tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4213316015209503694.post236383524309954802..comments2024-01-22T01:52:37.473-06:00Comments on RENEGADE TRADS: Clothing and CasteA Sinnerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05083094677310915678noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4213316015209503694.post-23138664082096212792010-05-27T22:58:03.346-05:002010-05-27T22:58:03.346-05:00Well, then, you would make a great Jesuit. I'v...Well, then, you would make a great Jesuit. I've been telling you for "ages."Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4213316015209503694.post-81778041717811340222010-05-03T22:26:41.800-05:002010-05-03T22:26:41.800-05:00Very true, an indelible character is a kind of &qu...Very true, an indelible character is a kind of "ontological change," but not every ontological change is necessarily an indelible <i>sacramental</i> character. The only thing I was talking about was the potential for wiggle room (which is only my personal discomfort which I'm not trying to impose on anyone else, sorry if I came off that way); other than that I really think we're on the same page.<br /><br />Btw, I gave an <a href="http://athaumaturgus.wordpress.com/2010/05/03/wearing-a-collar-on-the-catholic-boat/" rel="nofollow">anecdote related to this thread</a> on my blog. Wasn't sure if it was appropriate to post here.Agostino Taumaturgohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08187514355327479915noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4213316015209503694.post-85758554452322490562010-05-03T17:18:09.439-05:002010-05-03T17:18:09.439-05:00Yeah, still I would argue that ANY indelible chara...Yeah, still I would argue that ANY indelible character imprinted is by definition an "ontological change"...and as you say, I don't see why a priest should have to be always in clerics even when not doing priestly things when a deacon doesn't have do even when he IS doing diaconal things usually.A Sinnerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05083094677310915678noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4213316015209503694.post-19743622004968565692010-05-03T15:04:42.962-05:002010-05-03T15:04:42.962-05:00Good point, and I'm glad you posted the priest...Good point, and I'm glad you posted the priest's exact words; it helps to give context.<br /><br />I would say that this is why I've never been too comfortable with the term "ontological change," though. It's not specific enough (e.g. you mention the possibility of it being weasled into "not the same thing as the 'indelible character'"). In either case, the character of the diaconate isn't the same as the priesthood, so I take back what I said about formal heresy and humbly apologize.<br /><br />However, I still can't see how pointing out the difference in sacramental character between the two Orders has any bearing on whether one should be allowed and/or required to wear clerics. A cleric is a cleric, period. But then, I've never been one for "priestly Pride plain and simple," either.Agostino Taumaturgohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08187514355327479915noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4213316015209503694.post-75223639755618542332010-05-03T14:25:50.808-05:002010-05-03T14:25:50.808-05:00Most of the comments in Fr Z's combox are drec...Most of the comments in Fr Z's combox are dreck, plain and simple.<br /><br />I wonder whether the poster who claimed that deacons aren't ontologically changed was thinking of the recently released motu proprio, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omnium_In_Mentem" rel="nofollow">Omnium in Mentem</a> which says that deacons do not receive the power to act <i>in persona Christi capitis</i> (in the person of Christ the head) but rather <i>vim populo Dei serviendi in diaconia liturgiae, verbi et caritatis</i> -- the power to serve the people of God in a servant-ministry [diaconia] of the liturgy, of the word and of charity.<br /><br />An ontological change, of course, but of a different character than in ordination to the presbyterate.cor ad cor loquiturhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12451088364358322952noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4213316015209503694.post-89138244838886758792010-05-03T12:08:44.036-05:002010-05-03T12:08:44.036-05:00I might accuse him too, but just to make sure we&#...I might accuse him too, but just to make sure we're dotting our i's and crossing our t's before making such a claim, I will point out that his exact words were:<br /><br />"In addition, there is no ontological change upon receiving the diaconate as there is with priesthood."<br /><br />I can't see this as anything but a grave misunderstanding used to support an elitist view of priests-on-a-pedastal. <br /><br />But he might try to weasel into arguing that "ontological change" isn't the same as "indelible character" or something like that.<br /><br />What's clear is that these men have been convinced that they are "special" and set-apart and have eaten that up with their itching ears.<br /><br />It's priestly Pride plain and simple.A Sinnerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05083094677310915678noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4213316015209503694.post-48989468708259290622010-05-03T11:48:31.911-05:002010-05-03T11:48:31.911-05:00I think I'm gonna go on record here and just s...I think I'm gonna go on record here and just say flat-out that I don't agree with the whole "all clerics, all the time" schtick.<br /><br />I do support wearing clerics most of the time, particularly when "on the job," which would probably be about 85% of the time. But (and I speak from experience here) the reality is that there are places where you can do the most work without wearing a collar, because the collar carries with it a load of baggage and prejudices that will stop people from listening to you before you so much as open your mouth. In this case, I think that the argument for "making oneself available" is seriously flawed.<br /><br />As for me, I tend to wear my collar when going on ecclesiastical business, particularly when meeting people for the first time. Around my own church, though, I don't wear it as often as I should, largely because they all know who I am (I've been friends with 90% of my current congregants for several years), and it's not like they're not going to see me in full vestments saying <i>Introibo ad altare Dei</i> a few minutes later, anyway. So I'd say that my approach is largely situational.<br /><br />Btw, as for the priest who said the diaconate does not possess an indelible character, I would accuse him or formal heresy. He was taught better than this in seminary, hence he has no excuse. That, and it also irks me, because it calls into question what he might be feeding his flock regarding other matters.Agostino Taumaturgohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08187514355327479915noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4213316015209503694.post-4354829772987835192010-05-03T10:51:23.650-05:002010-05-03T10:51:23.650-05:00Well, what did we expect? It shows the depths of t...Well, what did we expect? It shows the depths of the problem with the priesthood right now though. <br /><br />The Exceptionalism those people seem to believe a priest is priveleged to (and the disparaging of deacons to the point of one priest claiming deacons don't experience an ontological change when they most certainly do receive an indelible Character) is absolutely mind-boggling but also, sadly, not surprising at all.A Sinnerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05083094677310915678noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4213316015209503694.post-41159229996120854542010-05-03T10:03:48.170-05:002010-05-03T10:03:48.170-05:00Looks like Fr. Z had a field day with your comment...Looks like Fr. Z had a field day with your comment. hahaTonynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4213316015209503694.post-78328696419041753022010-05-02T16:35:10.162-05:002010-05-02T16:35:10.162-05:00I agree with you. And I don't know why Fr Zuh...I agree with you. And I don't know why Fr Zuhlsdorf opens these "debates", since he and his claque invariably squash any disagreement with his opening thesis. <br /><br />I do think that "clericalism" has become a stick for each side to beat the other with. Traddies say that extraordinary ministers of holy communion are an example of "clericalism" because laypeople are trying to act like priests. Libruls say that the priest who wears a cassock to the grocers is "clericalist" because he's trying to set himself apart from the laity. Maybe the word isn't all that useful anymore...<br /><br />There does seem to be a generational divide. In the community of Jesuits I work in, it's the younger priests who are almost always in clericals; the older ones wear them on Sunday and when performing pastoral functions, but otherwise slip into "civilian" clothes or at least remove their white collars...cor ad cor loquiturhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12451088364358322952noreply@blogger.com