Since we are approaching the fourth decade since the restoration of the permanent Diaconate, I think it is time for an appropriate review of the aspirations, successes and failings of the Diaconate as it is today. First, a little background--the "permanent Diaconate" faded away after the third century and resurfaced during the Vatican II Council. In the course of the Vatican II discussions that followed, the permanent diaconate was restored by a majority vote of the Council on October 30, 1963. The restoration of the diaconate was promulgated as part of the Dogmatic Constitution of the Church which was released on November 21, 1964. Formation of deacons began in 1968 and by 1971 there were 58 permanent deacons ordained in the United States.
The aim of the permanent Diaconate was to restore a "sacred order" of ministers; however, it is important to realize that that order of minister never went away. The Church has always had Deacons, just usually transitional ones (men preparing for the Priesthood). The Church has always recognized the three levels of Holy Orders: Deacon, Priest, and Bishop. Pope Paul VI outlined the permanent Diaconate's "charter" if you will:
General Norms for
Restoring the Permanent Diaconate in the Latin Church Sacrum Diaconatus
Ordinem Motu Proprio of Pope Paul VI issued June 18, 1967...
1) To assist the bishop and the priest during liturgical actions in all things which the rituals of the different orders assign to him
2) To administer baptism solemnly and to supply the ceremonies which may have been omitted when conferring it on children or adults
3) To reserve the Eucharist and to distribute it to himself and to others, to bring it as a Viaticum to the dying and to impart to the people benediction with the Blessed Sacrament with the sacred ciborium
4) In the- absence of a priest, to assist at and to bless marriages in the name of the Church by delegation from the bishop or pastor observing the rest of the requirements which are in the Code of Canon Law[8] with Canon 1098 remaining firm and where what is said in regard to the priest is also to be understood in regard to the deacon
5) To administer sacramental and to officiate at funeral and burial services
6) To read the sacred books of Scripture to the faithful and to instruct and exhort the people
7) To preside at the worship and prayers of the people when a priest is not present
8) To direct the liturgy of the word,particularly in the absence of a priest
9) To carry out, in the name of the hierarchy, the duties of charity and of administration as well as works of social assistance.
10) To guide legitimately, in the name of the parish priest and of the bishop, remote Christian communities
11) To promote and sustain the apostolic activities of laymen.
It is absolutely undeniable that the diaconate has been successful in many of these mandates. Deacons fufill a special role and perform a wonderful ministry for people, in many cases, who would have no other connection to the church--the question that remains is whether a permanent diaconate is necessary and what has it done to vocations to the priesthood?
I think the answer to the first question, the necessity of a permanent diaconate, is not a yes or a no. The answer is "not in its current form." Sweeping changes need to be put in place by the local ordinaries so that the diaconate is more effectively used in their dioceses. Why on earth does a parish with a priest and a priest in residence also need a deacon? Wouldn't that deacon serve better the needs of a rural parish? Serving in a place where maybe Mass is only offered once a week--maybe not even that often? Why do some Churches have 2 or 3 permanent deacons and some have none at all? Is the ministry of a deacon needed in some places? Yes. But, unfortunately, those are the places where often there are no deacons.
Now to the issue of assisting vocations to the priesthood-I believe that the permanent diaconate has its share of legitimate vocations; unfortunately, I also believe that the permanent diaconate siphons off-in some cases-what would be additional vocations to the priesthood during the earliest stages of discernment. To a young man who is toying with the idea of a vocation it seems much "easier" to get married and plan on being a deacon down the road than actually discern a vocation to the priesthood now. By this I am in no way suggesting that all deacons are underachievers, rather, I think there needs to be much more emphasis put into the formation of deacons. Standardize the process; make mandatory spiritual direction for all young men from the local ordinary to ensure that some aren't investigating their vocation to the priesthood.
So love your deacons! They do amazing work. Take the "crazy" ones to task by forming a good relationship with your Bishop.
*As always share your thoughts, ask a question, or make a comment by clicking the "Email a question or Comment" link on the right or just type the addres into the email yourself: josephjcheney@gmail.com (please include in your email whether or not you'd mind me posting parts of your conversation or if you'd like it to remain a private conversation...though I'd never use your name if I did post.)
<< Home