www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life The Christian East & West Clarify Holy Orders

Thank you very much Anthony, for updating me with this information! It is wonderful news.

Stefan

Before this goes any farther Stop for a second... This is a hypothetical question and should have nothing to do My Latin heritage... So, please stop the comments of East vs. West. Please if you would really like to help me --- Jason --- Answer my questions...

If I were perhaps let�s say a Rutheran Church member and I felt the calling to serve as a priest. Could I be ordained (Here in America) while already being Married...

Or


Now For Kurt or anyone else who could answer this question...
"we Rutherans don't have the western concept of a personal "calling" to ordination to the priesthood"
How do you then know if the priesthood is for you...

and to add what is the "Babas"

Thankyou very much for your helping to discover the endless bounds of Christ's true and holy Church

Your other lung
Jason

Thank you to Kurt for the clarifications. It is for just such wisdom that I consult this forum!

I agree wholeheartedly with Joe when he says: �Byzantine souls lead a liturgical life far different than that of our brothers and sisters in the Latin Church. This type of liturgical life cannot be learned in 4 years of seminary study. It must be experienced. Byzantine souls need Byzantine priests.� But Joe goes on to pose an interesting query: �I find it hard to understand why a�married Roman Catholic man would want to be a priest in the Byzantine Church. Is it because he is (unfortunately?) married but still feels he has a calling to the priesthood? Isn't God aware of the discipline of celibacy in the Latin Church?�

This takes us back to the question of whether the Holy Spirit really motivates individuals (whether Latin or Byzantine) to desire to be priests at all. I tend to agree with David when he says: �I think every �calling,� no matter east or west, starts out with a personal call. It is only validated as a call when the Church agrees and a Bishop formally calls one to be ordained.� Is the individual surprised when the babas choose him to be priest? Or does he present himself to the babas as someone who is interested in serving the community as priest? Personally, I think it�s best to remember that presbyter means �elder,� and the community would do well to chose older (married or single) men who have �proven� themselves as our priests. But even these men probably feel that they truly have a �vocation.� There are obviously men, married and single (and women, for that matter), who believe they are being �called� to the priesthood, but who in reality are not. The community/seminary process should assist in determining that. But is sensing a "personal call" simply a form of self-absorption?

�Isn't God aware of the discipline of celibacy in the Latin Church?� I�m guessing Joe asked this question tongue in cheek, but this is a real issue in the Roman Church: Does God call Latin Rite men to both priesthood and marriage?

Final observation/question, and one that I�m not sure how I want to ask (and one that might best be addressed in another thread): It seems to me that emphasizing its Rusyn ethnicity and background is not as important to the Byzantine Metropolia as is, perhaps, offering Americans of all cultural backgrounds (German, Irish, Italian, African, Latino, etc.) an alternate (Byzantine) Catholic spirituality. Am I anywhere on the mark here? What effect does this have on Rusyn cultural identity, and pastoral and liturgical practices, within that Church? Is a new American Byzantine tradition being forged here? Am I opening a can of worms�or has this already been addressed?

Martin


[This message has been edited by Martin McGinley (edited 08-09-2001).]

Apologies to Jason. I just read my own post and realized that, once again, I have gotten far afield of the original issue.

I'll start with Jason.

Yes, married men can be ordained priests to serve in the Rutheran Church. They have always had the option of serving in one of the European Rutheran eparchies. Here in America, it is permited, in consultation with the Holy See, though no married men have been ordained to date.

On your second question, the "babas" are the Church Sisterhood. Priests obey them, Eparchs fear them, princes tremble, and cossacks flee away rather than cross them. You would be wise to do the same.

As to the issue of personal calling, maybe an easy way to explain it is the calling to the episcopacy in the Latin Church. What does a priest do who feels called to be a bishop?

Now to Martin's question:


Yes, you likely are. The Metropolia for some time has honored our cultural heritage without making it the defining mark of our Church. HOWEVER, we are NOT an "alternative Catholic spirituality." We are a PATRIMONY. What is the difference?

A patrimony I think is best described as the box, wrapping, bows and ribbions that the Gift of Faith comes in. Normatively, at either birth or adult conversion, one develops in the Catholic faith according to a particular patrimony. The Church is very aware and concerned as to the spiritual dangers of forciblely separating a Catholic from his or her patrimony. The Church also understands that social and cultural pressure to do so can have a negative impact on one's spiritual development. That is why we Rutherans work hard at helping our co-religionists preserve their patrimomy.

Non-normative situations do exist where mature Catholics adopt a second patrimony (one does not "change" patrimonies, excpet canonically. Patrimony is indeliable. A Latin Catholic may adopt a Byzantine Patrimony but he or she never loses the Latin patrimony). The most common situation is marriage where one party make the heroic sacrifice to live and grow in the other party's patrimony.

"Alternative Spirituality" suggests patrimony is nothing more than an option one picks based on a preferece.

K.

[This message has been edited by Kurt K (edited 08-10-2001).]

Kurt,

I think you misunderstand what a personal calling is in the west. This is where I started my discernment becasue at the time I thought I was a Latin Catholic.

In reality there is no such thing as a personal calling, you may think you are called but you can not be sure untill a Bishop or a religious superior verifys your personal calling by calling you to serve.

I can run around telling every one I see that I have a personal calling to be a priest, but until a bishop calls me and ordains me, my personal calling means nothing.

So if this personal calling means nothing in the east how do we end up with monks? Do the "babas" tell you if you should be a monk also?


Your little brother in Christ,
David

ps I see you have also ignored my other question to you.

>>>We do have a tradition of a personal call to the monastic life.<<<

Kurt is absolutely right (yeah, it's scary!). The presbyter serves the community, and is called by the community; the monastic, on the other hand, serves only God, and is called by God. I believe that the mandatory celibacy of the Latin Church muddies these waters for us, and we have fallen into their habit of speaking about "vocations" or callings to the presbyteral ministry precisely because it conflates the monastic vocation of celibacy with the presbyteral ministry of service.

My two kopeks --

The word "discernment" has been used in this thread. Discerning a vocation to the ministry is always personal, but never private. I was once asked by a young man, "How do I know if I have a vocation to the priesthood?"
I said, assuming a solid foundational prayer life, dedicate your time and energy serving your parish. Offer to clean the sacristy, run an adult Scriptures study group, go along with the teen group on retreats and social outings, visit the sick and homebound,
offer to clean the baking ladies' pots, etc.
In a thousand different ways both subtle and explicit "the people," through unbounded generosities and constant encouragement and support, will "tell you" if you have a vocation -- OR NOT. The decision is not yours, there should be no feeling of anxiety or pressure in testing the vocation question.
(If the inquirer has already fantasized about the color and brocade pattern of his ordination vestment - this is not uncommon - I just say, "forget it.")

Just an ordinary fool.

This is getting weird. Stuart is not only 100% right, but has found a perfectly pastoral and sound means of expressing it.

As to my brother David, he asks:


Actually I've been, for good or ill, post here for a while. Lost my password and had to re-register.

I think I am the senior Byzantine Catholic of the regular posters here.

Stuart gives the answer to your other question, though I appreciate your insight and correction to my statement regarding the Latin Church, a community I have the least familiarity with of the regular posters here.

K.

Kurt,
Thanks for the answer, I thought your posts looked familiar, that is why I asked.

I have learn much from what you and other have said.

As I have said, I am discerning, but not privately, I have been in discussion with others about it.

One of the things that I do not see happening is the community actively telling young men that they should serve until he approaches them.

This is something that I think needs to be worked on.


Your little brother in Christ,
David

ps Kurt, as I have been told in Latin circles, no one has a right to serve.

I think that Joe has hit the nail right on the head. For Eastern folks, the priest is indeed a man 'chosen by God, to serve the people in the things that pertain to God.' The 'calling' is from God, but the critical element is one's role in the community. While a Roman candidate for priesthood would go to seminary and then end up being ordained and sent to some or other parish, the Eastern model is a candidate coming from the parish -- especially to serve that parish. Of course, being the son of the priest made things flow a bit more smoothly. We do this for deacons -- they are ordained from within their parish to serve that parish. And this is where the Babas come in. They, along with the other members of the 'senior circle' of a parish exert a strong influence on the ecclesiastical powers-that-be to smooth the way for a candidate that the community considers suitable. One can be the most qualified theological scholar, a linguist, a singer, and drop-dead handsome, and one may want to be a priest really badly, BUT if the community thinks you don't fit, then you don't fit. And the pastor, who is supposed to recommend a candidate to the bishop, will be made very aware of what the community thinks. It's the "serve the people" part of the equation that is operative here.

So, even if someone is interested in being a Byzantine priest, he really has to be a member of the community. And, as Joe notes, you don't learn how to be Byzantine in 4 years of seminary.

Blessings!