Eastern vs. Western Couldn't you just switch?

  • Thread starter Thread starter SonSearcher
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

SonSearcher

Guest
If both sides… eastern rites and western rites are permitted to be all together one Church couldn’t you just switch sides?

Say you are being called to become a priest, you are a married man. You can’t in the Roman Catholic rite, but couldn’t you just become a member of an eastern rite and go into discernment?

Is this sinful? Is it wrong? What if you are truly being called?

Of course this is hypothetical. So be as abrupt as you wish.
 
SonSearcher said:
If both sides… eastern rites and western rites are permitted to be all together one Church couldn’t you just switch sides?

Say you are being called to become a priest, you are a married man. You can’t in the Roman Catholic rite, but couldn’t you just become a member of an eastern rite and go into discernment?

Is this sinful? Is it wrong? What if you are truly being called?

Of course this is hypothetical. So be as abrupt as you wish.
Click to expand...
This is actually a question I’ve wondered about a few times as well. Subscribing to the thread.
 
SonSearcher said:
If both sides… eastern rites and western rites are permitted to be all together one Church couldn’t you just switch sides?

Say you are being called to become a priest, you are a married man. You can’t in the Roman Catholic rite, but couldn’t you just become a member of an eastern rite and go into discernment?

Is this sinful? Is it wrong? What if you are truly being called?

Of course this is hypothetical. So be as abrupt as you wish.
Click to expand...
If you’re a married man and you’re a canonically a member of the Latin church, you can be assured you do NOT have a calling to the priesthood at that particular time. God holds bound what his Church has bound on earth and will not call a married Latin man to the priesthood except where the Church allows.

Changing churches sui iuris is not undertaken lightly, and definitely not for the reasons you give. If the bishops of the Latin church and the Eastern church get wind that this was the reason you wanted to change, your petition will likely be denied (because that is the wrong reason to change churches).

One will be permitted to change churches only if he has actively participated in the life of the other church for some time and has shown a true, interior love for the spirituality of that church. He will have to show a willingness to live according to the canon law of that church, such as observing their fasts.

And usually, canonical transferring of churches is permitted only once in one’s lifetime.
 
porthos11 said:
If you’re a married man and you’re a canonically a member of the Latin church, you can be assured you do NOT have a calling to the priesthood at that particular time. God holds bound what his Church has bound on earth and will not call a married Latin man to the priesthood except where the Church allows.
Click to expand...
What if the man is a convert/revert to the Catholic Church and didn’t fully discern his vocation to marriage?

Thanks for the rest of your post. It makes sense that if you are changing rites to become a priest that isn’t true discernment.
 
SonSearcher said:
What if the man is a convert/revert to the Catholic Church and didn’t fully discern his vocation to marriage?
Click to expand...
Doesn’t matter. Whether or not he properly discerned his vocation to marriage does not mean the bonds of sacramental marriage doesn’t exist. Because the authority by which the Latin Church withholds priestly ordination from married men is God-given, God will therefore hold bound his Church’s laws. If you’re a married Latin, you will definitely not receive a calling while your wife still lives.
 
40.png
porthos11:
Doesn’t matter. Whether or not he properly discerned his vocation to marriage does not mean the bonds of sacramental marriage doesn’t exist. Because the authority by which the Latin Church withholds priestly ordination from married men is God-given, God will therefore hold bound his Church’s laws. If you’re a married Latin, you will definitely not receive a calling while your wife still lives.

But there have been cases where an Anglican priest becomes a priest in the Roman rite. So not only do they get married they discern the priesthood too, become ordained and join the Catholic Church as a priest. So doesn’t that prove that some people receive a call even after a sacramental marriage is created?
 
40.png
porthos11:
Doesn’t matter. Whether or not he properly discerned his vocation to marriage does not mean the bonds of sacramental marriage doesn’t exist. Because the authority by which the Latin Church withholds priestly ordination from married men is God-given, God will therefore hold bound his Church’s laws. If you’re a married Latin, you will definitely not receive a calling while your wife still lives.

Is it a God-given (revelation) that married men cannot be priest in the Latin rite or is that tradition? In all sincerity, I ask because priest in the Latin rite were allowed to be married at one time…

Also, I think it is wrong to say that a married man won’t receive the call. If that were the case, then a pedophile would not receive the call either.
 
But there have been cases where an Anglican priest becomes a priest in the Roman rite. So not only do they get married they discern the priesthood too, become ordained and join the Catholic Church as a priest. So doesn’t that prove that some people receive a call even after a sacramental marriage is created?***

Seems like that is God’s plan… I would read in to it that the priesthood is meant to be a calling that is not dependent on marital status. There are married and celibate priest in the Catholic Church. Seems like it should depend on the individual.

Of course, my opinion means nothing in the scheme of things, but I like to talk about it.
 
SonSearcher said:
But there have been cases where an Anglican priest becomes a priest in the Roman rite. So not only do they get married they discern the priesthood too, become ordained and join the Catholic Church as a priest. So doesn’t that prove that some people receive a call even after a sacramental marriage is created?
Click to expand...
No, I don’t think it proves anything of the sort. As has already been said, a “calling” will not come in contravention of the Law established by the Church. That would really be God working against Himself, wouldn’t it?
 
malphono said:
No, I don’t think it proves anything of the sort. As has already been said, a “calling” will not come in contravention of the Law established by the Church. That would really be God working against Himself, wouldn’t it?
Click to expand...
This is faulty logic… What about gay priests? By your logic, that would be God working against himself and losing, right?
 
godisgood77 said:
This is faulty logic… What about gay priests? By your logic, that would be God working against himself and losing, right?
Click to expand...
Thank you for your opinion, even though it doesn’t bear on the question posed. I’ll stick with my position.
 
malphono said:
Thank you for your opinion, even though it doesn’t bear on the question posed. I’ll stick with my position.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the reply… Perhaps you would help me understand how it doesn’t bear on the question? You stated that a calling will not come in contravention with a law established by the Church. Seems like a reasonable parallel to me, but I could be missing something.

Or you could just dismiss the argument without explanation.
 
godisgood77 said:
Doesn’t matter. Whether or not he properly discerned his vocation to marriage does not mean the bonds of sacramental marriage doesn’t exist. Because the authority by which the Latin Church withholds priestly ordination from married men is God-given, God will therefore hold bound his Church’s laws. If you’re a married Latin, you will definitely not receive a calling while your wife still lives.
Click to expand...
Is it a God-given (revelation) that married men cannot be priest in the Latin rite or is that tradition? In all sincerity, I ask because priest in the Latin rite were allowed to be married at one time…

Also, I think it is wrong to say that a married man won’t receive the call. If that were the case, then a pedophile would not receive the call either.

It’s a discipline and can be unbound by the Church. If that happens, God will also unbind that just as he has now offered the call to married men to become deacons and former Anglican priests to the Catholic priesthood.

As for the pedophile, why do you even bring that up? Pedophilia is not even a state of life. Your comparison of marriage and pedophilia is completely uncalled for.
 
But there have been cases where an Anglican priest becomes a priest in the Roman rite. So not only do they get married they discern the priesthood too, become ordained and join the Catholic Church as a priest. So doesn’t that prove that some people receive a call even after a sacramental marriage is created?
Click to expand...
Yes, because the Church has allowed it. God gave them the call by virtue of their unique circumstances and because the Church has given them the necessary dispensation.

That doesn’t apply to any lay Latin Joe Taxpayer on the street because God knows what his Church has bound them to. If God indeed has a calling for him, it will be after he is free to accept it, and that is when his wife dies.
 
godisgood77 said:
This is faulty logic… What about gay priests? By your logic, that would be God working against himself and losing, right?
Click to expand...
What about gay priests? What bearing has that on married men?

What I don’t get is why you’re comparing married men to gay and pedophile priests. Marriage is a sacrament instituted by God and is governed by the laws of the Church. Homosexuality and pedophelia are abominations.

You seem to be positing that if married men receive the call, why do gay and pedophile men; is that what you’re trying to assert? Are you even sure that gay and pedophile men received the call to begin with? Because just because one got ordained doesn’t mean he had a vocation to begin with.
 
porthos11 said:
On what grounds?
Click to expand...
What I meant was that, if a person contracted a marriage without proper discernment, meaning that he really didn’t know or at least fully understand what he was doing, that lack of “discernment” could be considered grounds for annulment. Although the question seems to have been directed at men, the principle could actually apply to either party, male or female. Now, whether an annulment would be granted on those grounds is another matter entirely which I am not in a position to address.
 
porthos11 said:
What about gay priests? What bearing has that on married men?

What I don’t get is why you’re comparing married men to gay and pedophile priests. Marriage is a sacrament instituted by God and is governed by the laws of the Church. Homosexuality and pedophelia are abominations.

You seem to be positing that if married men receive the call, why do gay and pedophile men; is that what you’re trying to assert? Are you even sure that gay and pedophile men received the call to begin with? Because just because one got ordained doesn’t mean he had a vocation to begin with.
Click to expand...
I was trying to understand what you meant when it was said a “calling” will not come in contravention of the Law established by the Church. You were saying that a married man would not receive a calling because Church law does not allow it. Does the married man actually not receive the calling or is not allowed to act on it?

I brought the more seedy examples as a way to illustrate that a man who is not in communion with Church law, could still receive a calling…

I think you are opening a can of worms by saying that ordained priests could not have a vocation to begin with or that sacramentally married couples don’t have a vocation to begin with. That calls in to question the validity of the sacrament to begin with.
 
Hi all. Having just read this thread, I’m unsure where best to begin; but I guess I’ll begin with:
porthos11 said:
It’s a discipline and can be unbound by the Church. If that happens, God will also unbind that just as he has now offered the call to married men to become deacons and former Anglican priests to the Catholic priesthood.
Click to expand...
Does it follow that, back in those times and circumstances when married men weren’t permitted to become deacons, no married men had a call to the diaconate?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top