Deacon as Ἄγγελος, Angel or Herald

sanctuary of the Cathedral of the Epiphany

In the sanctuary of our Cathedral, we have four quite lovely stained-glass windows, depicting the Last Supper, the Resurrection, the giving of the Keys to St. Peter, and Pentecost.  During the year before my ordination, when I was serving Mass as an acolyte, I had a clear view of the Resurrection window, in which an angel is depicted rolling away the stone from the tomb, while Christ emerges and the soldiers are struck insensible with awe and fear.

In this window, the angel is wearing a dalmatic.

I pondered the better part of that year, week after week, what it meant that angels wear dalmatics, and what sort of "angel" I could be as a deacon.  I still think of those reflections, and what I learned in that time, each time I see that window.

Dcn. Bill Ditewig recently had a rather nice post on his blog on this topic, to which I was refered yesterday.  He makes the point correctly that this symbolism of angels wearing dalmatics is vital to the Eastern theological understanding of the diaconate, and less so the Western, but is a dominant tradition in the artistic representation of both angels and deacons even in the West (as in our Cathedral).

He doesn't, however, make the further point about what the word "deacon" (διάκονος) actually means.  The usual English translation is "servant," and that's alright in a very general sort of way.  But "servant" in English carries a wide range of connotations, from "slave" to "butler" to "trusted advisor," that only partially overlaps with the connotations of "deacon" in koine Greek.  One end of that range of connotations is occupied by other Greek words (e.g. "doulos," "slave" or "personal servant," which is also used frequently in the New Testament), while the connotation of the New Testament's "deacon" word group is rather different from the range of "servant." It means more specifically something like "ambassador," "messenger," or "herald" (as John Collins' meticulous study "Diakonia" (Oxford UP, 2009) showed).  This is why the translation into Latin has always been "minister," which has a very similar range of connotations (consider the usual governmental context of "minister" as a title today), and not something like "servus," "slave" (the root, e.g., of our English "servant" and "serf").

In other words, it's not just in art and in theology that the connection between angels and deacons is made, but that connection itself derives from the overlapping semantic content of the two words.  Both are "sent from" someone else, and wield (a share of) that person's own authority.  And thus, to push even further, the third word that fits directly into this same semantic weave is "apostle" (ἀπόστολος), lit. "one who is sent."  Indeed, just as the Father sends Christ the Son, and Christ sends the Apostles and their successors, the bishops, so also the bishops perforce send (priests and) deacons to extend their ministry to all (e.g., Lumen Gentium #18-20).  And the intimate connection between deacons and bishops that, say, St. Ignatius of Antioch makes flows also from this understanding of ministry and mission.

St. Gabriel

Thus, when Lumen Gentium goes on to say in #29:

At a lower level of the hierarchy are deacons, upon whom hands are imposed "not unto the priesthood, but unto a ministry of service."(74*) For strengthened by sacramental grace, in communion with the bishop and his group of priests they serve in the diaconate of the liturgy, of the word, and of charity to the people of God. It is the duty of the deacon, according as it shall have been assigned to him by competent authority, to administer baptism solemnly, to be custodian and dispenser of the Eucharist, to assist at and bless marriages in the name of the Church, to bring Viaticum to the dying, to read the Sacred Scripture to the faithful, to instruct and exhort the people, to preside over the worship and prayer of the faithful, to administer sacramentals, to officiate at funeral and burial services. Dedicated to duties of charity and of administration, let deacons be mindful of the admonition of Blessed Polycarp: "Be merciful, diligent, walking according to the truth of the Lord, who became the servant of all."(75*)

...the "ministry of service" the Council Fathers have in mind is, in its essence, that share of the apostolic ministry first entrusted by the Apostles to the Seven chosen in Acts 6, and which we see carried out by St. Stephen and Philip in Acts 7 and 8, namely, the proclamation of the Good News by word and witness, and the bringing of people into union with Christ through baptism and through inviting them to receive the full ministry of the Apostles themselves.  And this is also what the ordination rite clearly means when, as the bishop hands the Evangelarium to the newly ordained deacon, he says, "Receive the Gospel of Christ, whose herald you now are; believe what you read, preach what you believe, practice what you preach."

Two other implications then flow from this, both of which are contested points about the diaconate today.  First, just as angels only do what God sends them to do, so deacons must exercise their ministry within ecclesial structures.  For most deacons, this means a parish assignment and an active presence in the parish's liturgical and ministerial life.  (One could also be assigned to other ecclesial institutions, e.g. diocesan offices, schools, hospitals, apostolates, etc.  But all of these are "ecclesial" in the same sense, that of obedience to and communion with the local bishop.)  Whatever ministry a deacon undertakes, it must remain connected with the apostolic center, and with the altar.  Deacons are not "extra-ecclesial" ministers in the sense that they function "beyond" the institutions of the Church.  The fact that most permanent deacons are married and have jobs outside the Church confuses this greatly.  Certainly in those roles deacons remain deacons, and should preach Jesus Christ (especially by example), but it is not for this that they are ordained; all the baptised should do as much, each according to vocation and state in life.

2014 ordination of permanent deacons, in the same Cathedral

Second, just as the only example of disunity among the angels is the Fall, so the unity of the deacon with the bishop means that those who are chosen to be ordained as deacons must in principle be capable of receiving a greater share of the apostolic ministry; that is, they must in principle be eligible to be chosen to the presbyterate (and the episcopate).  To ordain as a (permanent) deacon someone who could never, under any circumstances, be ordained a priest would separate the ministry of the deacon from the ministry of the bishop.  It would create another, non-apostolic, "sending" for the deacon to pursue. 

"Jesuit" Interview with Pope Francis

Yesterday, America magazine released the English-language translation of the "official" interview with Pope Francis by Jesuit priest Fr. Antonio Spadaro, SJ.  The original Italian (which I have not looked at) was published in La Civilta Catholica.

Just two thoughts on this interview for now.  One, the main-stream press is trying very hard to use anything possible which they can glean from this interview to drive wedges into the Church.  Fr. Z, among others, makes this point most ably.  Just one example: Here's the AP report on the publication of the interview, copied in a great many places.  Notice how they lead with what they imagine will be the most provocative part, even though it's clearly not the most important part, and even then, they have to misconstrue by taking significantly out of context, to make it seem to say what they want it to say.  The caption under the photo takes it thusly:

VATICAN CITY (AP) -- Pope Francis is warning that the Catholic Church's moral edifice might "fall like a house of cards" if it doesn't balance its divisive rules about abortion, gays and contraception with the greater need to make the church a merciful, more welcoming place for all.

The article's lead point (second-to-fourth third paragraphs) makes the same maneuver:

In the 12,000-word article, Francis expands on his ground-breaking comments over the summer about gays and acknowledges some of his own faults...

But his vision of what the church should be stands out, primarily because it contrasts so sharply with many of the priorities of his immediate predecessors John Paul II and Benedict XVI. They were both intellectuals for whom doctrine was paramount, an orientation that guided the selection of generations of bishops and cardinals around the globe.

Francis said the dogmatic and the moral teachings of the church were not all equivalent.


Compare that with what Francis actually said about these topics, in the section labelled "The Church as Field Hospital:"

Pope Francis begins by showing great affection and immense respect for his predecessor: “Pope Benedict has done an act of holiness, greatness, humility. He is a man of God.

“I see clearly,” the pope continues, “that the thing the church needs most today is the ability to heal wounds and to warm the hearts of the faithful; it needs nearness, proximity. I see the church as a field hospital after battle...

“How are we treating the people of God? I dream of a church that is a mother and shepherdess. The church’s ministers must be merciful, take responsibility for the people and accompany them like the good Samaritan, who washes, cleans and raises up his neighbor. This is pure Gospel. God is greater than sin...

“Instead of being just a church that welcomes and receives by keeping the doors open, let us try also to be a church that finds new roads, that is able to step outside itself and go to those who do not attend Mass, to those who have quit or are indifferent...

“A person once asked me, in a provocative manner, if I approved of homosexuality. I replied with another question: ‘Tell me: when God looks at a gay person, does he endorse the existence of this person with love, or reject and condemn this person?’ We must always consider the person...

“This is also the great benefit of confession as a sacrament: evaluating case by case and discerning what is the best thing to do for a person who seeks God and grace...

“We cannot insist only on issues related to abortion, gay marriage and the use of contraceptive methods. This is not possible. I have not spoken much about these things, and I was reprimanded for that. But when we speak about these issues, we have to talk about them in a context. The teaching of the church, for that matter, is clear and I am a son of the church, but it is not necessary to talk about these issues all the time.

“The dogmatic and moral teachings of the church are not all equivalent. The church’s pastoral ministry cannot be obsessed with the transmission of a disjointed multitude of doctrines to be imposed insistently. Proclamation in a missionary style focuses on the essentials, on the necessary things: this is also what fascinates and attracts more, what makes the heart burn, as it did for the disciples at Emmaus. We have to find a new balance; otherwise even the moral edifice of the church is likely to fall like a house of cards, losing the freshness and fragrance of the Gospel. The proposal of the Gospel must be more simple, profound, radiant. It is from this proposition that the moral consequences then flow."

This is very nearly the opposite of what the AP article attempts to portray.  Nothing in all this can reasonably be construed as any sort of novelty, or break with the priorities of Pope Benedict, or change in what the Church is teaching or trying to do.  Pope Francis wants the Church to be successful at getting people to love God, go to Mass and Confession, and live the content of the faith.  Whudathunkit??

It also shows very clearly my second point in this post: Pope Francis, like his predecessors, and with a deep personal urgency and simplicity, really emphasizes the proclamation of the Gospel.  That's what this interview is mostly about; he comes back to it again and again in different contexts.  In this section, he's talking especially about the initial proclamation, the invitation to hear the Good News of Jesus Christ.  As Pope Paul VI, Pope John Paul II, and Pope Benedict XVI also said, our world is increasingly in need of this initial proclamation.  Actions speak louder than words, and the most fundamental kind of invitation to the Gospel, both in actions and words, is to demonstrate to someone that they are worthy of love, by actually loving them.  This is the grace that heals, and from that being loved comes the desire to love, to experience conversion and growth in faith.  That's the only real basis for living up to God's standards of freedom and dignity, the revealed moral law.  

 Pope Francis said essentially the same things in his address to the bishops of Brazil, back in July.  The talk and the interview are both worth a good read and reflection, if nothing else just to be able to refute the even more intense barrage of false claims about his vision and goals that we're going to face now.

PS - Today, Pope Francis addressed a meeting of medical professionals and preached about the evil of abortion, against "throwing away" the lives of children.  He made the explicit point that this is not only a religious idea, but also the clear conclusion of both reason and science.  After trying to suggest yesterday in their depiction of the contents of the interview that Pope Francis doesn't really think that's very important, the main-stream media are beside themselves today.

Round up: recent readings of interest - updated 9/19

Deacons are for proclaiming the Word of God, in word and in deed.  But we don't do that on our own, like liturgical Lone Rangers; we proclaim only in communion with our shepherd, apart from communion with whom we have no ministry, no mission.

Here's Pope Benedict proclaiming the Gospel during his recent apostolic visit to Lebanon. Text of all twelve of his addresses from this journey are at the link.

(Pope Benedict and Patriarch Gregorios III of Antioch in the Basilica of St. Paul, Harissa; Reuters photo, from the link above)

Here's Archbishop Chaput proclaiming the Gospel in a more quotidian but still compelling fashion:
     Selfishness dressed up as individual freedom has always been part of American life.  But now it infects the whole fabric of consumer society.  American life is becoming a cycle of manufactured appetites, illusions and licenses that turns people in on themselves and away from each other. As communities of common belief and action dissolve, the state fills in the void they leave.  And that suits a lot of us just fine, because if the government takes responsibility for the poor, we don’t have to. 
     I’m using a broad brush here, obviously.  In Catholic social thought, government has a legitimate role – sometimes a really crucial role -- in addressing social problems that are too big and too serious to be handled by anyone else.  But Jesus didn’t bless higher taxes, deficit spending and more food stamps, any more than he endorsed the free market.
     The way we lead our public lives needs to embody what the Catholic faith teaches -- not what our personalized edition of Christianity feels comfortable with, but the real thing; the full package; what the Church actually holds to be true.  In other words, we need to be Catholics first and political creatures second. (emphasis in original)


Here's an interesting reflection from Anthony Esolen on subsidiarity and the way it's being consistently misrepresented in politics:
     The welfare state is a soft prison, a system of induced incapacity, to the benefit of the wardens.  It works in concert with public schools, another vast network of compulsions, whose existence is predicated on the assumption that learning, in children, is unnatural, so that only “experts” can fathom the mystery, and so that “good” parents will act as trusties, submitting to the authority and enforcing its often ridiculous and pernicious commands.  The next network of control is an infantilizing media, persuading people that they are stupid or fat or ugly, that they live in a shack, that they wear rags, that they need what the hawkers provide.  The last element is a diseased and counterfeit individualism: the promotion of selfishness and of vices that make true self-reliance, and therefore true community, impossible.

And, tangentially, here's part I of a very interesting apologetic piece on the Deuterocanon (the books of the Bible Catholics keep and Protestants reject).

Update, 9/19 - Here's Part II of the same apologetic piece.

And, even more tangentially, for a bonus, here's the free on-line quarterly journal, "Church Life," from the Institute for Church Life at Notre Dame - where, for the moment, a significant portion of the University's Catholicity is being consistently expressed (link to Vol 3, vols 1 and 2 available there also).

Msgr. Pope on the Church and the kerygma, for the Easter Octave

Msgr. Pope has an excellent post on when the Resurrection becomes the official teaching of the Church. The proclamation of Christ's Resurrection, of course, is part of the original kerygma (Jesus is Lord, Jesus lived and died as a real man, Jesus rose from the dead). That kernel of the faith still underlies everything the Church is and does.

Here's the heart of Msgr.'s point in this post:

So when does the resurrection become the official declaration of the early Church? Up till now the stories had been rejected by the apostles as either fanciful or untrue. Even the possible belief of one of the 12 (John) was not enough to cause an official declaration from the early Church. So, what causes this to change? It would seem that, after the early evening report by the disciples returning from Emmaus, Peter slipped away, perhaps for a walk, or some other purpose, and according to both Paul (1 Cor 15:5) and Luke (Lk 24:34) the risen Lord appeared to Peter privately and prior to the other apostles. Peter then reports this to the others, and the resurrection moves from being doubted, to being the official declaration of the community, the Church. The official declaration is worded thus:

The Lord has truly risen indeed, he has appeared to Simon!” (Luke 24:34)

The resurrection is now officially declared. Notice, the world “truly” (some texts say “indeed”). It is now an officially attested fact that Jesus has risen. Neither Magdalene, nor the women in general, nor the disciples from Emmaus, nor even John, could make this declaration for the Church. It took the college of apostles in union with Peter to do this. Hence the dogma of the resurrection becomes so on very Catholic terms: The first bishops (the apostles) in union or in Council with the first Pope (Peter) make this solemn declaration of the faith.

I heartily agree; and the whole thing is well worth reading.

Ecclesiology and the "plan of action" that is Ministry

Given what we've said about what the Church is, and what relation she ought to have with the Polis (state, country, political unit), how do we start drawing conclusions about what the Church ought to be doing to serve all people?

The second part of the constitution Gaudium et Spes, on the Church in the modern world, lists some key areas where the ministry of the Church is particularly valuable, and ought to be particularly visible. These concerns are marriage and family life (#47ff), development of culture (#53ff), economy and society (#63ff), and politics, both intra-national (#73ff) and inter-national (#77ff). Notice that this list also progresses in the order of subsidiarity, from the smallest and most personal level to the global level. Let's take a quick look at them.

Marriage and Family Life

GS #47: The well-being of the individual person and of human and Christian society is intimately linked with the healthy condition of that community produced by marriage and family. Since the family is the domestic church, and the basic, subsidiary unit of both human and ecclesial life, the Church puts an extremely high priority on protecting and fostering healthy families. Gaudium et Spes lists some threats to married life: polygamy, divorce, fornication, abortion, contraception, worship of self and of pleasure, etc. Therefore the Church's ministry needs to address these kinds of threats, which, of course, we do on a regular basis. Clergy are (as we have always been) on the "front lines" of dealing with issues in marriages, both before and after the fact; and the Church also has resources like Catholic Charities and other Catholic professionals to help protect existing marriages, and heal broken ones (to the extent possible). Catechesis of married adults and their children, and of youth before (both remote and proximate) marriage, takes place constantly. And the witness of married couples themselves is of course critical to the success of these other efforts. All of this also needs to show up regularly in liturgical preaching.

But notice that these efforts to promote marriage and family are also "social justice" efforts. Divorce is the single greatest cause of generational poverty, and the consequences usually fall more heavily on women than men. The outcomes for children of divorced families (education levels, economic status, rates of criminal behavior and both social and physical disease, and stability of their own future marriages) are all significantly lower than for children whose parents do not divorce. All of these things also drive up taxes to support expanding social services, and may tend to imbalance the Church-State relationship and marginalize ecclesial efforts to serve in these areas. The long term costs of abortion and contraception are also devastating, not only morally (as is obvious) but also fiscally (elimination of millions of productive workers, etc, which more and more we are publicly admitting).

So, ecclesial ministry which succeeds in reducing rates of divorce, abortion, contraception, etc, and in strengthening marriage to the same extent, not only serves the individuals who benefit from that ministry directly, but also serves the Church as a whole, and the world in which she lives.

Culture

GS #53: Man comes to a true and full humanity only through culture, that is through the cultivation of the goods and values of nature. The "goods and values of nature" are of course many and diverse, and how we "cultivate" them (including both conservation/tradition and innovation/progress) gives us a distinctive "character" at a given time and place. Thus, The word "culture" in its general sense indicates everything whereby man develops and perfects his many bodily and spiritual qualities; he strives by his knowledge and his labor, to bring the world itself under his control. He renders social life more human both in the family and the civic community, through improvement of customs and institutions. Throughout the course of time he expresses, communicates and conserves in his works, great spiritual experiences and desires, that they might be of advantage to the progress of many, even of the whole human family (ibidem).

Gaudium et Spes includes as threats to culture, especially in the modern (urbanizing, industrializing, individualizing) context: technology and the pace of change, commodification of goods and human services, materialism, scientism, deracination, homogenization (loss of traditional wisdom and character), etc.

Obviously, building up families and strengthening marriage also helps preserve and strengthen culture. The human aspects of labor, social relations and engagement, exchange of goods and services, etc., are far less likely to be diminished or lost, when family life is strong and healthy. Family life is the subsidiary reality and model for all social life; its health is the barometer of culture.

In addition, GS #60-61 particularly exhorts the followers of Christ to particular forms of ministry: to support education, while maintaining the Catholic vision of the unity of knowledge within itself (against hyper-specialization in sub-disciplines), and between itself (techne) and morality (sophia); to foster the humanizing aspects of labor; to inculcate a shared commitment to duty (pietas, in its original meaning) to the common good along with personal rights; and to respect the essential differences between men and women, even in the marketplace. Clearly, education is a fundamental ministerial commitment in the Church, not only to our Catholic schools and universities, but also our RE programs, adult bible studies, and sacramental prep, etc. - not to mention upholding the fundamental right of parents to raise their children. In all these ways, the fundamental truth that we must teach is that of the human person: created and loved by God, fallen in Adam, redeemed in Christ, called to and capable of living every aspect of life in intimate union with Christ and thus in the Trinity. Family and ecclesial life, the sacraments and prayer and service must so deeply underlie every individual effort at education/formation that they cannot be separated from it.

In terms of the Church's ministry, clergy have to be present and inherently involved in the life of these institutions. Lay people, with their vocation of bringing all things under Christ's feet by their labor and witness, must work to transform these institutions more deeply into the image of Christ. All the various ways these might take place follow pretty straightforwardly.

Further, while Gaudium et Spes doesn't explicitly go here, there are implied hooks between this document and the other three conciliar Constitutions (Dei Verbum, Lumen Gentium, and especially Sacrosanctum Concilium). This sacred Council has several aims in view: it desires to impart an ever increasing vigor to the Christian life of the faithful; to adapt more suitably to the needs of our own times those institutions which are subject to change; to foster whatever can promote union among all who believe in Christ; to strengthen whatever can help to call the whole of mankind into the household of the Church. The Council therefore sees particularly cogent reasons for undertaking the reform and promotion of the liturgy (SC #1). Culture is never whole without religion, and in religion, liturgy ("cultus")is the primary vehicle of passing on culture. In other words, we cannot pursue social justice or the common good without a solid and enduring foundation in right worship. In short, "Save the liturgy, save the world."

Economy and Society, and Politics

From this it follows that our consistent witness in living for Christ is the engine of divinization in the world. The proclamation of the Gospel in both word and action; the authenticity of standing consistently at the foot of the Cross in all social, economic, and political situations, and in being seen publicly to stand there; and the uncompromising commitment to be the instruments of bringing the order of nature under the order of grace: these are the hallmarks of compelling ecclesial ministry, always and everywhere. For man is the source, the center, and the purpose of all economic and social life (#63). Christians who take an active part in present-day socio-economic development and fight for justice and charity should be convinced that they can make a great contribution to the prosperity of mankind and to the peace of the world. In these activities let them, either as individuals or as members of groups, give a shining example (#70).

Nod to the Natural Law

Note, finally, in this exposition of ecclesiological ministry, the implicit hierarchy of goods. In the commitment of belonging only to Christ, being pro-life comes first, and being pro-family can't really be separated from it. (Of the Ten Commandments, this immediately invokes obedience to #1, 3, 4, 5, and 6.) From these first-order goods comes the second order of "the common good," especially what is tangibly grasped in the concrete life of the community (diocesan Church, local society with vigorously healthy voluntary associations, and deeply shared engagement in economy and political life). This layer of commitment invokes the remaining five Commandments (#2 in right worship in communion with the local bishop, and #7-10 in right social relations with others). Finally, the tertiary order of goods follows, in political commitments and party platforms and identifications. In a truly healthy culture, these various tertiary commitments never differ on the first and second order goods, but may envision different means of achieving them, or may differ on aspects of prudence. How much we argue about the first- and second-order goods is a clear measure of how unhealthy our culture is today, and by implication, how disconnected from that sickness our ministry can be.

"Deacon Reader" Summer Reading 6

Chapter 3 - The Deacon and Gaudium et Spes (Fr. McPartlan)

This essay argues that "We must try... to relate the diaconate... to some of the major principles of Vatican II's teaching," and especially to the main themes of the Constitution on the Church in the Modern World, Gaudium et Spes.

The first major principle he notes, in the second paragraph and following, is Church unity (my p. 57). Charity, he notes, serves unity, as does the authentic kerygma of the Good News, along with reaching out to the marginalized (probably envisioning both ecumenism and social justice) and defending the rights of the weak. Then he has a long section on the relationship between Church and the world, and the relevance of this to the diaconate (which we'll come back to in a moment), before listing other major principles at the end (by way of demonstrating what he's been trying to say). The other major principles he notes (my p. 73) are (2) the Church as servant, (3) the central role of the College of Bishops (and the implications of this for the meaning of the Sacrament of Holy Orders), (4) that "good liturgy animates the apostolate [of the laity]," and (5) solidarity.

Now, as principles for the Church, these five are quite solid. The challenge of the essay is in the part about the relationship of Church and world.

He wants to argue that the Church and the world should be united in the manner of "seamlessness" (p. 65, beginning of the section, "Deacons and the New Ecclesial Embrace of the World"). He says, "Everything she [the Church] does is for the salvation of the world, of which she is thoroughly a part" (p. 60, just after the long quote from JP2 at the Assisi ecumenical meeting in 2002).

Now, there's an obviously sense in which this is true: the Church has never not understood herself to be both "in the world" and "for the world." Even the most isolated hermit serves the world by praying and sacrificing. And every attempt to deny that Christ established the Church for the whole world (e.g., Manicheaism in the 4th-5th c., Waldensians et al in the 12th c., Jansenism in the 18th-19th c.) has been roundly condemned.

But at the same time, the Church has also always understood that she is supposed to be "not of the world." The world is fallen. Original sin exists. Personal sin exists. This is the universal and unchanging basis for admitting that we need a Savior. By baptism, we die in a very real sense, in the order of fallen nature, so that we can live the new life of Christ. The life of struggling to carry the Cross is, at the most basic, completely different from the life of not struggling to carry the Cross.

It's not clear in this essay that this "seamlessness" argument includes both of these terms. The "in and for the world" part predominates; the conversion part is hard to see. At best, it's implicitly present in what is preached, and how that preaching might be received by the modern world.

In the section on the "Deacon and the New Ecclesial Embrace..." (my p. 65ff), he states that deacons should be signs of this seamless solidarity; present in the world, somewhat like what the worker-priest movement tried in the 1950's; a kind of link between altar and world (he doesn't mention that both priests and laity do this also, each in different ways from deacons); a reader of the signs of the times and an applier of the Gospel to them.

If he means all this as "in and for the world" only, without the expectation of conversion to Christ, then all this is pretty obviously flawed. Without the demand of conversion, solidarity degenerates into mere niceness; presence gives way to autonomy and moral relativism; the Eucharistic altar stands well apart from the world; and the signs of the times can never say anything truly human, but only fads and whims as culture drifts.

I have a hard time thinking this is what Fr. McPartlan really meant. So, we must read in explicitly the need for conversion. Then I think his argument is pretty good, although still imprecise. With the demand for conversion to Christ (even if that demand is not made explicit in every act), then these things make more sense. Solidarity with my neighbor is a way of being in Christ, together; presence brings the grace of Christ into a situation; the Eucharistic altar calls everyone to truth and beauty; and the signs of the times can speak essential human needs, where Mercy is most hungered for.

But, I still note that this is only descriptive, not definitive. I argue that the set of {solidarity, presence, linking to the altar, and responding to true need} is what deacons do, not because of ordination, but because of baptism. These four aspects are general modes of discipleship. We have to dig deeper if we want to see in what particular, unique manner they are modes of diaconal ministry.

For example, in his opening list of principles, he notes the special role of the College of Bishops, and therefore of ordained ministry, and therefore (one infers) of the particular share in the apostolic ministry each of the lower grades (priests and deacons) receives. So how does the sacred power to proclaim the Gospel by word and action, in liturgy and in ministry, give a unique shape or character to the deacon's particular discipleship? He says it should be "symbolic of their [deacons'] relationships and activities in the world at large" (my p. 76, third-to-last paragraph). But none of our sacraments are mere symbols; so, symbolic in what sacramental sense?

Likewise, the principle that good liturgy animates the apostolate clearly means something different for deacons than for priests, since our liturgical roles are distinct. So, what exactly does it mean for deacons? How can we, in our liturgical ministry, be in solidarity with the laity, or with the whole world; or be present to them; or link them to the Eucharist; or (help) respond to their actual needs for grace and mercy?

R. R. Reno on the Preferential (Moral) Option for the Poor

From First Things' online Public Square:

Want to help the poor? By all means pay your taxes and give to agencies that provide social services. By all means volunteer in a soup kitchen or help build houses for those who can’t afford them. But you can do much more for the poor by getting married and remaining faithful to your spouse. Have the courage to use old-fashioned words such as chaste and honorable. Put on a tie. Turn off the trashy reality TV shows. Sit down to dinner every night with your family. Stop using expletives as exclamation marks. Go to church or synagogue.

In this and other ways, we can help restore the constraining forms of moral and social discipline that don’t bend to fit the desires of the powerful—forms that offer the poor the best, the most effective and most lasting, way out of poverty. That’s the truest preferential option—and truest form of respect—for the poor.

Full essay here.

Beatification of Blessed Pope John Paul II

Pope John Paul II had a tremendous impact on the Church, partly simply because of the length of his pontificate -- 27 years, I believe the third longest -- but especially because of the way he travelled and preached the Good News so passionately. People all over the world saw in him a fearless, committed, and above all holy leader and servant of Christ. The chants of "Santo subito!" which rang so loudly at his funeral six years ago were a clear popular recognition of that. Holiness, being more like Christ, always stands out in a world whose norms are so much NOT those of Christ.

What does Pope John Paul II's beatification mean to us as deacons or future deacons, here in this diocese? I think we can take three lessons from it, and strive to imitate what Pope John Paul II did best in preaching the Gospel: to preach fearlessly, consistently, and joyfully, as much by our actions and comportment as by our words.

Fearlessly: One of the Blessed Pope's most common watchwords was "Don't be afraid!" From a man who endured fascism and Communism for decades, and successfully fought against both with the spiritual weapons of the Gospel, this is not trite. The world now runs on fear. Because the modern world rejects every traditional (stable, permanent, universally valid) truth, and demands the "right" to define its own (constantly changing and personally valid only) "truth," "quaint" notions like trust, duty, obedience, and honor work against it. So these too must go. And into this vacuum rushes the will to power - i.e., that one's individual idea of truth will either dominate (success) or be dominated by (victimhood) those of others in one's social milieu. Thus fear flourishes, the fear of being overturned, of being victimized in either large or subtle ways -- the fear, in short, of having one's most intimate will thwarted.

Against this ubiquitous dread, the Pope's example of preaching Christ's truth (stable, eternal Truth) without fear, without seeking power over or fearing victimization from others really stands out. This resistance to fear is rooted only in trust, in faith in the kingship of Christ over human relations. Because Christ rules, love is the true nature of our shared life. His love is what overturns fear. The Blessed Pope knew this intimately, from the struggles of his own life in Poland; and he also knew intimately the fearlessness of Christ's love. We too know something of that fearlessness, from the best parts of our family and ecclesial lives, even if we haven't had to endure its opposite in the brutal manner of the two occupations of Poland. We too can draw on our own shared experience of the reality of Christ's love ruling our hearts, to refuse to be mastered by the fear demanded by the worldly culture around us.

Consistently: One great image of this Pope's consistency in preaching the Gospel is his forgiveness of Ali Aga who tried to assassinate him. Pope John Paul II didn't preach one way when things went well for him, and another when they didn't. He preached the same truth, regardless of who was listening, who was betraying, who was shooting (in this case literally) at him.

In the same way, another image was his suffering from Parkinson's in the last years of his life. Again, he preached the same unchanging Gospel. His own suffering added a personal depth to his imitation of Christ, to be sure, but the Good News remained. It continued to be Good for the same reasons, and his own illness was part of that Goodness, not opposed to it.

This kind of consistency is easy to admire as an ideal. But striving for it in practice means ever deeper conversion of heart. It requires a real and personal commitment to carry the Cross, however and going wherever Christ wants us. This commitment will not be rewarded by the world. Sometimes, perversely, it's also not rewarded in the Church, because we're all human and we can't hermetically seal out either concupiscence or some of the attitudes of the world. (Tangentially, how dangerous is it to mistake the consequences of our pride for evidence of being a "martyr" within the Church! Quod Deus advertat.) Simplicity, humility, and patience are the keys here. And a really good spiritual director. And, yes, even with these, easier said than done.

Joyfully: When we read Abp Dolan's book "Called to be Holy" in Colloquium last year, most of us were struck by what he said about joy and reliability in ministry. Pope John Paul II exemplified this very well. No matter what he was doing, or for whom, and even in his serious illness, joy in Christ's love was a tangible aspect of his ministry. Again, this is a very high ideal that demands serious, hard work against concupiscence and pride in our interior life. But this is precisely the work of carrying the Cross with Christ, of kenosis for the sake of the exaltation promised: "He did not deem equality with God something to be grasped at, but emptied Himself...."

The foundation of this kind of visible joy is gratitude. Can we be thankful for the Cross that we bear with Christ? It's easy to be thankful for blessings, and to return love for love. But as Christ says, "even pagans" do this. Those who belong to Christ are called to more, to give back only love for fear, hate, and indifference; to be grateful for suffering. Those who are called to Holy Orders have to show the faithful that this is possible, because they're certainly not going to learn it from the world (though of course they also learn it from each other, not only from us). So we must cultivate gratitude, by actually thanking God for every gift, whether we experience that gift as a blessing or as a burden.

Finally, it's no accident that this beatification is taking place on Divine Mercy Sunday. Not only did this pope approve and promote this devotion, which is so well fitted to our own times, but also God's mercy and providence were undeniably at work in choosing him when He did, and in sustaining him throughout his pontificate. Deo gratias! So, as deacons and future deacons, may the example and intercession of Blessed Pope John Paul II inspire us to ever more fearless, consistent, and joyful proclamation of the Good News of our Lord Jesus Christ! Joyous Easter!