Someone else might have already addressed this. I haven’t read the entire thread, but what I had read hadn’t responded. If I’m repeating, just ignore me.
This is one of the main reason why I think catholic priest should be able to get married!
So that he can abuse his position of authority and have every woman he helps in a time of need adore him and be a potential bride? He should be attractive and look like a knight on a white horse, but without clear boundaries that say, “what you are attracted to is the light and life of Christ. Follow me and I’ll lead you to Him!” he is nothing but a target and a disaster waiting to happen.
I mean so what if Father Francis has fallen in love with someone.
So what is that he’s already knowingly and willingly commited his life solely to another.
Finding love is hard to find so more power to him if he has found it!
As a celibate priest, he chose to forgo earthly love to be a witness and bearer of God’s heavenly love. The love you are referring to is a romantic and fleeting feeling. Ask any married couple or marriage counselor and you’ll find that the *feeling *of love ebbs and flows. What is important is that a person understand that his vow is a constant choice he must make to live his life for another, no matter how he feels.
I just do not see a problem with serving ones faith no matter what that faith may be all while raising a family.
Me neither. I support a return to the ordination of married men, though I realize the cultural and administrative problems which preclude that as a prudent option for the Latin Church at this time. There’s a difference between a man who has kept his marriage vow faithfully taking on the additional responsibility of ordination and a man who has not kept his vow of celibate ordination taking on the additional responsibility of a family. As an ardent proponent of a married priesthood, I want nothing to do with the latter group.
The man is human and has human needs and feelings. I believe it is very wrong to surpress these feelings.
Feelings are fleeting and should not be trusted, especially when they encourage you to act against a vow you have taken. Should a married man act on his feelings of attraction for his co-worker? Of course not. That doesn’t mean he needs to suppress everything, bottle it up, and explode one day. Any man faced with the temptation of breaking his vow should fully confess to a strong and orthodox spiritual adviser as soon as he becomes aware of the issue. He should follow that person’s advice and should work to accept the feelings for what they are and to change his actions sufficiently so as to bring about a change in his thoughts and feelings.
I sincerely believe that is one of the reason why you see a few “bad apple” priest molesting young children.
Most child molesters are married men. They are fathers, step-fathers, uncles, and grandpas. Having a woman to have sex with does not stop a child molester. He is attracted to children. There are plenty of people who struggle with pedophilia but never act on it. Those men who are heinous enough to do so are not capable of having a well-ordered marriage. Unless you are proposing that we allow priests to have child brides and to be able to divorce and remarry when the child hits puberty, this will do nothing to stop child molesters.
From what I have read it seems that many religous were in fact married and serving God up until about the year 1200. For some reason around this time being a “single” priest became the standard. Many Popes also appear to have been married at one time.
You need to read your history a little more.
We have always had celibate monastics. The east has always had married parish priests as well as celibate monastic priests. The bishops are chosen from among the monastics. The west has had a tradition of celibate clergy from the earliest times. What you are referring to is the predominantly eastern tradition of ordaining married men. At no point in history have clergy been allowed to marry. As a matter of fact, the east doesn’t even allow those ordained to the minor orders (reader, sub-deacon, etc) to later marry. If the man is married when he’s ordained and later widowed, he can’t remarry. There is no historical basis for allowing ordained men to get married.
What are your thoughts and opinions on this?
As someone who supports a married priesthood, I roundly reject the idea that it should be lauded as a way to properly channel the interests of pedophiles and adulterers. Married men who have shown good moral character are the reason we should allow married men to be ordained. Those who desire to act outside of their vows or of morality should be counseled in a way to allow them to spiritually, emotionally, and physically grow in the faith, not placated with a woman.
