| Answer: You
raise a very interesting point!
You seem to be saying, and please correct me if I
am wrong, that there a Bishop "must" have a wife, according to
scripture and the canons. In actual fact, the reason the Bishop must be
a man with one wife and the reason for this church law, is to prevent
those who were divorced and remarried from ascending to the episcopal
ranks. This law could therefore be rephrased to say, "A bishop must
be a man of NO MORE than one wife and cannot have been divorced and
remarried." This is not intended to say that a bishop somehow needs
to be married in order to be consecrated bishop. The great Bishops of
the Church, St John Chrysostom, Basil the Great and many others were
never married and many were monastics.
Also, the early Church allowed married men to
become Deacons, Priests and Bishops and this only BEFORE ordination to
the Sub-Diaconate.
Soon after the fourth century, the Church began to
admit to the Episcopate only unmarried clergy of the monastic state.
When, for example, the Ukrainian Metropolitan of Canada, Ilarion
Ohienko, was consecrated Archbishop of Kholm in Ukraine, he was not a
monastic. However, as part of his sacerdotal ordination and episcopal
consecration, he was tonsured into the monastic state as part of this
tradition.
The Orthodox Catholic Church has always seen a
close connection between the vocation of a Monk and that of a Bishop in
that both are called to constant prayer for the Church of Christ.
Historically, both Monks and Bishops have been open to mystical
experiences through their deep prayer lives. They have both taught the
Church through their mystical insights into Church teachings, Scripture
etc. For example, the liturgical services for the deceased in the
Orthodox Church were derived from visions about the afterlife that were
received at once by St Macarius, Archbishop of Alexandria and St
Macarius the Hermit who are depicted together in Icons. This is also why
Bishop-Hierarchs and Monks were glorified as Saints soon after the early
Age of Martyrdom came to a close in the fourth century:
They prayed all the time for the Church and the
World when they were alive, and it was believed they continued in their
vocation in Heaven. Thus, the connection between the two states of
Christian life was made and monastics became candidates for the
episcopate. This did not mean that the "White" clergy could
not aspire to the episcopate, but, once the monastic backdrop of the
episcopacy was established with its incumbent celibacy, the
"White" married clergy could not become members of the
episcopate.
Traditionally, married clergy were always assigned
to parish work with people in their daily struggles etc. The role of the
wife of the priest, the Presbytera (Pani-Maty, Dobrodiyka in the Slavic
tradition) was and is very important. She shared in her husband's
priestly calling and work. She supports him and is often the real link
between the parishioners and the Priest. The "Black" or
monastic clergy were reserved to the spiritual needs of the monastery
alone.
Today, Orthodox theologians are re-examining these
questions. They often decry the fact that excellent candidates for the
episcopacy are being held back because they are married clergy. This
item has been placed firmly on the agenda for the next Ecumenical
Council of the Orthodox Church, whenever it occurs in the future. Given
the number of voices there are demanding for change to this rule (which
most certainly can be changed), it is highly likely the future will see
married men, once again, consecrated to the Orthodox Episcopate.
I think you are being rather harsh in stating that
the current rule of celibacy for Bishops in the Orthodox Church means
that the Church has fallen into schism or heresy. As we have seen,
celibacy became the norm not in and of itself, but as part of the
eschatological and spiritual connection made between the monastic
vocation and that of the Episcopate. That doesn't nullify the earlier
Church canon allowing married clergy to receive Episcopal consecration -
this issue is entirely within the competence of the Church to decide in
different times of her historical life and our Lord certainly gave His
Church the power to do this through His Apostles and the Bishops who are
their successors.
Our Lord also praised the celibate life, without
imposing it on anyone who "Could not receive it." St Paul
certainly tells Christians to try and live the celibate life, but not if
the alternative is for them "to burn." Celibacy, although
practiced in a different way in the East than in the Western Catholic
Church, is a charism of the Spirit, as St Paul is wont to tell us. It is
an opportunity for those who practice it to experience an intense
devotion to God in the Holy Trinity through the mystical life of the
Church of Christ and Her life of prayer, fasting,meditation and
spiritual reading. For those who can and sometimes must "receive
it," this way of life can be a very beautiful experience bringing
them, like Peter, John and James, to the Mountain with Christ to see and
experience His Transfiguration in their lives in a special way.
Dr. Alexander Roman
  |
