An alert priest sent this my way, and I thought it worth posting and discussing.

From Zenit:

Answered by Legionary of Christ Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina Apostolorum university.

Q: During Holy Week the Chrism Mass liturgy includes the rite of Renewal of Commitment to Priestly Service. During the rite the bishop invites his assembled presbyterate to renew their “dedication to Christ as priests of his new covenant.” When they have done this the bishop asks the assembled people to “Pray for your priests” and then goes on to ask them to “Pray also for me.” So the dialogue includes the priests, the bishop and the people but omits any reference to the deacons and their ministry. The deacons are also normally present in large numbers as members of the clergy on this key occasion when the whole diocese is gathered around its bishop. Although the permanent diaconate was re-established in 1972, the composition of the present missal (and this rite) predates it and probably did not foresee the growth and importance of the permanent diaconate in the life of large sections of the Church. In view of this, is it appropriate to include in this rite an opportunity for the deacons present to renew their commitment to their ministry? Or should the rite be left as it is? If the latter, aren’t we missing out on a special opportunity of asking the faithful to pray for the threefold order of bishop, priest and deacon who in the persons of the bishops, priests and deacons present have publicly renewed their commitment to their sacramental ministry of service? I feel that with the addition of a question and response for the deacons, plus making the title “Renewal of Commitment to Priestly and Diaconal Service,” the liturgy would no longer seem to exclude a body of men who increasingly these days give such great service to the Church. — P.C., Birmingham, England

A: I must admit that I found this question very intriguing and thought-provoking. Of course, it is not a question that I can answer in the strict sense of the term because any change in the rites belongs exclusively to the Church’s supreme authority. All I can do is add some pointers of my own reflection on this question.

First of all, we are not before an ancient rite. Before the present reform the Chrism Mass did not require the presence of all the clergy of the diocese, although 12 priests were present who assisted in the blessing of the holy oils. Consequently there was no rite of renewal of priestly promises.

Therefore we would not be infringing on some immemorial tradition by adapting the rite to somehow include the deacons. As our correspondent rightly points out, the growth of the permanent diaconate is a new reality that was not contemplated in the present rite.

At the same time, Holy Thursday, as the memorial of the first Eucharist and the call to the priesthood, has a particular significance for priests (and hence bishops) that is not embraced in the specific service of deacons. Only the priest can follow Christ’s command to “do this” in his memory.

For this reason I think that while it would be a good idea to somehow include deacons at the Chrism Mass, I believe that the central focus of the rite should still be the particular gift of the priesthood.

It might also be a good idea to have a special day in which the bishop gathers together with the deacons, for example, on the feast of St. Stephen or of St. Lawrence.

Interestingly, I’ve been to the Chrism Mass in my diocese several times, and there is inserted into the rite a special prayer renewing the promises of the permanent deacons. (There are always a sizable number of them in attendance — and that number is expected to grow this year when, for the first time, the mass is celebrated not on Holy Thursday morning, but on the previous Tuesday evening.)

Thoughts? Experiences? Opinions?