www.byzcath.org Forums News & Events Church News Maronites to ordain married deacon to the priesthood in US

Bishop Elias announced the Holy Father has approved the ordination of Deacon Wissam Akiki to the priesthood. I think it significant because prior to this it seemed to me the Maronites were content with the status quo.

Many happy years to Abouna-to-be Akiki, and his family!

Newspaper article today. [ksdk.com]

I'm not so sure what all the hubbub is about. Personally I'm not all that exited over this. While it's a "first" for the Maronites in the US, and while it is a good thing, it comes about only because "special permission" was given by Rome. What Rome is apparently doing is applying the "per case review" principle from Anglicanorum Coetibus to the Maronites. IOW, it's not a change in policy: bad old cum data fuerit is still the official party line.

None of the bishops would touch it before. It seems that they still won't. But they will, apparently, ask "permission" from outsiders to do something that is our own tradition. But whatever ...

God writes straight even with crooked lines! Welcome, Abouna, Khouriyeh and Bint al-Khoury!

We don't know from the story was it meant by "given permission." It might have been as you write or it might be something less formal, like a consultation.

Actually the Ruthenian Metropolia was given this arrangement back in 1999 prior to the Anglican Use ordinariates.

Yet another reminder to the Orthodox that Rome simply eitherdoes not understand why this offends us or they really do not care. I have come to believe it is the latter. http://acrod.org/news/releases/rome...axSearch_highlight+ajaxSearch_highlight1

Probably both. I think the Italians who are still the majority in the Curia don't care. Others are probably ignorant.

Here's what the ordaining bishop [stmaron.org] has to say about it.

Christ is in our midst!!

Somehow I can't load the link to what the ordaining bishop has to say, but I have some thoughts of my own that have matured over time.

First of all, IMHO the Orthodox Churches need to address this issue on some high level. All these ecumenical dialogues that touch issues of primacy are all theoretical until concrete cases such as the married priesthood are addressed. If I were in a position to address this with a high-level Roman delegation this is what I would tell them:

1. In the event of full communion, there will be no Eastern bishop who will report to the Roman patriarchate for any reason whatsoever. If Rome has something to say to a specific bishop, it can be addressed to the relevant patriarch in whose synod that bishop is a member. In ordinary matters, that will not happen.
2. There will be no issue whatsoever of any Eastern bishop having to answer to anyone but his own synod over who he accepts for priestly formation nor who he ordains. The Eastern Churches are fully capable of making their own decisions in these areas based on their own canons and traditions.
3. In the event of full communion, there will be no issue with any man transfering to another bishop if he feels called to Holy Orders and the decision to accept or reject him will be entirely up to the bishop he approaches without any appeal or interference from Rome. so if a Latin man is rejected because he is married and an Eastern bishop feels he has what it takes and accepts him, there will be no comment from his former Latin bishop or from Rome.
4. In the event of full communion, the Oriental Congregation that has been the Roman Patriarch's medium of dealing with Eastern Churches in full communion up to that time will be abolished. The Pope can feel free to send a delegation to another patriarch to discuss any concerns he may have, but there will be no jurisdictional authority to interfere in the internal workings of another patriarchate unless based on the ancient canons wherein Rome is a last resort for certain limited matters. If Rome wants some sort of regular contact with other patriarchs, an ad hoc committee can be set up, but with no authority other than that granted by the patriarchs involved.
5. In the event Rome does not like these concrete statements of how life in renewed communion will be, then it will be Rome's fault that full communion cannot be achieved.

I have received a copy of Light of the East, the house organ of the Eparchy of Van Nuys and the bishop states that it is his responsibility as bishop to ensure the availability of the Mysteries to those who have been entrusted to his care. Sounds to me like the man takes being a bishop seriously.

I also agree that the issues brought up in the link above on the ACROD website need to be incorporated into Roman catechesis. It's long past time to stop making it seem as if marriage were an "impediment" to anything. I wouldn't trade my spouse for anything in this world. She's my treasure.

The reason I'm worked up is that last Sunday we had a vocations director speak in my parish. Afterward, a comment was made that I'd make a good candidate for the priesthood. When I told the person that my wife is a "canonical impediment," he was first floored and then had the audacity to suggest I "get rid of her" to serve the Church. Not gonna happen.

Bob

On behalf of my brother, I thank you. Theophan, you get it and "it" (not celibacy, not the IC, not Purgatory or toll houses) remains the obstacle.

Wow. I thought I knew some arrogant people, but your friend deserves a blue ribbon.

Cardinal Sandri probably awarded him one already.

That's why you keep your friends close and your enemies closer.

On another note:

I've served as a funeral director in small businesses since 1966, starting as unlicensed help and soon after obtaining my license to practice. I identify with clergy because I've worked "on-call" for 24/7/51 until just a few years ago. People came first, often at the expense of family events--birthdays, soccer games, dance recitals, etc. I've been under public scrutiny all the time. Comments are made when I do almost anything and most are critical.

So to say that a married man cannot serve the People of God is to say that a man cannot serve as a professional in any other field, either. Not so. Ask physicians if they are in the same boat, though many today are part of large practices where they can share the on-call duties.

IMHO it isn't about anything more than control. A man without a support structure can be moved about like a chess piece and is at the mercy of his bishop. I've seen many a good priest destroyed by this arrangement. Not to say that it can't happen to a married man, but we all need someone to tell us that we are still made in the image of God and therefore good after a day or two or a week when it seems that the world has crushed us with trials. I've also known many a good priest who decided that he didn't like being lonely anymore and left to be married. What the public doesn't know is the nasty way these good men are treated and made to crawl to get back into the Church.

The Catholic Church held an international synod a few years back where the topic of the priesthood was discussed at length. One of the topics was the idea of having men who were married--families raised, for example--and who were interested in a second career switch being considered for the priesthood. Not acceptable to the assembled bishops in any form. So the thinking is ossified and not open to discussion.

As I said above, I think it's time the Orthodox stand up and make the primacy issue concrete. Tell Rome that unless concrete issues are addressed, that the dialogues in the future would be cordial but would never be for the purpose of re-establishing ecclesial communion.

Wonder what they'd be saying and thinking back at the home office.

Bob