Posted by Leo on 4/3/2008, 6:16 pm, in reply to "Re: Discretion and denial cannot overcome demographics."
Harry,
I don't want to wander too deep into this one, but:
1. I believe in the OCA, AOA, and GOA at least, maybe others here too, clergy have a role, at least alongside lay parish reps, in electing, nominating, recommending, or commenting upon, candidates for the Episcopate.
2. I think I've read that the Jerusalem Patriarchate considers some 'mere' priests members of its Ruling Synod, ie, not only Bishops. Of course, how you get such an appointment, I don't know.
3. Were alot of Orthodox bishops widowers in 'the old days' really? I don't have the info, but I know the idea and supposedly the experience after a certain point in Church history, was that most should be sufficiently-long-term monastics - not "bachelor priests" or "ornamental archimandrites" in the world, as Abp LAZAR Puhalo calls them pejoratively and wonders why they don't want to get married or enter a monastery, but actual 'monastery monastics' - because long-term monastics would have alot of experience more-intensively fighting the passions, hopefully even have achieved/received Theosis ... monasteries being, ideally, great spiritual and moral centers chock full of potential good bishops - even in the tradition of those Holy Fathers who had to be actually dragged to the Bishop's Throne! If one isn't sure any of this is still the case in today's Orthodox Church almost anywhere in the world, well, St. Symeon the New Theologian said 1,000 years ago that at some point before his lifetime either the Church didn't have enough bishop-candidates who were Theos'ed, or people rejected them as bishops. The problem may be that old, that we have to deal with ... all of us.
The point of Theos'ed bishops is that their first job is as a real spiritual father to their clergy, monastics, and faithful, guides for them to Somewhere he's already been, ie, Salvation. Administration, politics, and everything else are secondary to that. Maybe that's why some of the holiest have done more for the Church in retirement than even as active Ruling Hierarchs, eg, St. Tikhon of Zadonsk and St. Theophan the Recluse.... The idea wasn't in the first place that they 'have experience of what it's like to be married and fathers and work in the world,' nor that they have experience "as students," but that they have experience of how to get to heaven, to pass on to the rest of us. After all, everybody has a bishop; not everybody has a super-holy renowned spiritual father available in a monastery nearby!
The problem, if there is one, may not be Orthodox bishops "ordained young never married," though it may be as St. Symeon said way back then, bishops not as advanced in holiness as previously. Remembering that for us Orthodox, "holiness" is unity with God's Energies, including His giftedness for spiritual counsel, teaching, administration, leadership, inspiration, collaboration with clergy, laity, and fellow bishops, standing guard against error, attraction of people, their children, grandchildren, etc., to the Faith, a certain moral and fiscal trustworthiness, humility, and all the rest.
So the system is there. The question is, is it working, and if not, why not? And we all may bear some blame for it, or our forebears - bishops, clergy, laity, monasteries.
(As for the Latin Church, they have never, at least not since ancient times, since the mandatory celibacy rule came in AD 600-1300 or so, relied upon widowed men for clergy. They've always been relatively few and 'extra,' "late vocations" as they still call them.)
Responses:
