They who have been made deacons, declaring when they were ordained that they must marry, because they were not able to abide so, and who afterwards have married, shall continue in their ministry, because it was conceded to them by the bishop. But if any were silent on this matter, undertaking at their ordination to abide as they were, and afterwards proceeded to marriage, these shall cease from the diaconate.
Celibacy had made inroads so that even deacons were greatly encouraged to follow this lifestyle. The canon addresses what to do if single men came forward to be ordained. If he stated forthrightly that he was unwilling to remain celibate, he could be ordained. If he acknowledged his intention of celibacy and was ordained but married later, he was to be removed from his position. The difference between the two cases is demonstrated in their character. The former was honest, knowing himself enough to come forward with his intentions. The latter was caught up in pride acceding to a commitment with its spiritual prestige welling inside and in the eyes of the other believers.
The latter's action was identical to what happened to Ananias and Sapphira (Acts 5:1-11) who made a donation under false pretenses to receive honor from others for giving. In both that incident and this canon, the decision was fully under the perpetrator's control. Both could withhold something with the Lord's full approval without being considered somehow less spiritual or dedicated (Acts 5:3-4). Yet because of spiritual pride perceived in the dedicatory act, they both sought the glory for themselves and were left to the consequences of their decisions.
Celibacy had made inroads so that even deacons were greatly encouraged to follow this lifestyle. The canon addresses what to do if single men came forward to be ordained. If he stated forthrightly that he was unwilling to remain celibate, he could be ordained. If he acknowledged his intention of celibacy and was ordained but married later, he was to be removed from his position. The difference between the two cases is demonstrated in their character. The former was honest, knowing himself enough to come forward with his intentions. The latter was caught up in pride acceding to a commitment with its spiritual prestige welling inside and in the eyes of the other believers.
The latter's action was identical to what happened to Ananias and Sapphira (Acts 5:1-11) who made a donation under false pretenses to receive honor from others for giving. In both that incident and this canon, the decision was fully under the perpetrator's control. Both could withhold something with the Lord's full approval without being considered somehow less spiritual or dedicated (Acts 5:3-4). Yet because of spiritual pride perceived in the dedicatory act, they both sought the glory for themselves and were left to the consequences of their decisions.
No comments:
Post a Comment