www.byzcath.org Forums News & Events Church News Eparchy of Passiac....Pataki retired?

Glory to Jesus Christ!

I am reminded of the story when Metropolitan Basil was still the Bishop of Parma. He visited the Eparchy of Van Nuys (which had previously been part of the Eparchy of Parma), and when he was greeting the faithful, he said �I bring you greetings from the Old Country...Ohio�!

Deacon El

Deacon El,

It is charming to hear people at our church in Ohio refer to Pennsylvania as "the old country" or even better, "the holy land."

John Murray

When I visited Descent of the Holy Spirit UGCC in western Massachusetts a few years ago, one of the parishoners I talked to said, "Oooooh! The HOLY Land!" when I told him I was from Pittsburgh originally.

My pastor had Fr. Dino (DIE-NO) for dogmatics when he was in seminary, and said he is a wonderful teacher.

I remember that when Bishop William was to be ordained, we were all encouraged to attend because they said it would be a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity for us to experience, given that Bishop William is so young. I believe that Fr. Dino (God grant him many years!) is about 67 years old, so it looks like we will have not only a twice, but possibly a thrice-in-a-lifetime opportunity.

I thought the term was *consecration* since the priest becoming a bishop was already *ordained*. Is the term *ordination* used for both ranks of clergy?

Ed

Ed
Glory to Jesus Christ!

In the Church there are three Major Orders - Bishop, Priest and Deacon to which one is ordained. The Holy Apostles appointed seven men (Church Tradition calls them "Deacons") to perform a special serving ministry (Acts 6:2-6) and in his first Letter to the Corinthians, St. Paul speaks of various ministries in the Church (1 Cor. 12:28). Likewise, he addresses his Letter to the Philippians, To all the saints in Christ Jesus who are at Philippi, with the bishops and deacons (Phil. 1:1). In his first Letter to Timothy, the Holy Apostle also speaks of the qualifications of Bishops and Deacons (1 Tim. 3:1-13), as well as in his Letter to Titus (1.5-9).

Ordinations to the Major Orders always occur during the course of the Divine Liturgy. Only the Bishop has the power to ordain. Because of the collegial nature of the episcopacy, a college of Bishops (at least two or three) are necessary to ordain another Bishop. And since any ordination requires the consent of the whole people of God, at a particular point in the Service the assembled congregation proclaims Axios! {He is worthy!), showing their assent.

The rite of ordination to the episcopacy is very solemn and the Bishop is ordained in the Sanctuary, in the midst of the Congregation before the singing of the Trisagion. Thus the reading of the Holy Gospel is done already with his blessing.

The Priest is ordained after the singing of the Cherubic Hymn before the sanctification of the Holy Gifts. The rite of ordination to the Deaconate is less solemn and takes place before the singing of the Lord's Prayer, when the sanctification of the Holy Gifts has already taken place, since the Deacon only assists at the performance of the Sacraments and does not perform them. At the conclusion of the Liturgy the Priest goes out to the people in order to read the Prayer Before the Ambo and the Deacon to say the final litany, these actions being the first external signs of their ministry.

In all cases of ordination to the "Major Orders," there is a laying-on of hands on the head of the one being ordained and the grace of the Holy Spirit is invoked.

Deacon El

Deacon El,
I feel that with your recent post I had flashbacks of my Holy Orders exam this past Monday

So, did you pass?

I think so - with flying colors, I think.

Protology / Theological Anthropology... well... we were all scratching our heads on that one.

But in seriousness, the development of the Church's teaching on Holy Orders and such truly is something else!

My family tells me that they were never consulted in who gets ordained in their church. It is usually a fait accompli by the time of the ordination service, and the choir usually sings it for the people.

What would happen if a number of the people began shouting *non Axios!*??? Would they and their lack of consent be escorted out of the church by the local police for having caused a public disturbance at a public worship service? My aunt tells me that there was much protest regarding one case (information withheld), but the bishop ordained him anyway because he needed priests. A few years later, the priest resigned after being charged in a pedophile case. Would that have happened if the bishop really listened to the consent or lack of consent?

This *Axios!* part seems to be no longer a real consent part of the service, but a mandatory response to a fait accompli. I don't buy it. One of the protestors of the ordination I mentionied above was the man's pastor!

Ed

Notoriously, about 30 years ago two bishops were ordained in a certain US city. The ordinations were about as popular as greased pigs in an Orthodox Jewish synagogue. The church was packed to the gills for the ordination service - with people shouting ANAXIOS at the top of their lungs. The noise was so great that the clergy at the altar could not hear the attempts of the choir to sing the responses (nor could the choir hear what they were supposed to be responding to). It was completely impossible to attempt to give Holy Communion to any of the faithful, nor could the two men go through the church to give blessings (which, presumably, the people did not wish to receive anyway). And on, and on - adding any more details would serve no good purpose.

Fr. Serge

Father Keleher,
Obviously, their shouts were not *heard* despite being the loudest. This is why I don't buy the idea that an ordination requires the consent of the whole people of God. What really matters is the ordinations were still carried out to satisfy whoever picked them, right? From what I have been reading here on these forums, church leaders aren't even picked from one's own local community; they are hand-chosen from outsiders, ordained, and assigned to a community. Fait accompli. I think Eastern Catholics are mistaken when they actually believe or fooled into believing things about themselves that are not really accepted or practiced in their churches. this is my opinion. I could be wrong, but your story only confirms that the people's consent really doesn't matter anyway. *Axios!* was still said by someone (the choir supposedly singing it for the people) and that is what mattered.

Ed

I didn't offer an analysis. Yours is far too simplistic. But you're welcome to try again.

Fr. Serge

I didn't think you did. My analysis, no matter how simplistic it is, is simple (no pun intended) - consent of the people does not exist. It is mere lip service. Real consent probably existed in the early church. The people's consent has become liturgized into a hymn carrying with it no meaning or weight other than another response to be taken from the service books. I am interested in knowing when the last time, if ever, Eastern Catholic churches actually voted for their own bishop? My guess is that Rome picks who is acceptable to them. I would say that this also the case when clergy are ordained to the priesthood. Clerical votes before an ordination and the people's assent during are not part of church tradition anymore. They get in the way of fait accompli.

30 years ago brings us to 1977. Let's see ...

Ed

I carefully wrote "about 30 years ago". But seek and perhaps ye shall find.

As to when Eastern Catholic bishops were last elected, the answer will surprise you.

Fr. Serge