A reader writes:
I have a couple of important questions and hopefully you are the person to answer them.
I was baptized Catholic at birth and later confirmed. I have only been married once.
First, can I even contemplate entering the Diaconate program if my wife is not Catholic (she is a baptized protestant)? My wife attends Mass with me regularly, but does not receive communion, in respect to our church’s teachings.
Second, if my wife went through RCIA and became a Catholic, how long would she have to be a Catholic before I could be considered for the Diaconate program?
The fact that your wife is Protestant does not appear to create a canonical barrier to ordination to the permanent diaconate. The relevant canon simply reads:
Can. 1031 §2. A candidate for the permanent diaconate who is not married is not to be admitted to the diaconate until after completing at least the twenty-fifth year of age; one who is married, not until after completing at least the thirty-fifth year of age and with the consent of his wife.
There is nothing in there (nor does a check of parallel legal sources and commentary) requiring the spouse to be Catholic.
But there should be.
(NOTE: The last sentence signals that we are moving from canon law to theological opinion.)
St. Paul is very clear about the fact that Christ’s ministers–including deacons–need to have religious solidarity with their family. In 1 Timothy 3, he writes:
[8] Deacons likewise must be serious, not double-tongued, not addicted to much wine, not greedy for gain;
[9] they must hold the mystery of the faith with a clear conscience.
[10] And let them also be tested first; then if they prove themselves blameless let them serve as deacons.
[11] The women likewise must be serious, no slanderers, but temperate, faithful in all things.
[12] Let deacons be the husband of one wife, and let them manage their children and their households well;
[13] for those who serve well as deacons gain a good standing for themselves and also great confidence in the faith which is in Christ Jesus.
You’ll notice the reference to "The women" in verse 11. As a linguistic matter, the Greek here is ambiguous. The Greek text simply refers to gunaikas, which could be translated either "women" or "wives" since in Greek the word for "woman" and the word for "wife" are the same (gune–pronounced "gu-nay").
Advocates of women’s ordination have pounced on this verse to argue that there were sacramentally ordained female deacons in the early Church, but subsequent Christian tradition has made it clear that this was not the case. Only a baptized male can be validly ordained.
This indicates that the correct reading of gune should be "wife" rather than "woman." The passage should be understood to mean:
Wives likewise must be serious, no slanderers, but temperate, faithful in all things.
The structure of the passage also indicates this. Paul has just been discussing the requirements for deacons who are male in verses 8-10 and he is clearly discussing the requirements for male deacons in 12-13. It is much more likely that in verse 11 Paul is stating a further requirement for male deacons (i.e., that they have wives of a certain character) than that he is swerving wildly to mention in passing a whole different group of people (female deacons) about whose requirements for ordination he is silent.
Further, we already know that Paul has the "wife" meaning of gune in mind in this passage because in the very next verse (v. 12) it unambiguously means "wife."
If we take this as established then what does the passage say regarding the qualifications a prospective deacon’s wife must have? Among other things, that she be "faithful in all things."
What Paul means by this is somewhat ambiguous. He may mean a number of things. But I find it difficult to envision Paul regarding a prospective deacon’s wife as "faithful in all things" if she did not share the fullness of the Christian faith. If she rejected certain elements of the faith of Christ then I don’t think Paul would regard her as fitting this description.
Paul clearly consider the religious affiliation of family members important. In Titus 1:6 Paul is discussing the qualifications for office of a bishop (which term seems to have been used equivalently with presbyter in Paul’s day) and he says that one of the qualifications for ordinatoin is that "his children are believers and not open to the charge of being profligate or insubordinate."
So the children of a prospective bishop/presbyter must be believers in order for him to be qualified for ordination. This means that the religious affiliation of immediate family members are relevant for prospective ministers, and this provides part of the context for Paul’s statement that a deacon’s wife must be "faithful in all things."
This is something I recognized back when I was Protestant and married to a Catholic. I wanted–deeply–to enter the Protestant ministry as a pastor or seminary professor, but I recognized that the New Testament requires ministers to have religious solidarity with their families and, even though I’m sure that I could have found someone who would be willing to ordain me even though I had a Catholic wife, I refused in conscience to seek that.
I was willing to give up my prospective career–the only thing I wanted to do in life–rather than violate this requirement. This was an ENORMOUSLY painful thing for me, but I was planning to go into law or go back to philosophy instead.
I also thank God that he hid from me the fact that I might be able to do ministry as a Catholic so that I was not tempted to convert for the wrong reasons.
It seems quite clear to me, then, that this is a principle that needs to be honored. The immediate family members of a prospective clergyman (priest or deacon) need to share the fullness of the Christian faith, which means that they need to be Catholic.
Canon law may not require this, but in my opinion sound pastoral practice does. I understand allowing mixed marriages as a concession for the laity, but Christ’s ministers are to be held to a higher standard.
Whether your local bishop (the man who would be ordaining you to the diaconate) would agree with this, I could not say.
In regard to the second question, since even having a non-Catholic wife is not a canonical barrier to ordination there is correspondingly no canonical waiting period before ordination should she become Catholic.
The ideal thing, of course, would be for her to become Catholic, and it certainly is not inappropriate for you to invite her to consider this BUT–AND THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT–you cannot pressure her to become Catholic so that you can pursue the diaconate. The Catholic faith must be accepted freely, without coercion or emotional manipulation on the part of a spouse.
So I would encourage you to entrust this situation to God in prayer. Your desire to serve Christ is praiseworthy, and you are not canonically constrained from pursuing ordination to the diaconate, but there are serious pastoral issues connected with your life situation that may weigh against this. You should think about all this and pray about it and seek the counsel of additional people, including the vocations director of your diocese, who can guide you further regarding the particular requirements for ordination that your local bishop employs.
The situation may be messy and complex, but that’s the kind of situation that God specializes in.
Hope this helps.
I have a tangential question, I hope no one minds: Why aren’t there more deacons?
Suppose, for example, each parish were allowed to seek out for the deaconate faithful men in their 50s and 60s, men who, for example, have already raised their children, and who, perhaps, have retired early. Just think of the possibilities: these men could help run the business of the parish, could distribute communion instead of extra-ordinary ministers, could act in the role of alter server. Perhaps more importantly, they could act as a sounding board for the parish priest, so he would be more aware of the real issues confronting families in the parish.
Again I ask: why are there so few deacons?
The imagery of the “domestic church” seems very relevant here.
My diocese does not allow married deacons at all – no debate, no discussion. So why are there so few deacons?
Because sometimes the Bishop feels that they cannot dedicate themselves fully to God and will be pulled in other directions.
To answer the question why aren’t there more deacons, I think that it probably varies a lot from diocese to diocese. The diocese that I live in has more deacons than priests, and many of them are very active in assisting at Mass, baptizing, performing weddings, etc. Of course, that’s not to say that we couldn’t benefit from having even more deacons than we currently have.
Jimmy
You mention above “I wanted–deeply–to enter…” As a widower and single, will we ever hear about “Father Jimmy Akin”?
There is a little more in “Basic Norms for the Formation of Permanent Deacons” published by the Vatican and dated 22 February 1998.
“37. … Moreover, in addition to stability of family life married candidates cannot be admitted unless ‘their wives not only consent, but also have the Christian moral character and attributes which will neither hinder their husbands’ ministry nor be out of keeping with it’. [Footnote 42: Paul VI, Apostolic Letter Sacrum diaconatus ordinem, III, 11: l.c., p. 700. Cf C.I.C., cans. 1031, S2; 1050, 3°.”
A co-worker of mine is studying for the deaconate in our diocese. He tells me that he has to be careful about expressing his opinion, because he believes and tries to practice what the Church teaches! Pointing out that a lot of what he is being taught is contrary to Chruch teaching could get him kicked out of the program.(Hmmm, could that be a reason that our Diocese ranks 172 in priestly vocational rates of the 176 dioceses in the U.S.?)
It was sad that your 1 eyed kitten died after one day. I was going to cry when I heard it deid. It must of been hard for you to let it go.
Thanks! Actually, it wasn’t my one-eyed kitten (though I’d have loved it if it were), but I’m sure that the owner appreciates the thought.
why are there so few deacons?
I think there are many aspects to this. To highlight a couple:
1) The Priesthood itself has been professionalized. Priests are generally college educated and have the equivalent of a Master’s degree. At a high level, one doesn’t want a large drop off between priests and deacons. So the question becomes what level of education is desired?
2) Typical diaconate programs are administered through the diocese and not the parish. From a “sales” perspective, reaching potential deacons is difficult.
3) A prospective deacon, particularily in the 50 to 60 demographic, will have a more established relationship with many of his parishoners than the resident priest. This creates an authority issue. While this does occur in corporate life, it is rare to see a 35-year-old priest administer 50 to 60-year-old deacons. This conflict is currently seen between many parish administrators and priests.
While I certainly support deaconite vocations, I hope these 3 bullets illustrate some of the inherent difficulties.
Having a Protestant wife is not an impediment. Just ask my father – the year he was ordained to the Diaconate my mother was president of the women’s club at the her Methodist church. My father’s first pastoral assignment from his bishop was to minister to interfaith couples.
In the Boston Archdiocese it is not required that a deacon’s wife be Catholic, but it is required that she be Christian. I applied for the diaconate here a few years back and was denied, and the reason (I eventually found out) is because my wife is not baptized. The reasoning made sense to me (but the procedure and answers to questions could have been clearer and saved lots of people lots of time). The deacon in charge of the formation program quoted the very passage that John Lilburne mentioned.
As for why there aren’t more? Well, there are over 11,000 in the U.S. (that’s almost 1 deacon for every 4 priests). But the required education is probably a barrier for many. Here in Boston there are five years in the admission/formation program. The first year of application normally will involve doing some heavy prayer and discussion with the aspirant’s wife…then the application, and then a series of interviews and tests (both of knowledge and psychological). The second year is more formation than education, and the deacon’s wife is required to attend the sessions (about 2-3 per month). The remaining three years are more academic; wives are encouraged to attend classes as well, but they are not required to do so. While this is the equivalent of an M.Div program, the deacons are not awarded any degree. In addition to class work, there is internships (such as helping in a hospital chaplaincy).
At the end of this, the deacon, when ordained, is assigned by the bishop to serve in a parish or an institution such as a college or hospital or prison. It is generally not the case that the deacon, nowadays, serves in his home parish.
Most deacons serve gratis.
Here in Boston there is a Master’s program in ministry for lay people which is run at the seminary (same place as the deacon’s go). At the end of their term, the lay folk who get their masters are then often employed by parishes as pastoral assistants or parish administrators. They of course get paid.
So another reason that some men might not seek out the diaconate is that at the age when they are supporting their children’s college education or paying off the loans they took out to help the kids, they are then going to dedicate a huge amount of time for free to the church, without any recognition of the education they have undertaken; or they can get the MA, get paid to work in the parish, and get not only the recognition, but don’t have to listen to people referring to them as “lay deacons”, etc. The wonder isn’t why there aren’t more deacons…the wonder is that there are so many who respond to the call!
If one’s wife is not hostile to the Church, and is willing to support his ministry as a deacon, I see no reason why he should not pursue ordination. I am not a scripture scholar, but “faithful in all things” seems to have more to do with character and openness than whether she has come to see the fullness of the truth.
Of course we hope and pray that this gentleman’s wife will enter the Church and share with us Our Lord in the Eucharist! But if he makes her conversion a requirement, that may place on her the undue pressure to which Mr Akin refers, i.e., to become Catholic for the wrong reason.
Awesome. Will you be posting on 1 Timothy 3:1-7 as a defense for a married priesthood? Looking forward to it.
Having an ordained married clergy is one of the most radical changes instituted by Vatican II. Such changes in the life of the Church typically take about 100 years to become a “normal” part of the life of the Church.
When I was ordained a deacon over 25 years ago parishoners, especially those not very active in the Church, couldn’t figure out what I was. But a few years ago I changed parishes and the feedback I repeatedly got back from parishoners was “Finally, our parish has a deacon.” (My new parish had been the only parish in this very Catholic large city without a deacon or two.)
Mixed marriages are not ideal, so a deacon in a mixed marriage would be giving a, well, non-ideal example.