Over the last few years, in working with young adults, seminarians, and those considering ordination, a few things of note have emerged.
First, there are many, many people looking to have their faith be not something apart from the rest of their life or a distraction amidst a panoply of distractions. They are seeking a way for their faith to form their life and for their life to matter in the deepest ways possible. Second, many of these people have been told “you should become a priest” or the like because they enjoy serving others or they have a way with people or because they are kind – all good traits in a priest. Third, the Church does not have the capacity to employ, full-time, the many, many caring and wonderful people who feel a call to ministry. Fourth, our communities are longing for a relational model of Church that blends depth of tradition with the strength of real relationship and authenticity.
It seems to me that we might be entering a cultural moment in which we should consider the Religious life (monastic vocations) and the diaconate as the ideal means to form leaders equipped to engage the realities of contemporary society.
There are models for bi-vocational ministry being explored around the Church – encouraging priests to serve as priests while employed in other work as well. This is a fine thing yet I am not sure that it is the only answer to the needs of both the Church and the culture around us.
I firmly believe that intentional Religious Communities and a robust Diaconate are key to the rejuvenation of a vibrant Christian presence all across the country. The need is for missionary communities of prayer, service, and sacrificial giving.
In a culture in which fewer and fewer people will simply wander into our churches to check us out, it is vital that we build up and equip a generation of missionaries whose work is to make the Gospel known as a lived experience of joyful offering and not simply something to be read or heard. This may be a way for the world to see and know that Christ is raising up a Church that will find its locus and heart in the communities all around us.
This work begins with daily prayer and the Sacraments – but the churches that serve as the heart of this kind of disciplined approach to engaging the Holy would not be the final destination but the launching point for those trained and equipped to be the presence of Christ for those they meet and serve. I imagine local Churches serving as a sort of mother ship where people are fed and trained for missionary service.
We need two deacons for every priest in every Church – at least. We should be finding those people who have a passion for proclaiming the Gospel and for serving those whom society would ignore and making them deacons whose mission is not full-time employment but is full-time ministry. These deacons would become the leaders and catalysts for evangelical and missionary service in our communities. Moreover, they would be the conscience of our churches as they ever call us to deeper companionship and self-offering.
These deacons would serve at the heart of local communities of those taking religious vows. Whether full-time, professed monastics or part of neo-monastic communities we should also be looking for those in our communities who are yearning for a deeper connection to other faithful people and are longing for their faith to ground their approach to work, relationship, and service. These kinds of communities could then become the heart of congregations longing for connection to the communities around them but fearful or unsure of taking the next step.
There are many for whom the full-time ordination process and seminary are not the appropriate route. There are also those being fast-tracked to the priesthood who have little sense that they want to preach, teach, and administer the Sacraments. They do, however, have a powerful and holy desire to live and serve with faith and passion. We do them a disservice by funneling them into the priesthood because we have falsely equated ministry with priesthood.
We need passionate and powerful advocates for Christ in the communities around us – we need deacons and lay religious equipped for holy living. They can be, in our communities, the kinds of Christians that people never knew existed whose concern is not institutional maintenance or Church membership but is a faith lived so eloquently and authentically that their very being is evangelical.
This kind of work will require that we shift the heart of our congregational leadership from our vestries and priests to our deacons and lay religious leaders. These communities must not be projects of parishes but the heart of them. They will have to have voice and vote and serve as a voice for the community in parish deliberations and as the prayerful heart of any parish’s discernment and growth in discipleship. They could be an inspiration for the congregation’s deepening sense of their own vocation as evangelists and servants.
When we talk about the “discernment process” in our dioceses, I hope that we’ll consider discernment for the Diaconate and for religious orders to be as high in our priority list as we do candidates for the priesthood. Ultimately, it will be these servant-leaders who are creatively making Christ known in the communities around us who will re-center the Church and draw others to come and see.
Robert
A Desert Father 
Amen. Alleluia. Thank you. Let’s get started!
Yes! We absolutely need to overhaul our understanding of ministry in this (and other) churches. By the time that somebody reaches the formal discernment process, they must have already done an immense amount of leg work in discernment. When one reaches out to the diocese to begin discernment, one pretty much has to know in which direction she is pointed–priesthood, religious life, or the diaconate. With an overhaul in discernment and calling, we might begin much earlier on by asking questions, “WHAT is God calling me to?”, rather than by making assertions “God IS calling me to ______.”
I think we also need to dedicate ourselves to a more holistic and authentic understanding of religious life. This could begin by differentiating between vowed and non-vowed communities. The Episcopal Church has an overwhelming number of “orders,” which seem to be defined by the wearing of a religious habit, the use of traditional filial titles, and praying the Divine Office, as opposed to being defined by vows (celibacy seems to be the most “adapted”), life in community, and religious obedience.
I also think that we might begin differentiating communities by their charisms (monastic, apostolic, contemplative, etc.), which are not all the same, despite falling under the very broad umbrella of religious life. This will allow discerners and committees/vocation ministers the ability to present the rich multiplicity of religious options in the Church. A woman called to an apostolic religious life, but only presented with monastic options, might well end up missing out on a life of whole fulfillment.
That is all to say, yes! Amen!
Father Robert…. With much thanks for letting people know there are other options to serve other than as ordained priests and deacons. One question though – Are you saying that deacons should head Religious Communities? At least, that’s how I’m reading this. “These deacons would serve at the heart of local communities of those taking religious vows.” While we have deacons in our community, as do many Religious Orders and Communities, they aren’t necessarily the leadership. Not quite sure what you mean by “serve at the heart of.” Thanks Br Ron Fox, BSG Chicago IL
This is a great question, Ron – thanks for the chance for clarification. I think that it might be easier, in some places, for a deacon to help marshal energy and focus of local congregations around forming communities of service. In many places, our deacons have strong connections to local service organizations and have a sense of the needs of local communities. I think that currently existing orders or lay religious or neo-monastics with a strong sense of vocation and direction would not need this kind of organizational boost – but in some locations it might be helpful to have a deacon helping to coordinate the effort to get a new community started. They also serve, in many places, as the visible link between the life of the the institutional parish and the community the parish serves so might be able to offer a helping hand in launching the community and providing moral and spiritual support, particularly to those new to the work of service. So my thinking is less about them leading the community than about them providing needed and valuable experience to folks embarking on a venture of service and mission.
In times like these, I have to chuckle, since we’ve come to a place where an ordained person “serving” any community is a euphemism for that individual leading the community or governing them. What you’re describing, Robert, is a situation where people are really, authentically serving. And yes, while that service may involve a deacon offering direction to a vowed monastic or neo-monastic community, it does not mean that the deacon must govern them, too. And that’s a difficult shift for people to accept; that the four orders of the church will start to level out and become collaborative, rather than be hierarchical for purposes of governance.
On that point, if I can get up on a soapbox, I’m glad that you addressed this trend where people have been funneled into the priesthood because that was synonymous with ministry. That happened to me when I began my discernment, despite my ardent objection that I am called to the diaconate. I ended up leaving that faith community over the disagreement. But as for my soapbox, as the orders begin to level out, people can discern according to their vocation and work their way into the ministry that they are actually called to, rather than get themselves priested because they want that kind of power in the Church. And that goes back to the point I made earlier; whether it’s deacons and religious communities or priests in charge of parishes, I appreciate when we can use the word “serve” and have it actually mean “serve.” While it may take longer to then add “leading” or “governing,” I think it’s worth the time to say what we mean, rather than just using church-speak.
I have thought about the diaconate or a semi monastic life many, many times over the years, especially as I continue to get older and see little to make me think a return to seminary or the discernment process is on the short horizon.
These are interesting concepts presented. The vocation of the Deacon carries specific roles within the clergy, many aspects of that vocation give the Church voice in the world. Traditional Religious Life (monasticism in varied forms) also brings gifts to the life of the Church. From the middle of the last century there has been a revival of Religious Life outside of the monastic tradition, it is called the Apostolic Tradition, the canons of the church calls us Christian Communities. We are ordinary people, called to live extraordinary lives in our everyday settings. Our aim is not to be a new form of monasticism, nor a support group for the clergy. Religious Life is a vocation unto itself, the way each community teaches it’s members to live is dependent on the Ethos and Rule of that community.
The vocation of the clergy and that of the religious can be combined, but the aspect of each vocation has a life of its own. Our community teaches its members that we are not social workers who wear a cross, rather our primary expression of vocation is a faithful life of prayer, out of which flows a life of service in the name of the Gospel.
I have been in religious Life since 1961, have served the church in many capacities over the years. I treasure my vocation, and am not a member of the clergy, by choice. I think when combing clerical functions with Religious Life it is important to respect the unique gift of each vocation.
Having been a deacon for nearly 20 years now as I have also enjoyed a career in healthcare consulting, sales, and talent development (this is what being bivocational looks like), I couldn’t agree more.
I went through the “discernment process” twice — in the first, when I wanted to be a priest, I actually described my ministry in terms of the classical diaconate and everyone said “sure, you’d make a great priest.” In my second, when I realized I was really drawn to the diaconate (having finally taken time to understand it), I educated my parish discernment committee about the diaconate and they said, “sure, you’d make a great deacon.”
Where I’m headed with this is that I think we need a much larger conversation about ministry — lay people, bishops, priests, and deacons — that is uncoupled from the notion of employment.
And unless we know about the rich variety of ways people live out their vocation, unless we meet monastics and deacons and bishops — and lay people doing their work to the glory of God — we’ll think the priesthood is all there is and these other paths are simply alternatives to the altar.
Who are you called to be in relation to the community? What pattern of life will feed your life and ministry and growth in God?
Then, and only then, do we ask whether the church — a specific parish, diocese, agency, whoever — has needs that would warrant employing someone to fill them.
But do we dare to let that conversation lead us?
What if someone’s truly called to be a bivocational bishop? Do we get out of their way and prepare them for that office *now* — not 20 years from now after seminary, two ordinations, and a career in the church?
What if someone is truly called to be an urban monastic? Do we recognize that paying them a salary helps us build a center around which lay people can gather to practice the Daily Office and lectio divina?
I’m a pretty traditional guy — I teach Episcopal 101 and lead EfM at my parish — but I think we don’t know our own Christian tradition well enough to understand all the ways we could possibly shape our life together in Christ.
Lots of good ideas here. I think it is important to clarify the distinction between deacons and vowed religious and their respective calling. Deacons are part of the hierarchical church, and share those strengths and limits, so that their ability to bear prophetic witness to the church is limited (but certainly not eliminated) by their comittment of obedience to their bishop and the priorities of the institutional church.
While religious are very much part of the chuch, their primary obligation is to the “god quest”. This will often draw them into prophetic witness and notable acts of selfless caring, but their path may not coincide with the immediate concerns of the institutional church.
This distinction is explained much more clearly by Sandra Schnieders, IHM in her excellent trilogy on religious life. She’s writing in a Roman Catholic context, in which these frictions arise more often than in TEC, but they are important for us to keep in mind as well.
I suspect Fr Robert is speaking as much or more about neo-monastic communities where there is a more explicit and focused commitment to radical hands-on service in the world–not that classical monastics don’t do that, but there is a different emphasis in neo-monasticism, especially when contrasted w/ enclosed or semi-enclosed orders. So the idea of a deacon as head of the community makes more sense in that context, IMO. There is still a polity issue, especially since deacons answer directly to the bishop while classical orders are not part of a diocesan hierarchy.
Thank you Robert for talking about an issue that I have been thinking about and dealing with for some time. I felt the call to ministry over 35 years ago, but pressures of finance and family have kept me from actively pursuing the ordained ministry. I, as have many others, have given where I can, but could have used a community and a church as a support behind me. We need better support for our lay ministries in doing the work of the Church. My dream has been to build a retreat-center/conference-center/camp here in the mountains of Southern California and have it operated not by a “staff”, but by a community of lay persons committed the ministry of hospitality. Your vision of where the Church should be going fits pretty well with mine. So, where do we go from here?
As a Deacon, I agree with you that there should be more deacons enabling the work of the Gospel in the church, they set an example and would raise up lay ministry. But, if a person has a calling for priestly ministry sending them down the path to diaconal ministry just because there are too many priests out there can be extremely damaging to their effectiveness as a deacon. The longing for a ministry to which they were called can be a deterrent to their performance in the ministry to which they are steered. The better way is one you mentioned also, bivocationalism in the priesthood. The celebration of the Eucharist for them will be enabled, yet they still will be performing a service ministry by virtue of their bivocationalism. They will also set an example of selfless service to their congregation.
Here in No. America, between TEC and CoC, there are over 3,000 deacons. TEC has been ordaining people into the diaconate since the 1970’s. IOW, we have a tradition and a resume to explore if you want to consider us for leadership roles (btw, we’re already doing it). The religious communities is another matter, and we have much to learn about the new lay organizations in the RCC as well as the new monastic movement in the Emergent churches. We may really shorten our learning curve if we visit them.
Hmm…i must admit that there are a few things that, um, I find a bit disturbing? May I address them, please?
I don’t think it’s a good idea to shift leadership away from the vestry and place it in the hands of a clericized select few. That’s not us; it’s a prescription for revolt from the laity, as they should. Also, discernment is supposed to be about what one is called to, not a thumb up/down on priestly ordination only. And also, there are over 3,000 deacons right now in leadership roles between TEC and CoCanada; they’ve been around since the 70’s; we might want to ask *them* about the nature and role of their vocation? Lastly, we might want to visit lay organizations in the RCC and the new monastic communities of the Emergent churches. They can help us shorten our learning curve about non-ordained ministry. Thx for listening!
This is a very important discussion. I agree that we need a much larger conversation in the Church about Christian vocation. I am a mission-minded lay person who is not discerning a call to ordained ministry. Only recently have I begun to understand that I am truly engaged in discernment of my own lay ministry by praying, intentional listening, asking self-awakening questions and in determining what is faithful action. We need support and guidance on this journey. Thank you.
I will chime in here, with an another amen. Many of the folks who have come to our community were pushed toward diaconate or ordination, but felt they were being called in another direction. A challenge is that many in discernment and leadership groups do not have religious life (in whatever form) on their mind to suggest to folks.
I have read several books about the Emergent(ing) Church by Phyllis Tickle and others but I don’t remember any specifics about, “…new monastic communities of the Emergent Churches” mentioned in one or two of the replies to this post. Can anyone point me to any concrete examples of how they are organized / operate in a book or other publication?
I think the main concern should rather be about ministry, and about forgetting the “leadership” thing. The Churches have unfortunately embraced a secular approach, which is leadership. No.
The solution is not two deacons for a full-time-stipendiary priest that hass been trained a little bit too long. The solution is a high amount of priests, all non-stipendiary, especially for the sacramental tasks of the pastoral care; a high amount of deacons, all non-stipendiary, for non-sacramental tasks of the pastoral and social work. The tasks would be shared by several individuals who would earn their living from secular jobs.
As for the neo-monastic or monastic-like orders, they are full of people whose celibate is just a personal problem. I bet those are the best examples of giving and serving. On the contrary, non-stipendiary clergy, as well as good standing mature families would be the best ways of giving and serving.