www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Parish Life & Evangelization Looking for precedent

One set of ideas that came up are a reconception of vocations. I don't think there's much interest in creating a bunch of new categories but rather recaturing some older precedents. Here are some ideas that floated about:

1."Worker priests" whereby smaller parishes or parish starts could be served by persons who were priests but got some or much of their support through secular work.

2. "Circuit Rider priests" who would establish a parish on solid footing, stay until it was stable (2 or so years) and then move on to establish another one.

3. Priests who get most of their training and formation in a parish served by a priest that was doing somethings that the metropolia knew needed to be done.

Rationale: We need new parishes started. We haven't enough priests to do this task and the priests we need require specific skills.

Question: Knowing that "seminaries" are a fairly recent development and that as conceived serve some training functions well but not all training functions that are needed there surely are precedents for priestly training that use the parish as the center of training for priests. What are they specifically? Also, there are many examples of priests that did the type of work that we are seeking. Let's discuss those examples.

Dan L

Dear Dan,

So when are you getting ordained?

We have lots of "worker priests" here but none that Dorothy Day would be too much impressed with . . .

They work at their secular occupations as married priests and then devote the weekends to their parish or on an "as needed" basis during the week.

The circuit rider, like the Methodist circuit preachers, could be used to great effect.

I live in an area whose Christian life was built up by just such Methodist circuit preachers (producing our very own saint, Holy Anne Preston of Thornhill and Toronto).

Quite brilliant, these ideas of yours!

Alex

With the phrase "worker priest", you run the risk of confusion with the "worker priest" movement in 20th century Europe - intended to put priests into the workplace, to evangelize "in the marketplace." For various reasons, this movement ran into controversy (of course it might be attempted again - but I know that at MY workplace, any priest who tried to evangelize would run into a great deal of oppostion, probably leading to long sensitivity counseling sessions with his manager...)

"Part-time" priest might be true (practically speaking) but would have bad connotations.

I'm looking for a better term.... "Self-supporting priests"? "Non-stipendiary priests"? I'd hate to imply that priests supported by parishes DON't work...

Jeff

Ah, Professor Alex, you see right through me. Concerning ordination, your guess is as good as mine. I'd love to give to the Metropolia the gifts I have been given. We shall see.

She didn't know everything.

I don't know if the metropolia uses such priests or not. If they do the word hasn't filtered down to us lowly laity. But perhaps I should not say that. Our recent "sobor" may demonstrate a new thing in at least the Eparchy of Parma.

The Methodists got some things right. Moreover, if St. Francis is a model, he got it right as well. What are some good Eastern models. I'm rather ignorant of those.

I hate to burst your bubble, but I know you already know. These ideas are all derivative. But then Solomon knew that about all things. "Vanity, vanity...nothing new under the sun." But they certainly are applicable today.

Dan L

Jeff,

Our intention is to try to think of ways to start new parishes or to work with parishes in transistion until they can again become self sustaining through growth or through uniting with other parishes. It takes specific chrisms given to specific priests in order to do this. There are parishes that cannot support a priest. You knew that didn't you?

Dan L

Dan,

One of the major roadblocks to allowing vocations to get their priestly formation outside the seminary is the notion that they will not attain the "mystique of the priesthood." There is a myth going about in the celibate community that implies that the seminary injects a certain mystique (or aura) that cannot be attained outside.

I'm not trying to be funny. This is what I ran into with certain hierarchs.

What happeend to the idea that the bishop was the missionary who set up missions to be left for priests to minister to? The Latin model was priest/missionary first, then bishop to establish a church foundation after certainty about permanence. The Byzantine model was bishop first, evangelize with a team of ministers, and found church communities. Were the Slavs Christian before Cyril & Methodius; before Vladimir?

Joe

We have a tiny Byzantine church in our town - there is mass/liturgy there only on Sat afternoon as the priest travels 50 miles to come down for that. Sundays he has to take care of his own parish.

-ray

Dear Joe:

Being Roman, I am partial to the Latin model. And it appears that missionaries (priests, religious, and lay) have shown relative success in this modern era as in the distant past, continually if not continuously.

Another reason to consider: given the smaller number of Bishops and who are tied down to their diocesan duties and obligations in the first place, it is less "costly" to send priests, religious, and laity (especially the latter 2) to blaze the trail.

It should not be the other way around.

Amado

Does anyone here know of some missions in the last decade or so that have gone from the establishment as a mission and then to a Church? How was it done?

Dan L

Do you mean BC only? I'm in a three year old mission currently trying to get a property and move to church status.

Andrew

I think any Eastern example would be helpful but I'm especially interested in BC.

DanL

There may be some truth to that but since we all aren't going to be bishops it seems to me rather irrelevant. This may explain some of the "mystique" we've both experienced when trying to contact certain places. I simply don't know. The point is of course that the Eastern way is to have married priests. So let's have them.

What happeend to the idea that the bishop was the missionary who set up missions to be left for priests to minister to? The Latin model was priest/missionary first, then bishop to establish a church foundation after certainty about permanence. The Byzantine model was bishop first, evangelize with a team of ministers, and found church communities. Were the Slavs Christian before Cyril & Methodius; before Vladimir?

Joe [/b][/QUOTE]

I don't really care which model is used. I'd just like to be part of helping the bishop establish some new Churhes.

Dan l

Dear Joseph,

The "mystique of the priesthood!" I came across that not too long ago . . .

Seminaries can be great - I don't know if they really train someone to be the kind of public-spirited, outgoing, man of the people that priests ought to be though.

Seminaries that I've been to seem like "secular monasteries" with the difference that some monasteries can boast much more outreach than they.

Alex

I'm not opposed to seminaries, we probably have far more than we need, but they have a place. The locus of priestly formation must be the parish if we are to learn again how to grow. Hence, I agree with what you've written.

A year ago we read here that there were perhaps 3-4 students at the seminary for the entire metropolia. We learned recently that there are no priestly vocations from Parma and only two permanent deacons. How much "mystique" is needed to be a deacon? Don't misunderstand, I like Mystique. I just believe that one does not need to be full time at a seminary to find this mystique, unless the seminary is Anchoritic. This is especially true if one has already completed a good deal of time at a seminary already. Some mixture of seminary and parish formation seems to be called for. For that matter wouldn't Eastern Catholicism be better served if our priests had a Cenobitic experience at a seminary serving all of the Eastern Catholic Churches? Are you getting my drift?

Dan L

Ok, here goes...

I know the archdiocesan department of missions and evangelism has a bunch of criteria for starting missions. In our case I believe it was a petition by some lay members of an existing parish coupled with the desire of the archdiocese to open a mission in a populated but underserved area (the mainline west of Philadelphia).

Our priest who is a convert was a deacon at the mother parish and in 2002 became the pastor of our congregation with a small core of families and they began meeting monthly and then weekly in a hotel for vespers, but still attending liturgy at the mother parish.

They moved to weekly services, meeting in rented spaces at a couple of churches. We now meet in the basement of a boy scouts building which is a chore because the worship space has to be built and torn down every week. I think the current count of families is around 30 and we average anywhere from 70 to a 100 for the normal weekly liturgy last I heard. We are now at nearly max capacity and it�s really crowded when we�re near peak attendance.

Our mother parish and one we�re closely associated with became full churches by having land donated to them which they built on. I believe it took each of them around ten years to go through the whole process. Unfortunately I don�t think we�ll be getting a free property and we�re in an area that has high real estate prices. We�ve raised a significant amount of cash in the mission to acquire a building, but only enough for a down payment at this point. All of the money has come from donations from within the parish, we haven�t gone outside for anything. We�ve put in offers on two properties, but they were both rejected. Currently there�s a group specifically dedicated to finding and acquiring a property. Renting a place has also been floated as an option, but most people seem intent on buying.

Once we actually get a building, we will go from mission to church status.

I would say our mission as it stands now is pan-Orthodox. There are cradles from a number of jurisdictions and a substantial number of converts.

Andrew