www.byzcath.org Forums News & Events Church News married clergy

Dear Anastasios,

I agree with you, once again!

Was not Paul a tent-maker?

There are many monasteries where the monks and nuns work at different jobs.

And these monks tend to "beat out" in terms of excellence the secular people working at the same tasks.

My favourite example in this is New Skete. They have a flourishing dog-breeding business and I have been the beneficiary of their dog-training manuals and videos (they are terrific).

They also have wonderful smoked meat products and the nuns make cheese-cake (to die for, really).

Then there are their liturgical book service publications.

Part of the reason for having married clergy is, if I am not mistaken, that they share something in common with many laity (ie. the joys and tribulations of married life).

Having an independently employed married clergy would enhance even more that close identification with the people they serve.

A blessed Pascha!

Alex



[This message has been edited by Orthodox Catholic (edited 04-12-2001).]

Friends,

I recently discovered a marvelous book in my local Christian bookstore. While written by a Protestant minister, it is a very practical and sensible guide to bi-vocational ministry.

Check it out!

The Tentmaking Pastor : The Joy of Bivocational Ministry

Book Description
For thousands of small churches, calling a bivocational pastor may be the only way to survive. Too often, revolving-door pastorates, financial worries, and feelings of inferiority plague small congregations. Bivocational ministry can be a welcome solution.
Dennis W. Bickers, a veteran pastor who runs a family business while serving a church, guides readers through the challenges and rewards of bivocational ministry. With a second job providing financial stability, a bivocational pastor can put down roots in a community and remain in a church for a longer period of time. In turn, the church thrives as an effective pastoral ministry develops and funds are used to support more ministries.

Those who feel called to pastor a church while keeping their full-time job will be encouraged by this book. It contains practical tips on preparing sermons, furthering ones education, setting priorities, and finding appropriate balance in the Christian life as a pastor, family member, and employee. Students in Bible colleges and denominational leaders will also benefit from this book.
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0801090997/qid%3D987097572/103-9904569-1148641

Anthony

Dear Anthony,

Thank you - I'll definitely look that interesting and exciting resource up!

A blessed Pascha, Friend in Christ!

Alex

This would not be a topic that I claim any authority or deep knowledge, but I will admit I am uncomfortable with "bivocational" parish pastors. Pastor and insurance salesman, marketing director for RJR Reynolds, or GE executive? I won't say I'm 100% against it, but we need to talk it out first.

Now, Dustin asks a very fair question when he says "if someone is young AND feels called to be a priest and wants to serve God in this capacity ... then we shouldn't say 'wait 30 years.' I think we would establish a dangerous precident if the only married priests were in their 40's or 50's."

I think the Byzantine response would be (as he suggests we touched on in other dicussions) somewhat a puzzled as a Latin Catholic might be if asked "what about someone who feels called to be a bishop..."
I just think it is a question we have no reference point for and therefore cannot answer. Lastly, while I am open to being educated, I can't think of any aspect of Byzantine patrimony that would resulting in seeing priests at a mature age as a "dangerous precedent. In fact, my of our understanding of the parish ministry suggests (thouhg not always the case in practice) that the priest (presbytos = elder) be mature, be a spiritual "father", etc..

Now, the aspect that may introduce something to be grappled with is Dustin's clause "and the parish needs him". That is a point to explore. It might be helpful to frame the discussion by first answering the question "Is that a current need?". Many Ruthenians (an definately the U.S. Melkites) have said the current "crop" of celibate candidates supplimented by the "mature" married candidates fullfills the eparchy's needs at the present time. The furture might be different.

Anyway, I think much more discussion could occur on this issue and that the discussion is best focused on what are the needs of the Church and away from individuals and theri "rights".

K.

The recent posts have offered some very good suggestions for supporting a married priest; unfortunately, they still seem to puts a great deal of responsibility on the priest and his wife and family.

I would like to add to the considerations brought up by Dr. John by offering information about a Protestant congregation in Ohio where my brother is the organist (paid with benefits) and the business manager (also paid with benefits). Granted the congregation (United Church of Christ) is substantial... immense by Byz. standards... 1,300 members, but they have two paid ministers, who do not work outside the parish, several full-time admin folks, a janitor, music directors, and day-care (free to those who can't afford it). The pastor receives over $100,000 annually in salary and benefits. The church's total utility bill alone for Feb. was $12,000.

How to they do it? One, again it's a large congregation with a history that goes back almost 200 years. Two, they have an incredible number of endowments, donated stock, and the church often is the heir in people's wills. Three, many, many of the congregation tithe. They also have an interesting way of increasing donations each year. There is a report issued saying that X amount of households gave this much; Y amount gave this; Z, this amount. The budget for the following year is calculated. Let's say it needs to be increased 5%. They ask that those not already tithing to increase what they are presently giving by 5%. The concept of "stewardship" is very much stressed.

Now contrast this to an e-mail I received the other month from a Byz. priest in "the old country." His congregation is 300 strong, not a bad size for us. It is well over 85 years old. There is one priest and three Divine Liturgies (one, Saturday; two, Sunday). The average attendance at the Saturday vigil is 100. The collection is in the neighborhood of $200. The church's bank account is in the area of only $5,000. The priest does all the administrative work, cleaning, cooking, bulletin printing/folding/stuffing, etc. The most distressing aspect of his e-mail was that few if any folks volunteer their time to take care of some of these chores. My first reaction was to say that the parish is dominated by older individuals on fixed incomes, which is to some degree true. But the real problem is that many people are giving the same amount (according to the priest) that they gave 50 years ago. He said he does have a few families that tithe and they are the only reason right now the church can pay the bills.

The reinstitution of a married priesthood is important to who we are as a Church. But how we do that is not simple (Rome should be the least of our worries). Not only is it a money issue, it is an issue of a declining number of priests; of a declining number (as well as the graying) of parishoniers in the old country; of large, aging structures with old heating systems, leaking roofs, and little insulation. Much of the "extra" money that people might give to support a married priest could easily be eaten up in heating bills or a new roof.

I fellow parishonier of mine just recently commented that maybe our shortage of priests is part of God's plan... a call to the laity that it's time they take more of a part in the physical and fiscal support of the Church. And maybe also that big brick church on the corner with the attached 3-story rectory is a thing of the past. Maybe now churches/parishes need to be more "moveable," adaptable to the economics and the demographics of the area, that parishes don't drown in a sea of debt to build/upkeep a structure.

P.S. One other comment about the parish in the old country: The church has no icon screen nor onion dome. Interestingly, or unfortunately, the reason for this has little to do with money. The people are against it because it's too Orthodox! How sad.

May God grant His blessings to us, the members of the Ruthenian Church here and abroad.

Blessed Holy and Great Week.

Rick

I find Rick's post interesting and thought provoking. It does contain one point I am not sure of. Do we have a shortage of priests? If so, what is the number of the shortfall? Is this a latinism? Are we just adopting this assumption because we hear it so often from the Latin church?

K.

>>>This would not be a topic that I claim any authority or deep knowledge, but I will admit I am uncomfortable with "bivocational" parish pastors.

I am absolutely against bivocational pastors. My suggestion was for a bivocational assistant priest. And his job would hopefully be for instance college professor of religion/philosophy/history, or a relief worker, etc (although other postions possibly at the approval of the bishop).

>>>Now, Dustin asks a very fair question when he says "if someone is young AND feels called to be a priest and wants to serve God in this capacity ... then we shouldn't say 'wait 30 years.' I think we would establish a dangerous precident if the only married priests were in their 40's or 50's."

I think the Byzantine response would be (as he suggests we touched on in other dicussions) somewhat a puzzled as a Latin Catholic might be if asked "what about someone who feels called to be a bishop..."
I just think it is a question we have no reference point for and therefore cannot answer.

Kurt, I respectfully disagree. I honestly have no idea what happens in Europe, but here at least in the Ruthenian Metropolia, we have vocational "come and see" weekends. We have vocation icons passed around. We have vocational molebens prayed at pilgramages. We have priests pushing for vocations. THis may not be the Byzantine patrimony, but it is what is being pushed in the US, so certainly we have a frame of reference. Besides, if we are a multi-ritual church, we are going to have some cross-feritilization. I think the question is fair.

Obviously the Byzantines of the past did not go to seminaries to discern their vocations. BUT are we to assume that they never felt the desire to be a priest? Is this not the first step towards serving God--feeling an inner tug, a peace when assisting at the altar, a desire to serve fellow man?

>>>Lastly, while I am open to being educated, I can't think of any aspect of Byzantine patrimony that would resulting in seeing priests at a mature age as a "dangerous precedent. In fact, my of our understanding of the parish ministry suggests (thouhg not always the case in practice) that the priest (presbytos = elder) be mature, be a spiritual "father", etc..

Kurt, I believe truly that it would be better in many cases to at least wait until the candidate is in his middle thirties. My problem is sociological though, something you should understand. :-) If we make married priests the "old grandfather type" and celibate priests are the "seminary educated, young type" then we are going to see a class distinction. I say, if the man be worthy by a mutual convergence of some sort of tug on his soul, with a need from the community, then let him be ordained--married or single, young or old. Certainly the bishop and community can discern his worthiness (or should we say degree of unworthiness?? :-)) BUT we need to have the option open.

>>>Now, the aspect that may introduce something to be grappled with is Dustin's clause "and the parish needs him". That is a point to explore. It might be helpful to frame the discussion by first answering the question "Is that a current need?". Many Ruthenians (an definately the U.S. Melkites) have said the current "crop" of celibate candidates supplimented by the "mature" married candidates fullfills the eparchy's needs at the present time. The furture might be different.

If we had two more priests here in North Carolina, we could have two more parishes opened. If we ordained two of the married men (one the mature type, the other middle aged, and I have a man in mind who is younger, and no that's not me [yet]!) that could be ordained, we would fill that need until a "permanent" parish pastor could be located.


>>>Anyway, I think much more discussion could occur on this issue and that the discussion is best focused on what are the needs of the Church and away from individuals and theri "rights".

I would agree that no one has a right to be ordained. However, I feel that to set up categories such as married vs. unmarried etc are the wrong way to go, when we should be saying "will this candidate serve the community and how".

anastasios