Confused on Titus

[Dolphin]

In Titus 1:5-9 it speaks of how Paul wanted elders to be appointed who would instruct others in faith both through wholesome teachings and through being a good example in their own lives. These elders Paul says should be faithful to their wives and should teach the faith to their children. Further, Paul calls these elders church leaders who should love inviting guests to their homes.

My question is, these elders who are married and are church leaders, are they what we would consider to be the first priests? Or the first deacons? Appointed by the apostles as Paul told Titus to appoint them (is this laying on of hands then?)

As such, my deeper question is, if these are priests, does this show priests were married in the historical beginnings of the Roman Catholic Church? Not trying to make a point here or express my own opinion. Rather I’m wondering I’m I read this right or not.

Also - at 2:4 Paul says older woman should teach younger woman to be pure and work in their homes and be submissive to their husbands. I assume the mention of working at home was because back then women didn’t work outside the home usually. The mention of being submissive to their husbands, is there a deeper meaning to this? What exactly does this mean?

Further - at 2:9 Paul says slaves must be obedient to their masters and obey them and not talk back so that they please God. I am confused. Is Paul defending slavery here? If so, how does this make sense with his anti-slavery remark in Philemon 1:16? Further, if Paul is saying slaves should obey (and isn’t condemning slavery) then how does this jive with him proclaiming people are children of God and deserve fair treatment and mercy? Are slaves not of the same standard?

 

[BartholomewB]

As such, my deeper question is, if these are priests, does this show priests were married in the historical beginnings of the Roman Catholic Church?

Yes, it does. I don’t think it shows that only a married man could be ordained a priest, but it certainly shows that some married men could be priests.

 

[po18guy]

As well, scripture state that the elder should be the husband of only one wife - polygamy still being known in that age.

 

[Dolphin]

Is there a reason why married priests is not the norm currently given historical evidence for it? There are a few previously married priests in my diocese whose wives had died and they went on to become priests (they were previously deacons in most cases) or some who were Protestant ministers and became catholic and priests and have kids.

But aside from these cases, it is not the norm that someone married with kids can become a priest. Rather it is if the wife had died or they are a converted minister. I know the vow of celibacy is part of being a Priest but it was not always and in theory could be removed as a vow unlike obedience and such. Why is it a vow and why can’t some people be ordained to priesthood without taking this particular vow?

I know this was explored in the Amazon Synod, I’m just confused on what the primary issue is given this historical example in the Bible.

 

[BartholomewB]

Where and when was the rule requiring priestly celibacy first introduced? I don’t know the answer, but hopefully somebody else will. Maybe @billsherman? He’s a historian specializing in the early church.

 

[JGD]

Yes, there were married priests in the early Church. Our first Pope - the apostle Peter - was married.

Married priests are allowed in the 23 Eastern rites that are under the Pope. I’m not sure if there are different regulations in the various rites. We had an Eastern Rite priest on a tour once (not sure if it was Byzantine) and in his rite, if the seminarian wanted to be married, he had to do it before being ordained. He said unmarried seminarians would often take a year off before ordination to find a wife! Once ordained a priest, marriage was not allowed. Also I think in most rites bishops were to be celibate. I don’t know if that was in all Eastern rites; neither do I know if it’s been changed since.
Wikipedia has a couple good links on the Eastern rites:
Eastern Catholic Churches
Catholic particular churches and liturgical rites

 

[adamhovey1988]

some married men could be priests

Which is still true, since I’ve met several married priests

 

[JGD]

Here is a very good history of celibacy in the Catholic Church from the online Catholic Encyclopedia. If you scroll 1/3 to 1/2 way down you’ll get to where the “History of Celibacy” starts. Here’s a sample from the “Second Period”:

In the history of clerical celibacy conciliar legislation marks the second period during which the law took definite shape both in the East and in the West. The earliest enactment on the subject is that of the Spanish Council of Elvira (between 295 and 302) in canon xxxiii. It imposes celibacy upon the three higher orders of the clergy, bishops, priests and deacons. If they continue to live with their wives and beget children after their ordination they are to be deposed. This would seem to have been the beginning of the divergence in this matter between East and West. …

 

[BartholomewB]

Thank you, @JGD! It’s a long article and I haven’t read it all yet, but I’ll do that tomorrow. And it helpfully clears up @Dolphin’s doubts about the status of married priests in the early Church.

 

[JGD]

From an interesting article. I know I have read in other places that married priests see the benefits of a celibate priesthood.

Quote - again about 1/2 down:

…But there’s one very small, very notable Catholic constituency that mostly doesn’t support opening up the priesthood to married men: Married priests themselves.

“So many of the married priests, like myself, hold this sort of strange, almost contradictory position. And I get that it’s hard to understand. But that’s sort of the irritating beauty of Catholicism. The Church persistently thinks theologically, and not sociologically and not politically, at her best,” said Whitfield. …

 

[jack63]

Don’t forget 1 Timothy 3:2-5. It is made even more clear here. Yes, you are reading this right!

a bishop must be irreproachable, married only once, temperate, self-controlled, decent, hospitable, able to teach, not a drunkard, not aggressive, but gentle, not contentious, not a lover of money. He must manage his own household well, keeping his children under control with perfect dignity; for if a man does not know how to manage his own household, how can he take care of the church of God?

The questions “Can priests be married?” and “Were priests married historically in scripture?” can both be answered as “Yes of course!”. The real questions are whether it is wise to allow more married men to be ordained priests and under what circumstances.