacon’s sons, since Deacon Bill Tyson’s kids were in other communities, not available to us.

It’s not the hardest thing in the world, but it can be traumatic.

 

[Aramis]

Oh…Ok. I saw that, but then I saw another statement, and became confused. Thanks for the clarity.

stbruno–I thought only priests took the vow of celibacy???

The vow of celibacy for married men is that they will not remarry.

In those rites which still have subdeacons, celibacy attaches at the installation to the subdeaconate. In those without the lesser order of Subdeacon, it attaches at the Deaconal Ordination.

 

[whatevergirl]

The vow of celibacy for married men is that they will not remarry.

In those rites which still have subdeacons, celibacy attaches at the installation to the subdeaconate. In those without the lesser order of Subdeacon, it attaches at the Deaconal Ordination.

what is a sub deacon?

 

[Brendan]

what is a sub deacon?

It was an order of clerics that was in effect prior Pope Paul’s supression of the order in the Latin Rite in 1972.

The sub-deacon was a cleric, (not a layperson), but was not in Holy Orders.

The Sub-Deacon read the Readings at Mass and assisted the Deacon.

The other churches in the Catholic Church ( Byzantine, Maronite, Chaldean) still retain the Sub-Deacon.

( one note on the celibace, it was a promise that could be dispensed by the local Bishop, unlike those in Holy Orders. It was similar in many ways to a monk being released from vows by his Abbot)

 

[whatevergirl]

It was an order of clerics that was in effect prior Pope Paul’s supression of the order in the Latin Rite in 1972.

The sub-deacon was a cleric, (not a layperson), but was not in Holy Orders.

The Sub-Deacon read the Readings at Mass and assisted the Deacon.

The other churches in the Catholic Church ( Byzantine, Maronite, Chaldean) still retain the Sub-Deacon.

( one note on the celibace, it was a promise that could be dispensed by the local Bishop, unlike those in Holy Orders. It was similar in many ways to a monk being released from vows by his Abbot)

How about those helping during mass on EWTN? There seem to be ‘brothers’ who are reading the Readings…(and not a lay person) Are they brothers or are they sub deacons??

 

[vocatio]

I was 12 at my father’s Ordination. It was hard on me. My experiences, as well as the children of my father’s class of deacons, have been listened to, and have been used to make the transition easier on the “younger” classes of deacons.

It’s still a transition, and it does change people’s perception not just of the would-be deacon, but his wife and children.

Looking back, my trials 22-24 years ago were worthy, both for me and the Church, and I fully support my father’s ordination. If you’d asked me 20 years ago, I would not have been so positive about the permanent diaconate. It is an important return to Tradition. One which was not without its flaws, and one with is still growing.

This is important to me too. However, I have a family full of preachers and already understand the pitfalls. That’s why I’m not in a hurry. But the transition of returning the permanent diaconate was not without problems. I personally know the first ordained deacon from where I grew up. I won’t say his name for obvious reasons that follow. He apparently did not live a transformed life. He had at least on girlfriend on the side. His wife found out and they got divorced. He has lived with several women and obviously left the Catholic Church. How could the Bishop miss this? Blind if you ask me. The diaconate is a good office and if single men started answering the call to the priesthood the need for them would go down. However, I persoally would prefer the diaconate to increas in use. Many are educated me that would be better to received communion from and serve the much needed prison ans sick ministry. Their are so many things that they can do to help relieve the burden off of priest who are overwelmed with too much work. Priests are people too that need time to rejuvinate. I would like to see priests join together in communities for formation like the religious. It’s a return to pre-Trent days I believe from my studies. Deacons would work better in pairs and it would always be good to have a deacon along side the priests to help.

Don’t cut em short just cause you have an issue with one or the other. But a father the neglects his family is no father at all in my book. I won’t let that happen. But early in my career, I was working 80 hour weeks. Not much time to bond you know. But a man will work by the sweat of his brow. That’s our state in life. But we have to take time out for our family and say no to others at times. If they don’t understand I’d say that’s their problem. And if the bishop gets upset he obviously is missing something important about family. I thing Acolytes would be cool to restore. I know Vatican II changed this to help get the laity involved more, but there are just some things that should be set aside for those that work towards them. There are some EMHC that disturb me. I certainly have an issue with some of the young people distributing communion for lack of wisdom. One almost gave my 5 year old communion while I was adjusting my 2 year old and him to receive blessings and communion for myself. The blessing thing is really there to help keep traffic flowing and I don’t make a big deal out of it even thought it really isn’t necessary. This was not the norm in the 70’s or the 80’s.

Full of hot air tonight.

 

[THurifer2]

The diaconate is a good office and if single men started answering the call to the priesthood the need for them would go down.
Full of hot air tonight.

SInce the permanent diaconate and priesthood are two different and seperate callings, why would the number of priests affect the need for more or less deacons? The Permanent diaconate was not reintroduced becuase of a priestly shortage, it was reintroduced because of its ancient tradition. St. Francis was not a deacon because of the number of priests availible, neither was St. Stephen.

I think the popular notion going around is that deacons are sorta around to pinch hit for the priest is he is not availible.

I disagree with the fact that since we are talking apples and oranges here the need for one does not and was not intended to affect the other office.

 

[Brendan]

How about those helping during mass on EWTN? There seem to be ‘brothers’ who are reading the Readings…(and not a lay person) Are they brothers or are they sub deacons??

Non-Ordained religious are actually laypeople.

Most likely, these brothers are instituted Readers or Acolytes, which are lay positions.

I’m sure most are also studying towards Holy Orders, but until they are Ordained Deacons, they are actually laymen in religious vows.

 

[vocatio]

I’m not trying to Hijack, but defend my statement even though I should have too on this thread.

I’m not writing a dissertation here. But it would be nice to post without someone going off over something I post that may be uninformed or just plain stupid. I am attempting to communicate politely and share. The problem is that we can see each other and hear each others tone as we speak. I’ve finally jumped on that bad wagon and abandoned other boards for that reason. I’m even question the wisdom of trying to relate to people on this board because of the diversity of the members that are waiting to pounce on a single misplaced word. This is very scrupulous in my opinion and hinders effectively communicating thoughts. I believe there is a real skill in communicating effecting on these boards that is lacking with many of us – particularly me. Sometimes I pop off with well meaning jokes as tension relief that are taken so seriously. My intention is to step back and realize that maybe we’re getting too intense. Yes, I believe in the need to say things correctly, however, this is casual conversation and not an apologetics thread. I’m avoiding apologetics for a while because it is an angry thread in my honest opinion that is not necessarily productive all of the time. I know where to get what I need – the “Catechism of the Catholic Church”. In the “real world”, I avoid emotionally charged conversations for obvious reasons.

I hope you’re not really serious in asking this question, THurifer2. The increase in deacons has been suggested by many members in the church, clergy and laity alike, reflects what I said. That doesn’t mean it’s the real reason for deacons being brought back. I “think” Vatican II resurrected ancient practices that the “traditional” Catholics reject for their own reasons – whether correct of not. One of those practices is the receiving of the Holy Eucharist in the hand. No one is worthy of anything the Lord gives us. But it is an ancient Church practice. It’s a shame that many people do not realize the return to these ancient practices. It sounds almost Protestant-like to me to reject them on the basis they use. It’s a form of cafeteria Catholicism – only to the right, implying conservative as opposed to traditional. Traditional would have us make these changes from my studies. I personally believe that what you say is a correct assessment – that he deacons and priests are separate vocations with distinct functions. It’s an apple and orange issue. But they do overlap in many important ways. Neither can remarry if their spouse dies.

May the Peace of Christ be with you.

 

[prv]

Deacons may annoint; but they may not confer “annointing of the sick”.

There is a difference.

Annointing of the sick, as a whole sacrament, entails confession.

Simply annointing with oil is a seperate act which deacons can do.

Annointing of the sick, as a whole sacrament in its own right, even w/o confession, requires a priest and nothing but a priest and a sick person.