Abolishing celibacy would not lead to more vocations, says Argentinean archbishop [CNA]

  • Thread starter Thread starter CNA_News
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

CNA_News

Guest
Buenos Aires, Argentina, Jul 13, 2009 / 06:49 pm (CNA).- Archbishop Emeritus Carmelo Giaquinta warned last week against “the false illusion that abolishing celibacy would lead to an increase in the number of priests.” Unfortunately, he noted, some priests “give in to temptation, and instead of nurturing their ideal of consecration in the Word of God, adopt the opinions of the media that often pontificates about divine things.”

After warning that this is “a trap that both the faithful and pastors should not fall into,” the archbishop underscored the need to “clearly state that the candidate for holy orders in the Latin Church must have a double vocation: to the life of consecration to God through voluntary and perpetual celibacy, and to the exercise of pastoral charity. And that must be proven by the subject and shown to the Church through an adequate journey that includes having acquired the habit of personal prayer.”

“Priestly celibacy is not an extrinsic condition that is added on after ordination, but rather a prior condition, whose foundation is living faith in Jesus Christi, who invites one to leave all for love of Him in order to follow Him,” the archbishop said.

Full article…
 
CNA_News said:
Buenos Aires, Argentina, Jul 13, 2009 / 06:49 pm (CNA).- Archbishop Emeritus Carmelo Giaquinta warned last week against “the false illusion that abolishing celibacy would lead to an increase in the number of priests.” Unfortunately, he noted, some priests “give in to temptation, and instead of nurturing their ideal of consecration in the Word of God, adopt the opinions of the media that often pontificates about divine things.”

After warning that this is “a trap that both the faithful and pastors should not fall into,” the archbishop underscored the need to “clearly state that the candidate for holy orders in the Latin Church must have a double vocation: to the life of consecration to God through voluntary and perpetual celibacy, and to the exercise of pastoral charity. And that must be proven by the subject and shown to the Church through an adequate journey that includes having acquired the habit of personal prayer.”

“Priestly celibacy is not an extrinsic condition that is added on after ordination, but rather a prior condition, whose foundation is living faith in Jesus Christi, who invites one to leave all for love of Him in order to follow Him,” the archbishop said.

Full article…
Click to expand...
There’s only one way to find out.
 
diggerdomer said:
There’s only one way to find out.
Click to expand...
We already have it.
I believe there is a fall of the number of Deacons as well.

There is no such restriction on the deacon, so it seems apparent that the rule has little to do with the numbers.
 
🍿 You know, I wonder if anyone has done a study to see if there is a decline in vocations to the priesthood amongst members of the Bzyantine Rite Catholics and the Orthodox. Orthodox priests can marry, and I think also some of the eastern rite Catholics as well.

It might be interesting to see if they too, despite being able to marry, are also slowly losing vocations to the priesthood and diconate. Also what would be interesting too, in this study, would be finding out whether Protestants are also showing a decline in young men who become ministers, as they can also of course be married.

If for these other groups there is a drop in vocations to the ministery and priesthood, then celibacy is definitely NOT the cause of the problem of declining priestly vocations in the Catholic Church. There has to be another factor involved. Maybe these men just don’t want to commit themselves to a life long vocation. My dad spent 33 years in the military,1942 to1975,i personally don’t know many guys who would do such a long stint or make it a career like my dad did.
 
The Archbishop is correct.
The rule of celibacy is well-known to candidates to the priesthood. It is not a deterrent to those who have a true vocation (to the priesthood).
One of the biggest reasons there have been so few priests ordained in the past few decades, is the infiltration of seminaries by non-Catholics (heretics and other non-believers and perverts), who, as the authorities, weeded out the good candidates and seminarians (by good, I mean those who had a good understanding of Catholic doctrine), and allowed perverts (usually homosexuals) and others weak in the Faith, to stay, and often those defective men became ordained priests.

For a real eye-opening view on that subject, read the book Goodbye, Good Men, by Michael Rose.
 
I agree with the Archbishop. It is the general loss of faith that is diminishing the priestly numbers. Without faith how can one live a life of sacrifice?
 
I think the unmarried clergy is necessary. I think married clergy would be biased in favor of their kind; they couldn’t be any other way. The way it is now unmarried folks have a chance of tolerance. Not to mention that Jesus never married.
 
Shaken said:
I think the unmarried clergy is necessary. I think married clergy would be biased in favor of their kind; they couldn’t be any other way. The way it is now unmarried folks have a chance of tolerance. Not to mention that Jesus never married.
Click to expand...
What do you mean by “biased in favor of their kind”?

There are several married Eastern Catholic (note I say Catholic, not Orthodox) priests in my city, and I see no “bias” at all.

I will agree that while I believe the Church, including the Latin Church needs both married and celibate priests, it’s not a panacea.
 
My husband has relatives of many Protestant denominations, and a number of them are ministers.

They admit that at times, they have to put the congregation before their families. It’s not easy; there are no quick fixes.
 
The problem in the Latin Church is that people think the priesthood and marriage are exclusive vocations. Some men may have a true vocation to both. God is the one giving the vocations, but it is man-made disciplines in the Latin Church that are preventing the man from living both vocations and that then becomes his cross to bear.

Obviously since we have married Catholic priests both Eastern and Western the vocations are not exclusive. While I see no absolute need to allow married men to become priests, I also don’t see a need to prevent it, as I’ve known several married priests, both Eastern and Latin, and honestly they’ve been amazing priests. They definitely had gifts that many of my celibate priests have not had, but this goes both ways. I’ve seen particular pastoral gifts on both side, married and celibate.

As far as an increase in vocations. In a way I agree with the bishop, and that is because I think these men already have their vocation, and are not allowed to live them. Now if their vocations were recognized I think there would be a temporary increase in the number of visible vocations, but I don’t know how long it would last, because as other people have said a lack of faith is the true cause of the shortage of vocations.

Another thing that people need to remember when they make statements like, someone with a true vocation to the priesthood would just follow it and give up married life, is that if the man is truly being called to both. If so, then the only way he has a chance at living out both vocations legitimately is to get married first. Then he sits and either hope that things change and his vocation is recongnized and nurtured by the Church, or he has to enjoy his family life, while awaiting the death of his wife, which may or may not come at a time that will allow him to become a priest later in life. This is in some ways a rather sad thing to resign him too…and his wife for that mater.

As far as looking at the married deaconate to compare whether or not we’d see an increase in vocations, we need to remember that the deaconate and the priesthood have different functions. One may be called to be a deacon and not a priest, likewise a person may be called to be a priest, and may feel that the deaconate alone would not allow them to live out their true vocation. People need to remember that being a deacon is not “priest-light.” The other thing people should remember is that in many places there is still much predjudice against “permanent” deacons, which does discourage some people from persuing that particular vocation.
 
vz71 said:
We already have it.
I believe there is a fall of the number of Deacons as well.

There is no such restriction on the deacon, so it seems apparent that the rule has little to do with the numbers.
Click to expand...
In the Diocese of Harrisburg they had to turn away many qualified men because there is not enough resources to train them all.
 
CNA_News said:
Buenos Aires, Argentina, Jul 13, 2009 / 06:49 pm (CNA).- Archbishop Emeritus Carmelo Giaquinta warned last week against “the false illusion that abolishing celibacy would lead to an increase in the number of priests.” Unfortunately, he noted, some priests “give in to temptation, and instead of nurturing their ideal of consecration in the Word of God, adopt the opinions of the media that often pontificates about divine things.”

After warning that this is “a trap that both the faithful and pastors should not fall into,” the archbishop underscored the need to “clearly state that the candidate for holy orders in the Latin Church must have a double vocation: to the life of consecration to God through voluntary and perpetual celibacy, and to the exercise of pastoral charity. And that must be proven by the subject and shown to the Church through an adequate journey that includes having acquired the habit of personal prayer.”

“Priestly celibacy is not an extrinsic condition that is added on after ordination, but rather a prior condition, whose foundation is living faith in Jesus Christi, who invites one to leave all for love of Him in order to follow Him,” the archbishop said.

Full article…
Click to expand...
Indeed, are there really that many married couples who would dedicate themselves to such a life? Only those unfamiliar with the trials and tribulations of the Protestant clergy would make that statement. In Greece, where priests have wive, many remain bachelors because they cannot find women to share their vocations. The demand for the end of celibacy comes from those priests who ran away from their vocations to get married and from their liberal-minded friends who hate the traditional priesthood.
 
countertenor said:
The problem in the Latin Church is that people think the priesthood and marriage are exclusive vocations. Some men may have a true vocation to both. God is the one giving the vocations, but it is man-made disciplines in the Latin Church that are preventing the man from living both vocations and that then becomes his cross to bear.

Obviously since we have married Catholic priests both Eastern and Western the vocations are not exclusive. While I see no absolute need to allow married men to become priests, I also don’t see a need to prevent it, as I’ve known several married priests, both Eastern and Latin, and honestly they’ve been amazing priests. They definitely had gifts that many of my celibate priests have not had, but this goes both ways. I’ve seen particular pastoral gifts on both side, married and celibate.

As far as an increase in vocations. In a way I agree with the bishop, and that is because I think these men already have their vocation, and are not allowed to live them. Now if their vocations were recognized I think there would be a temporary increase in the number of visible vocations, but I don’t know how long it would last, because as other people have said a lack of faith is the true cause of the shortage of vocations.

Another thing that people need to remember when they make statements like, someone with a true vocation to the priesthood would just follow it and give up married life, is that if the man is truly being called to both. If so, then the only way he has a chance at living out both vocations legitimately is to get married first. Then he sits and either hope that things change and his vocation is recongnized and nurtured by the Church, or he has to enjoy his family life, while awaiting the death of his wife, which may or may not come at a time that will allow him to become a priest later in life. This is in some ways a rather sad thing to resign him too…and his wife for that mater.

As far as looking at the married deaconate to compare whether or not we’d see an increase in vocations, we need to remember that the deaconate and the priesthood have different functions. One may be called to be a deacon and not a priest, likewise a person may be called to be a priest, and may feel that the deaconate alone would not allow them to live out their true vocation. People need to remember that being a deacon is not “priest-light.” The other thing people should remember is that in many places there is still much predjudice against “permanent” deacons, which does discourage some people from persuing that particular vocation.
Click to expand...
In the Latin Church, there has been a reaction against the monastic ideal that is like the one that occured during the Reformation. It is interesting, however, how society as a whole has turned against marriage.
 
RobbyS said:
In the Latin Church, there has been a reaction against the monastic ideal that is like the one that occured during the Reformation. It is interesting, however, how society as a whole has turned against marriage.
Click to expand...
I don’t understand?

What Latin Catholic reaction against monasticism?

What society against marriage? How would you say that society has turned against marriage?

I would agree if we said the society is against marriage as understood by the Catholic Church, but simply against marriage?

Thanks for any clarification.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top