Caring for Orthodox priests

[Orthodox Pilgrim]

Is there an organization in America that is pan-Orthodox and devoted to caring for Orthodox priests?

An Orthodox Priest Benevolent Association, if you will.

I would be interested in learning about/joining such a group. Thank you.

[Orthodox Pilgrim]

OK, let's assume there isn't one.

Do people think we could use one?

A group that could, in a confidential and professional manner, comfort and advise priests who, through no fault of their own, find themselves stressed out by church politics, parish councils, hierarchs or simply the high cost of health care.

Of particular concern would be priests with families; for them, their problems become their wives' and children's.

[Petros L.]

That is what a spiritual father is for. Even priests have confessors, or should.

[Orthodox Pilgrim]

I would disagree with that; although I don't believe you meant to be flip. Certainly, all of us require confessors. Don't we need physicians for our bodies? Teachers for our intellectual development? Friends with whom we can share grief as well as joy?

Certainly within the monastic life, on the grounds of a monastery, a spiritual father will fulfill more of these needs; but even then, not all. God has provided all of us with the opportunity to interact, and reflect his Grace back upon each other; within a monastic environment, yes, but even more, outside of it.

How many priests are out there, at this very moment, being attacked by an ornery parish council on one hand, and an unsympathetic hierarch on the other??

Priests are there to shepherd and comfort their flock; but who comforts the priests?

[Fr Raphael Vereshack]

Dear Orthodox Pilgrim,

Perhaps it would be of help if there was some sort of "Orthodox Priest Benevolent Association" & maybe there already are official programs in various jurisdictions (or on the diocesan level) that we aren't aware of.

Apart from this however the need for a spiritual father is crucial especially at the difficult times that you point to. It can make all the difference in the world. Of course a bishop can also be an important source of support but more often than not it is ones' spiritual father that really brings you through the fire.

Another 'support group' to mention is the diocesan clergy meeting. This is extremely important not only for attending to official business but also to create personal connections with others and to break down the sense of isolation we often suffer from in Orthodoxy.

In Christ- Fr Raphael

[Matthew Panchisin]

I would be remiss to mention that Presvyteres comfort and are a blessing.

In Christ,

Matthew Panchisin

[Orthodox Pilgrim]

I agree Fr. Raphael that brother clergy can be of help to a priest who is "troubled" or in trouble. They can relate to the problems of being a priest; and also, many of them can relate to the difficulties of being a married priest, in a way that a hierarch or monastic never could. Indeed, I believe that having married clergy is a true blessing for us Orthodox.

But they face additional strains and burdens, for in addition to their flock, they also have a family to worry about and take care of. I have also, unfortunately, seen where a priest's family is "used" by those who would try to harm or manipulate a priest. Under duress, an archimandrite or monk might well say, "Perhaps parish priest is not my calling; I will return to the monastery". He always has a way out. Not so for the married priest. His choice is to (naturally) endure and make his family endure as well.

I don't believe any of us should be afraid to suffer for our Lord; but to ignore or inflict suffering on the Presvyteres and children is a terrible thing.

If you doubt what I say, speak to the sons of priests and ask how many of them have changed their minds about entering the priesthood after watching what their fathers have gone through.

[Kosmas Damianides]

Dear Everyone,
I think that a support group for priests is very good idea. I also think that there should also be a group for priest's wives which they can confide in and share their views and offer support for each other.

I think that it can be more stressful for the wife of a priest than for the priest himself, in most cases.

The prist's wife often has to deal with family and her husband's problems. She has to be very strong and supportive, but at the same time have the courage to correct and even guide the priest on appropriate actions and decisions. i think that we often overlook the importance of the presbytera or priest-wife. She truly has to be a pillar in the family.

In Christ
Kosmas

[Joanna N.]

A little known resource for priests, with the exact purpose of providing spiritual and emotional support for clergy and their families, is the St Silouan Retreat Center in North Carolina, run by Fr John Breck and his wife Lynn. It is sposored by the OCA - Fr Breck is a well-known theologian and he and his wife have long experience in providing spiritual direction and psychological support to clergy of all vocations.

Our parish wanted to give the priest a gift and we chose to offer a week at this retreat center for our parish priest and his wife - it was much appreciated.

[Vasilis Kirikos]

"St Silouan Retreat Center in North Carolina".

That is good news. How long has it been around? I have a friend who is a former Orthodox priest; The poor man had a problem with his church council and was quite literally "put out" (Russian parish; I'll not say where). He had to sleep in an abandoned car for about 6 months (most of it was during the winter months!; I did not know him at that time). He managed to get married and find another job (not as a priest of course). I know of another priest (Antiochian) who's entire family was locked out of their parish home (the poor man had 5 children!); this was due to the parish council splitting into two factions; half the members moved to another church building and the other half went go back to the old church. To make matters worse they had already finished building a new church; but with the parish membership split they were not able to pay for the new building and it was sold to some muslims and is now a mosque (vomit). I have little doubt that being an Orthodox priest is crucifixion on a daily basis. Being an Orthodox priest has got to be one of the most difficult jobs around. It is about time someone did something to provide some kind of insurance such unfortunate priests who have been handed raw deals by their parish members. I did hear about one parish whose priest was able to pull something off to save himself. A faction wanted to get rid of him; and so they went to the bishop...HOWEVER THE BISHOP CALLED THE PRIEST AND ASKED HIM IF HE WANTED TO LEAVE AND HE SAID "NO". So the Bishop told these guys "he stays". So they were forced to keep him as their priest....but... what happened next is really rich....This very wise priest took it upon himself to surreptitiously look and did find another parish while still serving the first parish. He found one in another state...AND HE GAVE THE PARISH COUNCIL MEMBERS TWO WEEKS NOTICE....LOL..IT TOOK MONTHS FOR THOSE BAD BOYS TO FIND ANOTHER PRIEST FOR THAT CHRUCH; THEIR JUST DESERTS! Vasilis

[Leandros]

I have a friend who is a former Orthodox priest; The poor man had a problem with his church council and was quite literally "put out" (Russian parish; I'll not say where)….…A faction wanted to get rid of him; and so they went to the bishop...HOWEVER THE BISHOP CALLED THE PRIEST AND ASKED HIM IF HE WANTED TO LEAVE AND HE SAID "NO". So the Bishop told these guys "he stays". So they were forced to keep him as their priest....but... what happened next is really rich....This very wise priest took it upon himself to surreptitiously look and did find another parish while still serving the first parish.

Dear Friends,

There are Holy Canons (canon laws) in ORTHODOX Church. These Canons are the Constitution of the Church. Both clergymen –Bishops, Presbyters/Priests and Deacons - and laymen MUST follow the Canons, or else each local parish will become autonomous self-isolated brotherhood and the union of Church will become an abstract ideal.

A specific parish is One Body if only – and only if - both laity and clergy are under the blessings of a specific Bishop and in communion with all other Orthodox Christian Churches.

There are specific, written rules, which prescribe when and how a priest is ordained, how and when he is moved to another parish and how harmony is balanced between Bishop, Presbyters/Priests, Deacons and Laity in a parish.

Actions against, or outside of these Canons are considered as schisms or even in some cases as self-deportation from Church.

In case the issue is kept into the limits of a specific parish the suitable solution is provided from the respective Bishop. In case the issue is affecting many parishes in a greater fashion, or in the case of issues regarding a Bishop, a local Synod is converged to provide the solution. In every case the laity should participate in the procedure to provide the "resolution".

From the cases you mentioned, I understand that these parishes were without a Bishop, or that they functioned in an autonomous way by “church council” rule. This is not the Orthodox way of being a functional parish !

ONLY A BISHOP, OR A SYNOD, CAN BLESS/PERMIT THE WALK-OUT OF A PRIEST. THIS CAN NOT BE DONE FROM THE “CHURCH COUNCIL” ALONE, OR FROM THE PRIEST ALONE.

As you can see in the X Canon of the Holy and Ecumenical Seventh Council EVEN if a priest wants to go to a parish of another see to perform his ministration, then he MUST take the permit and blessing of both of his Bishop and of the Bishop of the other see. He is not loose or self appointed.

In my experience, most of the non-canonical cases that a Priest is abused by the “church council” are cases of schismatic churches that are self defined by the power of laity and they are Bishop-less or Bishop- indifferent brotherhoods rather, than genuine Orthodox Churches. These "brotherhoods"/churches defy every Canon of the Church and they twist them according to their own will. They never accept the synodic way of ruling and they think of all other orthodox churches that they are adulterated and for that they decide for themselves without being in communion and cooperation with any other Church.

From this cases, we can understand what tragedy, each specific schism, is for the Church!

From the Canons of the Holy and Ecumenical First Council of Nice:

Canon XVI.
"Neither presbyters, nor deacons, nor any others enrolled among the clergy, who, not having the fear of God before their eyes, nor regarding the ecclesiastical Canon, shall recklessly remove from their own church, ought by any means to be received by another church; but every constraint should be applied to restore them to their own parishes; and, if they will not go, they must be excommunicated. And if anyone shah dare surreptitiously to carry off and in his own Church ordain a man belonging to another, without the consent of his own proper bishop, from whom although he was enrolled in the clergy list he has seceded, let the ordination be void.
Ancient Epitome of Canon XVI.
Such presbyters or deacons as desert their own Church are not to be admitted into another, but are to be sent back to their own diocese. But if any bishop should ordain one who belongs to another Church without the consent of his own bishop, the ordination shall be cancelled."

From The Canons of the Holy and Ecumenical Seventh Council:

Canon X.
"That no cleric ought to leave his diocese and go into another without the knowledge of the Bishop.

Since certain of the clergy, misinterpreting the canonical constitutions, leave their own diocese and run into other dioceses, especially into this God-protected royal city, and take up their abode with princes, celebrating liturgies in their oratories, it is not permitted to receive such persons into any house or church without the license of their own Bishop and also that of the Bishop of Constantinople. And if any clerk shall do this without such license, and shah so continue, let him be deposed. With regard to those who have done this with the knowledge of the aforesaid Bishops, it is not lawful for them to undertake mundane and secular responsibilities, since this is forbidden by the sacred canons."

[Elias Young]

An okay account of what happened after the Bolshevik Revolution and demise of church polity in America can be found in the book "The American Orthodox Church: A History of Its Beginnings".

The nature of the local parish changed as it became a "tax exempt" institution and was then influenced by financial (thus local parish political) pressures.

Sad but true...the canons were all but forgotten.

elias

http://www.reginaorthodoxpress.com/noname.html

[Orthodox Pilgrim]

Quotation:

I have a friend who is a former Orthodox priest; The poor man had a problem with his church council and was quite literally "put out" (Russian parish; I'll not say where)….…A faction wanted to get rid of him; and so they went to the bishop...HOWEVER THE BISHOP CALLED THE PRIEST AND ASKED HIM IF HE WANTED TO LEAVE AND HE SAID "NO". So the Bishop told these guys "he stays". So they were forced to keep him as their priest....but... what happened next is really rich....This very wise priest took it upon himself to surreptitiously look and did find another parish while still serving the first parish.

________________________________________________

The above story merely sounds like a bishop backing his priest (as he should) against a capricious parish council. The priest then went to a new parish within the same jurisdiction only after receiving the blessing of his bishop. Hopefully it was not out of spite, but simply for the sake of his own sanity.

But what about the other scenario? What happens when a small group of non-parish council members conspire with hierarchs to get rid of a priest? What then? Should the objecting council merely acquiesce to this travesty, ignore their consciences and say this kind of injustice is God's will?

Read this:

Church splinters over pastor’s exit (http://www.fortwayne.com/mld/journalgazette/news/local/12094881.htm)

and tell me what you think.

[Vasilis Kirikos]

"Read this: Church splinters over pastor's exit and tell me what you think."

The road of a priest leads to Golgotha. I think that I would rather not be a priest; but of course if I had a true calling I would have to answer and do what The Lord says. I also think that we should all pray for our priests on a regular basis. They all bear a heavy cross; and so too do their families. Vasilis

What happens when a small group of non-parish council members conspire with hierarchs to get rid of a priest? What then? Should the objecting council merely acquiesce to this travesty, ignore their consciences and say this kind of injustice is God's will?

Read this:

Church splinters over pastor's exit

and tell me what you think.

[Leandros]

Dear friends,

First, let me submit a link to Canons of Orthodox Church (http://aroundomaha.com/cn/stjohn/canons.htm).

Then, let me remind you of the case of injustice against St Chrysostom (http://www.chrysostom.org/life.html) : "The saint died in the city of Comene on September 14th in the year 407 on his way to a place of exile, having been condemned by the intrigues of the empress Eudoxia because of his daring denunciation of the vices ruling over Constantinople. The last words on his lips were, "Glory be to God for all things!"

The presence of a specific priest in a specific parish is not an end in itself.


But what about the other scenario? What happens when a small group of non-parish council members conspire with hierarchs to get rid of a priest? What then? Should the objecting council merely acquiesce to this travesty, ignore their consciences and say this kind of injustice is God's will?

Is this “conspiracy” a case of theological perversion of Church's doctrine? If this is the case, then each person in the parish must "fight" against Bishop's misdeed in order to guide him to repentance and in order to preserve the authenticity of Christian Faith. In this case the relation of the specific Bishop with the specific parish is absent, because their relation is the unity of faith. Even in these circumstances a Bishop is judged by a local synod of the Church as a “whole”, not by the “personal” opinion of parishioners, no matter how obvious their objection is.

Is this “conspiracy” a case of human error or intentional false practice of management? Then, parish council members must present their opposition with honest intimacy. But, the last word must be “let it be blessed, not according to my will but as you like”. Bishop is serving an appointed ministry that provides Christ's blessings in our way of life. He is not a manager of effectiveness. The “will” of God is in the blessed way of living, not in the “right” way of managing life. We must be ready to accept both a less capable Bishop and his "strange" decisions, as long as we share the same faith with him and he does not declare false doctrines of our faith.

[Orthodox Pilgrim]

Christ warns us in Matthew 25:45 of the consequences of failing to help those in trouble; and as this thread deals with "caring for Orthodox priests", they are certainly among "the least of these". The Lord's commandments trump any canon.

Paul reinforces this when he urges us to "Bear one another's burdens."

No Leandros, I am sorry, dogma and doctrine aside, no true Orthodox God-fearing Christian should sit by and allow a bishop to abuse a priest simply because, canonically, "he can". Complacency in this case is the same as complicity. If you have knowledge of a crime, and do nothing, you are as guilty as the perpetrator.

I would remind you that the laity rose up in defense of St. John Chrysostom when the rich and powerful wanted him dead. Were the laity wrong to do so?

[Leandros]

The Lord's commandments trump any canon.

But the Holy Canons are the implementation of Lord’s commandments in the Church structure. There is no contradiction in between.


No Leandros, I am sorry, dogma and doctrine aside, no true Orthodox God-fearing Christian should sit by and allow a bishop to abuse a priest simply because, canonically, "he can". Complacency in this case is the same as complicity. If you have knowledge of a crime, and do nothing, you are as guilty as the perpetrator.

Dear Orthodox pilgrim,

Of course you are right. But, there is a great difference between “supporting justice”/”not to sit by” and “substituting the Bishop in his ministration”.

I do not endorse a pathetic blind “faith” in Bishop (I think nobody does). But as Church life is the common life of Her members, it is structured in an hierarchical harmony in Christ. The Bishop must be the “servant” of everyone else, because the Christian hierarchy is not a hierarchy of power but a hierarchy of relations.

Of course if a Bishop is using his position and becomes a tyrant, by imposing his “absolute” authority, he must be removed, because such behaviour is both un-canonical and theologically it introduces the paradox of a body that has some members with absolute authority over other members of the same body. Then we have two bodies instead of one. This is not the way of the ONE body of Orthodox Church.

Church is a “body” of living ways of being Christian; It is a body of brothers/sisters that are being adopted by the Father in Christ. There is no other supreme authority in this body, except from Christ. But the structure of the “body” is not a “flat” structure. There is a hierarchy of harmonic “serve”/”being served” relations. Laity is being served by the deacons and the priests, deacons and priests are being served by Bishops and all together and each one of them are being served in the name of the Father, through Christ, in Spirit.

It is not possible to impose “authority” and “power” upon the weak “in the name of the Father, through Christ, in Spirit”. One can become tyrant only in his own name. There are many cases that laity, or a priest, or a bishop are functioning in their own name, in being out of the hierarchy of the Church. This malfunction must be avoided and for that reason the Apostles and the Fathers of the Church instituted the Holy Canons of the Church.

No layman alone, no priest alone, no bishop alone has the power to formulate the harmony of the Church as a live ‘body’. A body is a harmonic hierarchical relation of “serve”/”being served” body members. And a body must have a head – this head is Christ. In this context, neither the autonomy of each member is abolished nor the dictatorship of each member can implemented. It is a mystery that even Christ is not the “dictator” of the body but He is the absolute “Servant” of the Church body. In the same way that we are faithful in Christ, not by a blind faith, but by being in relation with Him, we are also related to each other as Church members with the bond of His Love.

In the context of Love, right or wrong is irrelevant, as the experience of remission is transforming the relation from “mutual agreement” into “all-inclusiveness”.

Finally, my point is that being in Church is a “mutual way of being”. As long as we transform this into “our way of being” we cut off ourselves from the body of Church. This failure is not a privilege of a Bishop, but can be performed by priests and laymen as well.

In an earlier post there was a reference in a specific parish in trouble (http://www.fortwayne.com/mld/journalgazette/news/local/12094881.htm) where the Bishop "He said he did listen to the concerns of parishioners, answered them and 'they simply did not like the answers they received'." and a parishioner said “Dr. Ashraf Hanna, a member of the ousted council, said he will not be going back to St. John Chrysostom because he believes he was disrespected by the hierarchy.” This case is a typical case of secularization of the Church in the absence of the protection of Canons over relations among Church members. If the specific Bishop would have kept the specific priest in this parish, then he would have achieved a mutual accepted agreement and nothing more. Well, Church is beyond mutual accepted agreements and mutual tolerance.

Church is the living experience of being ourselves in relation with other members of the Church in our common doxology of God. This relation is the relation of being servants of Love. This relation presupposes that we are being "disrespected" by others and that others "do not listen to us". After all, to be a servant is exactly this way of being in these pride-killing situations. As Christ lived such a blessed human life of a servant, we follow His footsteps in "being disrespected" and "not being listened". Because the important thing is to be in loving relation with others, servicing them in their needs and not to preserve ourselves in a mutual respected agreement after a dialogue between equals. “Being a servant” is impossible in a community/body without hierarchy of relations.

Let me present some Canons that describe the Orthodox way of being Bishop and by them it will become clear that a Bishop has no absolute power by himself and at the same time neither laity have an absolute power by themselves. We can not have a Bishop without parishioners and we can not have parishioners without their Bishop. The Canons are not protecting each member of the church but they are protecting the relations between church members. The Canons are protecting the hierarchy or relations while requiring at the same time the participation of every Church member.

From the Canons of APOSTLES (http://aroundomaha.com/cn/stjohn/canons1.html) :

CANON XIV
A Bishop shall not abandon his own parish and go outside of it to interlope to another one, even though urged by a number of persons to go there, unless there be a good reason for doing so, on the ground that he can be of greater help to the inhabitants there, by reason of his piety. And even then he must not do so of his own accord, but in obedience to the judgment of many Bishops and at their urgent request.

CANON XXXIV
It behoves the Bishops of every nation to know the one among them who is the premier or chief, and to recognize him as their head, and to refrain from doing anything superfluous without his advice and approval: but, instead, each of them should do only whatever is necessitated by his own parish and by the territories under him. But let not even such a one do anything without the advice and consent and approval of all. For thus will there be concord, and God will be glorified through the Lord in Holy Spirit, the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

CANON LVIII
If any Bishop or Presbyter neglects the Clergy or the laity, and fails to instruct them in piety, let him be excommunicated: but if he persists in his negligence and indolence, let him be deposed from office.

CANON LIX
If any Bishop or Presbyter fails to supply necessities when any of the clergy is in want, let him be excommunicated. If he persists, let him be deposed, as having murdered his brother

CANON LXXIV
When a Bishop has been accused of something by trustworthy men, he must be summoned by Bishops; and if he answers and confesses, or is found guilty, let the penalty be fixed. But if when summoned he refuses to obey, let him be summoned a second time by sending two Bishops to him. If even then he refuses to obey, let him be summoned a third time, two Bishops again being sent to him; but if even then he shows contempt and fails to answer, let the synod decide the matter against him in whatever way seems best, so that it may not seem that he is getting the benefit by evading a trial.

But Priest are also under canon too:

CANON XXXI
If any Presbyter, condemning his own bishop, draw people aside, and set up another altar, without finding anything wrong with the Bishop in point of piety and righteousness, let him be deposed, on the ground that he is an office-seeker. For he is a tyrant. Let the rest of clergymen be treated likewise, and all those who abet him. But let the laymen be e excommunicated. Let these thieves be done after one, and a second. and a third request of the Bishop.

CANON XV
If any Presbyter, or Deacon, or anyone at all in the Sacerdotal List, abandoning his own province, departs to another, and after deserting it entirely, sojourns in another, contrary to the opinion of his own Bishop, we bid him to officiate no longer; especially if his Bishop summons him to return, and he has not obeyed and persists in his disorderliness, he may, however, commune there as a layman.
CANON XVI
If, on the other hand, the Bishop with whom they are associating, admits them as clergymen in defiance of the deprivation prescribed against them, he shall be excommunicated as a teacher of disorder.

<font color="0077aa">From these canons, it is obvious that both a bishop and a priest and all parishioner are free to perform their ministry, "But let not even such a one do anything without the advice and consent and approval of all. For thus will there be concord, and God will be glorified through the Lord in Holy Spirit, the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit"

There is the canonical Orthodox way:

If we have a problem with our priest, the solution is to be given by our bishop. You are right, we must not "sit by" and do nothing.

If we have a problem with our Bishop, the solution is to be given by the local council of Church Bishops. You are right, we must not "sit by" and do nothing.

"Justice" in Church life is the result of blessed relations of "serving the others" in Christ - It is not the result of decision about the proper way of being protected and justified in a perfect Church social structure.</font>

[Orthodox Pilgrim]

The Bishop must be the “servant” of everyone else, because the Christian hierarchy is not a hierarchy of power but a hierarchy of relations.

Let me present some Canons that describe the Orthodox way of being Bishop and by them it will become clear that a Bishop has no absolute power by himself and at the same time neither laity have an absolute power by themselves.

Well said. I believe this is probably the crux of the matter for the council members and parishioners who left that archdiocese in the example above.

Some might naively call it "dis-respect", but others would more properly say it was a failure on the part of a man who used his bishop's rank to lord his power over men, rather than seek a spirit of conciliarity with the local elected council or laity.

Of course, there is much unsaid in that article that we do not know. For an entire parish council to allow themselves to be fired by a bishop, and many others resign from that jurisdiction for reasons of conscience, they must have had a strong sense of some great wrong or corruption involved. It was obviously about more than a priest being transferred, for this happens every day in the world.

Also, this is also a particularly American issue, in a sense, because their are numerous Orthodox jurisdictions in America, and in all of them the laity pay their priests directly at the parish level (as well as the archdiocese); how does this work in Greece? Is it not the government? Does an Orthodox parish in Greece even have a parish council?

Let me ask you another question. If a worker loses his job in Greece, is he entitled to unemployment compensation? What about a priest?

If a priest is put on leave of absence, can a bishop starve him into submission or would that be a violation of the canons you cited?

[Leandros]

Dear Orthodox Pilgrim and friends,

In Greece, being an Orthodox priest is considered a ministry of public office and the government is paying the wages of the clergy, both for Bishops and for priests.

So, there is no unemployed priest in Greece because there is only one Greek National Orthodox archdiocese.

There are some schematic Old-calendar Orthodox Bishops and priests, who are not on government payroll and they use to have problems just like those you mention the clergy having in USA.

In Greece, Orthodox Church made an agreement with the State, several decades ago, to seize large land property (worth of billions of dollars) over to the State and in return the Greek State would pay the wages of clergy.

In Greece where 98 percent of the population is Orthodox, “the unemployment issue” is not a matter that could be used against a priest.

Before this agreement, Church had its own assets (mainly land property that was donated to her by parishioners over the years) and Bishops and priests managed to be economically autarkic.

Nevertheless, power “games” are not absent from Greek Church. Canons of the Church are often violated because some Bishops or priests or laymen are overwhelmed by their personal ambitions. Because these people can not use the power of money, they use immoral and slanderous ways to strike innocent members of the Church that are standing in their way for absolute power.

In almost every case, this attempt to collect power and to abuse status of office is covered by piety and by the presentation of several church members who “express” the will of the people. Their methodology is exactly like the “democratic” manipulation of politicians.

In any case the problem of “unemployed priest” is a problem of secularization of Church. The priesthood is one of the greatest Sacraments of the Church. There is only one Sacrament of Priesthood and the difference between a bishop and a priest is a difference in hierarchy. Both a Bishop and a priest and a deacon are ordained to perform the same ministry: to serve the people of God. As this ministry requires different ways of service, there are respectively several “orders” of “servants” in Christ.

Even in the case of a priest who is canonically deposed, the Church must provide what is necessary for him to carry through. This is the expression of our Christian Love that we should never fail to relate with persons in need.

Being a priest is not a profession like being a psychologist. Being a priest is not a question of being employed or being unemployed, it is a question of being “flaming fire”: “Bless the LORD, O my soul. O LORD my God, thou art very great; thou art clothed with honour and majesty…Who maketh his angels spirits; his ministers a flaming fire” (Psalm 104:1-4)

Of course a priest is a human being with needs, like everybody else. We should realize that it is our mission to “supply necessities when any of the clergy is in want”. Actually our mission goes beyond the necessities of the clergy to the necessities of every human being. The issue that was initiated in this thread by brother Orthodox Pilgrim goes beyond “caring for orthodox priests”. It is actually a question of treating other people like “brothers and sisters”. It is a question for revision of our “Orthodox” lifestyle of being in relation with the useful others and not being in relation with the valueless others.

The realization of priesthood is being a servant of the people of God. We must not forget that every baptized Christian is a member of the Royal Priesthood. In this context we all are servants of the people of God. Christians serve everybody else with genuine CHristian love.

Saint Apostle Peter is saying to us:

“But you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people belonging to God, that you may declare the praises of him who called you out of darkness into his wonderful light. Once you were not a people, but now you are the people of God; once you had not received mercy, but now you have received mercy. Dear friends, I urge you, as aliens and strangers in the world, to abstain from sinful desires, which war against your soul. Live such good lives among the pagans that, though they accuse you of doing wrong, they may see your good deeds and glorify God on the day he visits us.” (1 Peter 2:9-12)

May God bless us, all.

[Eugene J. Angeledes]

The late Reverend Father Soterios Angeledes, serving our Church in New Hampshire and New York, founded the Greek Ministers Benevolent Assn., in the mid-fifties. Whatever happened to this? I am his son

[Paul Cowan]

Is there an organization in America that is pan-Orthodox and devoted to caring for Orthodox priests?

An Orthodox Priest Benevolent Association, if you will.

I would be interested in learning about/joining such a group. Thank you.

I think all of the jurisdictions have a clergy retirement fund. I believe also they offer health benefits as a collective since priests probably cannot afford health care on their "salaries". This is especially critical for priests with families.

Paul

[Andrew]

I think all of the jurisdictions have a clergy retirement fund. I believe also they offer health benefits as a collective since priests probably cannot afford health care on their "salaries". This is especially critical for priests with families.

Paul

The OCA's retirement fund has a lot of problems in it's fine print... I know a priest who for many years was paying into his retirement fund, but then was without a stable source of income for awhile; he lost all his retirement savings because of how the system works. The health insurance for priests is very steep too, considering how much the average priest makes. I'm sure the Antiochian Church and the Greek Church have better programs for their priests, because their administration is more together, so to speak.

Priests can have it quite hard financially. There are priests on food stamps in the OCA, while there are ones in the GOA that drive Mercedes' and have million dollar houses. These are extreme examples, but things can be quite hard. I'm sure things have gotten better now, but for many of the priests of previous generations life has been a true struggle.

[Father Anthony]

I think all of the jurisdictions have a clergy retirement fund. I believe also they offer health benefits as a collective since priests probably cannot afford health care on their "salaries". This is especially critical for priests with families.

Paul

Paul,

While most of the Orthodox jurisdictions have health and retirement plans in the US, in some jurisdictions they provide minimal coverage at maximum prices or may be elective as to participation. I know of brother clergy in which their wives must work because they receive better benefits, especially regarding health insurance.

I have also heard of many instances, where despite mandates for certain percentages of the priest's salary being contributed to the pension fund, the parish council refuses to do so, leaving it instead to rest on the priest and it coming from his salary alone.

This situation is improving over the past 15+ years, and is certainly better than the times before that were any retirement or medical plans had to be shouldered by the priest and his family alone. Remember most of these benefits were not part of the priest's compensation before the 1980s. Also there are some of the smaller jurisdictions that have no plans for either health or retirement yet available for their clergy. In these cases it is still left to clergy to decide how they will be covered for medical issues and how they will be provided for when eventually they can not serve anymore.

In IC XC,
Father Anthony+

[Paul Cowan]

Father Anthony,

Forgive my tone, I did not mean to suggest the priests were "taken care of". I know too well the challenges my own priest has with just getting a pair of glasses. I only meant to post in regards that there were some opportunities out there that the various dioceses were trying to address this concern.


I have also heard of many instances, where despite mandates for certain percentages of the priest's salary being contributed to the pension fund, the parish council refuses to do so, leaving it instead to rest on the priest and it coming from his salary alone.


This makes no sence to me. It is one thing to be frugal with the budget and spending policy, how would they like it if their employers treated them the same way? Even within our own parishes the faithful (the priest) are still being persecuted! Shame on us!

Paul

[Nina]

This makes no sence to me. It is one thing to be frugal with the budget and spending policy, how would they like it if their employers treated them the same way? Even within our own parishes the faithful (the priest) are still being persecuted! Shame on us!

Paul

Dear Paul,

Maybe I should not post here at all because I know nothing about this topic. However here is what the grandmothers and pious females I am related to have taught us. When we make the Prosphora and bring to the church we also write names of the living and departed Orthodox we would like to give to the priest for the Proskomide prayers.

We place these names in an envelope and give it to the priest. In addition to the names we place in the envelope, we should also place money. It depends on the person on how much they offer. It can be from $1.00 to as much as one wishes; and according to the occasion. Also we can give the list without the Prosphoron because many times there is an appointed lady in the community for making it, or we can not make it for various reasons - although my grandmothers made it always.

Also during memorial services, Saturdays of the Souls, during Paraklesis, and other services that the priest is praying for our loved ones and for so many people, we have to take care of him also. When I see the priests sweating and loosing their voice while reading all the names of the departed (thousands) during the Saturday of the Souls during Lent etc. I feel so bad that they go through so much for us. And in the OT it is said "Do not close the mouth of the animal who works the field." (please excuse the paraphrasing because I do not have time now to find it - it is in the Proverbs though).

So what I mean is that while we ask our priests/monks to pray for us and etc. and give sometimes long lists of names it is very appropriate to give a personal donation to them. We should do that even if we think that the priest is well off, because many help with that money the poor and etc. and actually we are giving that money back to God and it will be used and dispersed according to His Holy Will.

Also if a priest can not pay for a pair of glasses what about the community??? They can all chip in and buy it for him. We should think this way: What would be if we lived in a place without our dear priests? Who will baptize, crown, bury, church, pray and intercede to God for us??? Not only in a collective manner, but also in a personal level we can always do something for our dear priests.

[Father Anthony]

Paul,

I did not take any offense or interpret a negative tone. I am just sharing some of the realities that many are unaware of. If you have ever attended a General Assembly or Annual Parish Meeting in some parishes, you will certainly hear from parishioners objections to the priest making the same type of salary or benefits they do. In fact, on average most clergy make just above what the minimum wage is for the regular work force in the US. I can definitely attest in one case, where a Russian priest of 25 years service and a parish of 125 families could not get his salary raised above $23,000 a year, with no medical insurance or pension benefits with only token coverage of some of his other expensies. I have heard the same thing in the Antiochian Archdiocese as well as other jurisdictions. These have been told to me by priests that have had this difficulty.

Many would look at the salaries what the GOA clergy make and think they have it made, but there are somethings that are not apparent, such as the priest in most cases must own his own home since no rectory is provided, must provide his own vestments, etc. Some of these are contributed towards by the parish, but in most cases the wife must work to offset these costs.

We have to look beyond the public liturgical part a priest plays, and look at the overall service he does for the entire community. It is not a part time job, but one that involves many spiritual and administrative facets. Most priests I know that serve full-time, put in a 50-60 hour work week. I do think they should be compensated so that they can support their family. Yet, we have to wonder why sometimes we have a vocations problem, and yet the answer is evident on how we do care for our clergy and their families.

I think I will get off my soap box now.

In IC XC,
Father Anthony+

[Paul Cowan]

I think I will get off my soap box now.

Not at all Father. If we don't know it is raining, we don't know to take an umbrella with us.

I admit I don't attend our parish council meetings, nor do I 'hang out' after church or mingle with anyone after liturgy. I don't know of the concerns of our parish nor of our priests.

I poorly tithe. My service to the church is pitiful. I am the typical slothful and inconsiderate parishioner you speak of. I like to think all is well to make myself feel better for not "doing" more. But I know I won't if left to volunteer my time. If asked, I will probably make an excuse why I can't. If pressed, I will give in.

I won't give you that dollar Father, but please pray for me THE worst of sinners.

Paul

[Father Anthony]

Father, but please pray for me THE worst of sinners.

Paul
Paul,

Just one of our duties that we always look forward to, prayer. Of course you have my meager prayers, and ask the same favor in return.

In IC XC,
Father Anthony+

[Karena Hryniuk]

Dear Father Anthony,

Very true and unfortunate but this seems to happen a lot of the time. It also does make a difference if the priest has a family to provide for.
In a conversation had a short time ago with a local Seminarian, he made it clear that the theologs fresh out of graduation have difficulty finding companionship not only because of their religious devotion but because they have to find a woman with a substantial income to support them and any children they wish to have.

It should not be this way. These are our Spiritual Fathers, we are nothing without them.


Paul,

I did not take any offense or interpret a negative tone. I am just sharing some of the realities that many are unaware of. If you have ever attended a General Assembly or Annual Parish Meeting in some parishes, you will certainly hear from parishioners objections to the priest making the same type of salary or benefits they do. In fact, on average most clergy make just above what the minimum wage is for the regular work force in the US. I can definitely attest in one case, where a Russian priest of 25 years service and a parish of 125 families could not get his salary raised above $23,000 a year, with no medical insurance or pension benefits with only token coverage of some of his other expensies. I have heard the same thing in the Antiochian Archdiocese as well as other jurisdictions. These have been told to me by priests that have had this difficulty.

Many would look at the salaries what the GOA clergy make and think they have it made, but there are somethings that are not apparent, such as the priest in most cases must own his own home since no rectory is provided, must provide his own vestments, etc. Some of these are contributed towards by the parish, but in most cases the wife must work to offset these costs.

We have to look beyond the public liturgical part a priest plays, and look at the overall service he does for the entire community. It is not a part time job, but one that involves many spiritual and administrative facets. Most priests I know that serve full-time, put in a 50-60 hour work week. I do think they should be compensated so that they can support their family. Yet, we have to wonder why sometimes we have a vocations problem, and yet the answer is evident on how we do care for our clergy and their families.

I think I will get off my soap box now.

In IC XC,
Father Anthony+