tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-73042886598650075.post7579700275934423551..comments2024-03-22T11:37:52.668-05:00Comments on Byzantine, Texas: On the role of the diaconateByzantine, TXhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17845681957622343484noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-73042886598650075.post-41895619498854509122014-11-17T15:27:30.953-06:002014-11-17T15:27:30.953-06:00The permanent diaconate of the Roman Catholic Chur...The permanent diaconate of the Roman Catholic Church is not exactly traditional. Traditionally, in the Roman Church the deacon did not touch the Blessed Sacrament directly with his hands since they are not anointed. He did touch the sacred vessels, especially the Chalice. And in the Offertory of the Traditional Roman Liturgy, the deacon touches the chalice and says the prayer of offering "Offerimus Tibi..." with the priest. Deacons were regarded as "extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion and would administer this sacrament only when a priest was not available. <br />Traditionally, deacons would sing the Gospel but did not preach at Eucharistic liturgies. <br />As far as I can tell, deacons would not baptize except in special and rare circumstances nor would them impart blessings since they were not given the power of consecrating. They also would not witness marriages nor give the nuptial blessing.<br />In the earliest days of the Roman Church, the deacon was in charge of finances and charitable works. They were also quite able theologians.<br />In many places, the Roman Catholic deacon of today is inventing an identity. This is unfortunately due to the new liturgical rites. The deacon's role in the hierarchy is less clear and many deacons seems to be encroaching on the priestly office, for example, in preaching at the Eucharistic Liturgy (which is canonically allowed with the bishop's permission). I've been present at the devotion of Benediction when the deacon gives the blessing with the Blessed Sacrament while priests remain kneeling in their pews. Also permitted is the strange situation where a deacon will receive the vows of his daughter and her husband at her nuptial Mass while the priest sits to the side. Even worse, there are some abuses that have crept in, for example, where the priest does not administer the Blessed Sacrament to the deacon but allows him to self-communicate the Lord's Body and Blood as if he were a concelebrant. Not long ago, the Pope had to make it clear that deacons could not administer anointing of the sick because it is a priestly function. <br />I don't have a problem with a permanent diaconate I theory, but have misgivings in practice, especially after the liturgical changes. Many Roman Catholics are confused about the deacon. Their theological formation is not too rigorous. Moreover, many are older men in their retirement years with family obligations and so it is difficult to ask them to charitable works.<br />I think both Catholics and Orthodox would profit much by looking at the role of the deacon in both East and West during the first millennium. We need to be wary of innovations in practice which run contrary to the nature of the office.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10751094166090375495noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-73042886598650075.post-11549166499433970862014-11-06T16:57:27.991-06:002014-11-06T16:57:27.991-06:00"Permanent" deacons aren't rare in O..."Permanent" deacons aren't rare in Orthodoxy today; they just aren't uniformly common. For example, most ROCOR parishes that I've encountered have a deacon.<br /><br />("Permanent" in quotes because with no restrictions on the ordination of married deacons to the priesthood, there's no inherent difference between permanent and transitional deacons. I have a friend who was quite happy (and needed) as a deacon for years, but then when the parish situation changed, and he felt another call, was ordained priest.)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-73042886598650075.post-77693907257321780222014-11-06T12:25:27.992-06:002014-11-06T12:25:27.992-06:00Speaking as a Roman Catholic, I fear that the rein...Speaking as a Roman Catholic, I fear that the reintroduction of a pastorally active "permanent" diaconate amongst the Orthodox will lead to the same clericalizing problems as the Catholics have. Speaking only for the United States (which, despite having the least need for deacons, has more than all other nations combined), permanent deacons are not allowed to be called "Reverend Mister" (which is only reserved for seminarian deacons) but only "Deacon [Name]," in most dioceses are forbidden to wear clerical attire outside the liturgy, usually receive their income from secular employment - which means they usually aren't available during the daytime for pastoral visits, are limited in their capacity to preach, and find themselves among the clergy rotation when it comes to performing baptisms and funerals. Many laity refer to permanent deacons as "lay deacons" as opposed to the "real" deacons who are waiting to be ordained as priests. The minimum age requirement for permanent deacons is 35, whereas it's 23 for seminarian deacons. There is even a fit going on over whether canon law is ambiguous or not on the matter of married deacons needing to become continent upon ordination. There is so much clericalism among the bishops and priests about who deacons are and what they're supposed to do that it is shocking. In the modern Roman rite the deacon only reads the Gospel, reads the general intercessory petitions, holds up the chalice for a few moments at the end of the anaphora, invites people to exchange the kiss of peace, and finally tells everyone to depart. That's it. A. T. Wallacehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02816243030572765014noreply@blogger.com