Former Priests

[TiggerS]

Yes but that is the thing. If God gave the gift of Celibacy why do many priests leave the church to get married instead of staying as priests? No offence but not everybody is given celibacy who is called. Nor are they given the gift when they get baptized with the Holy Spirit, which is after you confess Jesus is Lord, and God gives you a new heart btw where you can actually feel the remorse of concious when you do wrong.

If a priest leaves the priesthood to marry, then he has fallen in love and ideally has been laicized by application and process in The Church (returned to lay status) - the priest has formally applied to The Church to leave the priesthood. Some may have been unfaithful to their vows and Grace granted. There may be other reasons.

Not everyone is given the gift of celibacy because God does not want everyone celibate, which would mean in fact that (and for one) the human race would be dying out. One reason I can think of anyway.

Btw didn’t Paul have to correct Peter in his teachings?

They had a real difference of opinion - Paul won. Not much is new in Catholicism

 

[feed_me]

But certainly I do not experience overwhelming temptations against chaste celibacy. Could I? Yes I could and then I would be either speaking to my spiritual director or a priest - or even both.

Unfortunitly I do, and talking to a Priest or Spiritual director doesn’t help. Even when I’m in a state of grace I have overwhelming temptations of lust, and that is just being outside doing my day.

Probably very rare is the person who hears The Lord actually speaking to them and it is regarded as a mystical phenomena. There are normally speaking three clear signs of vocation:

Well then you can count me on that list :thumbsup:

1. 
   *]Attraction to the life

1. 
   Cant do it, never had and still don’t have attraction to life of a priest.
   
   *]
   

   Ability to lead the life (psychological and spiritual maturity and for the priest (for one) would certainly include the ability to live comfortably with the chaste celibate state, which is not necessarily the absence of temptation. Temptation is only temptation and not sinful)

   Can’t live chaste celibate, again overwhelming temptations even in the state of grace.
   

   *]Acceptance into the life

   This third sign for a priest is with ordination and only after six or seven years of study and formation in a seminary or noviciate. All three signs need be present to positively assess that the man does indeed have a vocation to Holy Orders and the Catholic Latin Rite priesthood.
   
   N/A there, but thank you.
   

   No way - of course! The rule of celibacy for the Latin Rite Catholic priesthood is a disciplinary rule only of The Church for the Latin Rite priesthood.

   Seems like the East is doing just as well without the rule. Again no offence.
   

   They had a real difference of opinion - Paul won. Not much is new in Catholicism

   :thumbsup:

 

[FCEGM]

It is in the scripture, between the parentheses. My bible has those same exact words as every bible does. If those parentheses aren’t there then something is amiss.

No matter what translation is used one is straining the scripture to read into 1 Timothy 3. an absolute mandate of a married priesthood. If such a mandate IS St. Paul’s intent, then he himself would have been disqualified, as would have been St. John the Evangelist.

Just because Christ was celibate, doesn’t mean that we all have to be celibates to follow him.

Neither does it mean that Christ’s celibacy is not of consequence for those He has called to serve Him as other Christs, the priests of His Church. A theologian would consider why Christ’s celibacy so influenced the Church in its discipline so as to take on a normative character from the outset - both East and West, remembering that the Eastern Churches select only men who are celibate (I.e., the never married or widowers) as their Bishops. A theologian would look at the writings of the early Fathers of the Church to see what their understanding of this discipline was.

Yes but that is the thing. If God gave the gift of Celibacy why do many priests leave the church to get married instead of staying as priests? No offence but not everybody is given celibacy who is called. Nor are they given the gift when they get baptized with the Holy Spirit, which is after you confess Jesus is Lord, and God gives you a new heart btw where you can actually feel the remorse of concious when you do wrong.

I see your understanding is influenced by Protestant thinking. Are you a Protestant?

So I ask what is celibacy? Is it the state of which where you have no more of a sex drive? Where girl/guy after girl/guy comes your way luring you with with the immorality of dress, or lack there of and you have no care to look back or have no interest at all? I mean what is it? Cause I don’t have it, nor given it with the baptism of HS

.

Why would you expect to? And why do you think having no sex drive must be synonymous with celibacy?

Are you sure about that?

Absolutely.

If there is a long period of discernment to see if the call is from God, then are they listening?

Most are - and have done so through the centuries.

LIke I said I am still learning. I’m a theologin in training, learning and making mistakes. I wish I could get with more people that actually know this stuff like the back of their hand.

You’ve received links to articles by those who do “know this stuff”. Have you taken advantage of those articles? I also recommended a book that thoroughly looks at this particular issue. If you want to be able to speak with some knowledge on this subject then it is a book you should read.

Btw didn’t Paul have to correct Peter in his teachings?

No; St. Paul only corrected St. Peter on the application of the teaching, not on the teaching itself. There is a difference.

Sometimes I just feel that my words fall on deaf ears

.

If one doesn’t do his homework to become truly informed so as not to rely on his own uneducated subjective opinion, that’s usually the case.

 

[Alex2008]

Many of you seem to be approaching the whole question from a false perspective, i.e. that all priests who leave do so to get married. This is patently not true!

The reasons are many and varied: mental illness, loss of faith, realization that they discerned incorrectly,** perhaps to get married**, and some were even manipulated into becoming priests by family pressure (there is more of this than you can even imagine). I could go on, but I want to at least show that there is not only ONE reason.

If one discerned incorrectly, perhaps it might be better for the Church to leave ministry and go do something else. If one is mentally ill, it’s quite obvious that one should not serve as a priest. If one has lost faith or no longer believes, why would/should they continue? To get married, well many are aguing here about it. And finally if one were manipulated into it, why wuld you want to stay?

To be honest, I sincerely doubt that many who I know who have left (including me for mental illness reasons) would even want to go back…even if they were invited. I suggest that we have some charity for those who left as not all left to be married and not all had authority problems. The original poster has raised a question that is interesting but will never happen in our lifetimes, if at all. Thank God that many who are ordained stay! And why be so angry about those who leave? It seems to be counter-productive.

 

[bilop]

I think an interesting idea would be to reinstitute a form of “simplex” priest (in the old days there were priest who were allowed to say Mass, but nothing else, no preaching, no confessions, etc.).

You could allow married men, past a certain age and length of marriage, to be ordained as a priest, but they would remain responsible for their own support, would not be pastors, but would simply be available to provide Mass and Confession.

God Bless

 

[FCEGM]

I think an interesting idea would be to reinstitute a form of “simplex” priest (in the old days there were priest who were allowed to say Mass, but nothing else, no preaching, no confessions, etc.).

You could allow married men, past a certain age and length of marriage, to be ordained as a priest, but they would remain responsible for their own support, would not be pastors, but would simply be available to provide Mass and Confession.

God Bless

I read about “simplex” priests awhile ago (I think in one of the last issues of “Homiletics and Pastoral Review”); as explained in the article it seems like a very good idea.

 

[feed_me]

No matter what translation is used one is straining the scripture to read into 1 Timothy 3. an absolute mandate of a married priesthood. If such a mandate IS St. Paul’s intent, then he himself would have been disqualified, as would have been St. John the Evangelist.

Not true, St. Paul’s mission wasn’t to be a bishop, but an apostle, so that counted him out anyway, same way with St. John.

I see your understanding is influenced by Protestant thinking. Are you a Protestant?

.

Nope, a returning catholic with a personal experience, which actually makes the Protostant right on that perspective. I tried to see things from there perspective after that and I didn’t want to be part of where they were going, because most of their teachings weren’t right, and or only half full.

Why would you expect to? And why do you think having no sex drive must be synonymous with celibacy?

I don’t know what celibacy is so I wanted to get a perspective from somebody who actually has the gift to explain it.

You’ve received links to articles by those who do “know this stuff”. Have you taken advantage of those articles? I also recommended a book that thoroughly looks at this particular issue. If you want to be able to speak with some knowledge on this subject then it is a book you should read.

And I will take a look at those links and the book.

No; St. Paul only corrected St. Peter on the application of the teaching, not on the teaching itself. There is a difference.

TiggrS sumed it up.

If one doesn’t do his homework to become truly informed so as not to rely on his own uneducated subjective opinion, that’s usually the case.

You might want to talk to God about that especially since he is the one doing the educating personally, and also the One who has given me the actual gift of understanding.

 

[FCEGM]

Not true, St. Paul’s mission wasn’t to be a bishop, but an apostle, so that counted him out anyway, same way with St. John.

:nope:

zenit.org/article-26319?l=english

All the Apostles were also priests, the first priests of Christ. The Liturgy of Holy Thursday celebrates the the Lord’s establishing Holy Orders:

catholicculture.org/culture/liturgicalyear/calendar/day.cfm?date=2012-04-05

 

[peace2u2]

I think an interesting idea would be to reinstitute a form of “simplex” priest (in the old days there were priest who were allowed to say Mass, but nothing else, no preaching, no confessions, etc.).

You could allow married men, past a certain age and length of marriage, to be ordained as a priest, but they would remain responsible for their own support, would not be pastors, but would simply be available to provide Mass and Confession.

God Bless

Perhaps the time has come for the priesthood to become in a sense like the medical field, sub-specialized.

 

[feed_me]

:nope:

zenit.org/article-26319?l=english

All the Apostles were also priests, the first priests of Christ. The Liturgy of Holy Thursday celebrates the the Lord’s establishing Holy Orders:

catholicculture.org/culture/liturgicalyear/calendar/day.cfm?date=2012-04-05

Well thank you very much for that. I havent studied church history very well. Forgive me.

 

[FCEGM]

Well thank you very much for that. I havent studied church history very well. Forgive me.

Of course - and you’re very welcome. You should look into the series of books by Dr. Warren G. Carroll on the history of the Christendom. Also, a book often recommended on this forum is Frank Sheed’s Theology for Beginners; it would be a very helpful read for you given your interest in theology.

 

[TiggerS]

Of course - and you’re very welcome. You should look into the series of books by Dr. Warren G. Carroll on the history of the Christendom. Also, a book often recommended on this forum is Frank Sheed’s Theology for Beginners; it would be a very helpful read for you given your interest in theology.

"Theology for Beginners (Frank Sheed) is an excellent book.

 

[feed_me]

** perhaps to get married**,

Ok, so this part brings up another questions and I used this part to ask, so these ?s is for the mass to answer.

If a priest left to get married and this is only for the priests that do get married then why didn’t God in all his wisdom just send them their wife before the person got ordained as a priest? I mean if God answered the prayer of that person, why did it have to be after ordination? Wouldn’t it be a little too late for that person to be able to get married after they already commited their life to God. Seems like a cruel joke on Gods part?

I’m not attacking anybody but it is a logical question that it seems that after somebody has been through the evil, then something good finally comes along after they had that heartbreak. As an example, a young lady wants to wait for marriage to loose here virginity but, ends up loosing it before marriage to somebody who they thought was the one to marry, then they do end up finding the one man that she will spend the rest of her life with and he is unblemished. But yet if she didn’t go out with that guy or be deflowered by that guy before marriage, that person who she would of married wound not of come along. Do you get what I’m saying. ???

 

[HisIsTheCrown]

Ok, so this part brings up another questions and I used this part to ask, so these ?s is for the mass to answer.

If a priest left to get married and this is only for the priests that do get married then why didn’t God in all his wisdom just send them their wife before the person got ordained as a priest? I mean if God answered the prayer of that person, why did it have to be after ordination? Wouldn’t it be a little too late for that person to be able to get married after they already commited their life to God. Seems like a cruel joke on Gods part?

I’m not attacking anybody but it is a logical question that it seems that after somebody has been through the evil, then something good finally comes along after they had that heartbreak. As an example, a young lady wants to wait for marriage to loose here virginity but, ends up loosing it before marriage to somebody who they thought was the one to marry, then they do end up finding the one man that she will spend the rest of her life with and he is unblemished. But yet if she didn’t go out with that guy or be deflowered by that guy before marriage, that person who she would of married wound not of come along. Do you get what I’m saying. ???

There are things that are to be understood.
There are things that are to be accepted for we do not understand. This one is one of them.

 

[TiggerS]

There are things that are to be understood.
There are things that are to be accepted for we do not understand. This one is one of them.

Well said.

The Cross is our victory and our symbol as mysterious as suffering can often be and on the ordinary everyday human level, which we share with all humanity, may indeed be suffering.

Romans Chapter 6

: “Or are you unaware that we who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death?”

Catholic Catechism
272 Faith in God the Father Almighty can be put to the test by the experience of evil and suffering. God can sometimes seem to be absent and incapable of stopping evil.

But in the most mysterious way God the Father has revealed his almighty power in the voluntary humiliation and Resurrection of his Son, by which he conquered evil.

Christ crucified is thus “the power of God and the wisdom of God. For the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.” It is in Christ’s Resurrection and exaltation that the Father has shown forth “the immeasurable greatness of his power in us who believe”.

(Paragraphing in #272 above is mine)

 

[HisIsTheCrown]

Well said.

The Cross is our victory and our symbol as mysterious as suffering can often be and on the ordinary everyday human level, which we share with all humanity, may indeed be suffering.

St. Paul said that we carry diamonds in pots or clay…

 

[hwriggles4]

Ladies and Gentlemen:

Yes, a married priest (and from what I understand a permanent deacon) marries prior to their ordination. My understanding is that with both married priests and permanent deacons that when their spouse passes away, they must remain celibate.

On that note (yes, true story), I had a priest friend tell me about an Eastern Rite priest he knew who scheduled his wedding the morning of his ordination (or the day before). Due to scheduling problems, his fiance’e wanted to move his ordination - oh boy, would you want to explain that to your Bishop?

Recently, I attended an ordination in Texas for six former Episcopal priests. Five of the six are married. Their wives have to agree to support their husbands prior to ordination (my understanding is this is true of permanent deacons). In addition, several of these married priests (and permanent deacons) have a hard time balancing their family lives too. It is quite a bit of sacrifice - several Protestant ministers also say that it is a big challenge to balance running a church with a family. This is one thing a celibate priest does not have to deal with. Quite honestly, this is why many dioceses discourage candidates for the permanent diaconate who have younger children. When your children are grown up (and if you retired early from a full-time job), a permanent deacon will have more time for ministerial duties.

I’ve also heard that some dioceses (some, not all) will accept only former Episcopalians under the Pastoral Priviledge whose children have grown and left home. I do know some dioceses will accept “late vocations” of men who are widowers, whose children are no longer dependent on dad for support. I’ve even heard of a case where say, a divorced man who received an annulment was accepted for seminary. If this man had children from his prior marriage, the case was the seminarian had to be free of monetary obligations to the children.

On a positive note, I have met some really good former Episcopalian priests who are now Catholic. Several pastors have full seats on Sunday. The ones I know are very true to the magesterium (one at my old parish was very passionate about the Holy Eucharist), and walk their walk. One priest I invited as a group leader to attend a discussion on why he crossed the Tiber, and he accepted. It was one of the best lectures that I have ever attended, since it took him (and his associate pastor, who crossed the Tiber as well) two or three years after leaving the Episcopal Church to become a Catholic priest. Both were ordained in 1995. In short, Crossing the Tiber was much harder than what your hometown newspaper would print.

Personally, stories like this are touching to me because between 1988 and 1992, I was seriously considering becoming an Episcopalian. I’m convinced now that with what is happening in the Episcopal Church (no offense to anyone reading this), I think I would have eventually found my way back to the Catholic faith (which I did in 1993).

 

[hwriggles4]

I wanted to point out that there is a group of priests (it is small) called “Rent-a-Priest”. My understanding is these are priests who were ordained (Fr. Anthony Padovano is one, he was ordained in 1962 and left the priesthood in 1974 to marry) who are sometimes looked up to perform priestly duties such as weddings. What these former priests like to say is that they are a priest forever, in the line of Melchizedek.

If you hear about this group “Rent-a-Priest”, please keep your guard up. This group is a dissident group, and I don’t think many people have ever heard of this group - I didn’t know about it until about 3 or 4 years ago.

 

[Corki]

I wanted to point out that there is a group of priests (it is small) called “Rent-a-Priest”. My understanding is these are priests who were ordained (Fr. Anthony Padovano is one, he was ordained in 1962 and left the priesthood in 1974 to marry) who are sometimes looked up to perform priestly duties such as weddings. What these former priests like to say is that they are a priest forever, in the line of Melchizedek.

If you hear about this group “Rent-a-Priest”, please keep your guard up. This group is a dissident group, and I don’t think many people have ever heard of this group - I didn’t know about it until about 3 or 4 years ago.

They are beyond dissident. They have no faculties for witnessing weddings. If a Catholic couple uses a Rent-a-Priest for a wedding ceremony, they won’t be validly married.

Unfortunately these former priests are often contracted to provide “catholic” services on cruise lines.