From Origins to 360 on Celibacy

[Mt_28_19_20]

We have one local priest who would like to see married deacons be able to be ordained as priests.

I had not heard someone suggest that before.

I wonder if those in another thread who have questioned whether I am Catholic, called me a cafeteria Catholic, and suggested that I have a problem with authority and obedience, would say the same to the priest you refer to. Perhaps he should refrain from expressing how he feels, someone might judge his faith?

Do you know what his reasons/rationale are?

Michael

 

[ASimpleSinner]

I never said a priest was not a priest.
l

Are you a priest?

 

[Titus]

I’m still struggling with your overall argument. Why should celibacy be dropped?

Sorry if you think I’m being slow, but all I’ve seen is a couple of biblical passages, which are certainly not conclusive on this issue.

I’m not attacking you! I just want a bit of clarification so I can answer in a reasoned way. Thanks and God Bless.

 

[Mt_28_19_20]

Are you a priest?

Not beyond 1 Peter 2. I am have not sought preparation to be ordained a Roman Catholic priest.

Michael

 

[Mt_28_19_20]

I’m still struggling with your overall argument. Why should celibacy be dropped?

Sorry if you think I’m being slow, but all I’ve seen is a couple of biblical passages, which are certainly not conclusive on this issue.

I’m not attacking you! I just want a bit of clarification so I can answer in a reasoned way. Thanks and God Bless.

Didn’t think that at all, and thank you for your dialogue.

Why? Well, assuming the intention for implementing celibacy for priests was good, and the interpretation was made with good intention, in my opinion, celibacy as a requirement for priests does not appear consistent with Scripture, and historically has been inconsistently applied even when it was recommended or affirmed by synods or councils.

It seems plausible when looking at short passages, and not plausible when taken in larger context of New Testament, and Old Testament.

Many of the arguements for celibacy are practical arguements, which, in my opinion are not consistent with what we see in everyday life. Other important vocations due not require celibacy, and are well performed by single and married people. The practical arguements due not seem to hold up to a reality comparison. I can understand how the practical arguements are appealing, yet have not seen God limited in how He uses individuals based on practical factors. Look at married people like Scott Hahn and others who God is using in marvelous ways, and the practical arguements do not seem to stand up, marriage does not hinder his ministry, and he would probably say it helps strengthen him and his ministry for God.

Not intending to dwell on it, and knowing my sins are not any less serious or less frequent than others, however the scandal which has in effect festered for decades, and continues to affect the Church, does not demonstrate that a vow of celibacy left us with some leaders and teachers whose behavior and leadership has been less than role model material. We are known by our fruits, including the fruits of our labors, and my faith has been strengthen more by people like Scott Hahn, and others, who are not celibate, than by the parish priest I listened to on Sundays while I was growing up. The bishop Gregory has stated that homosexuality in the priesthood is a major issue. If we listened to 1 Tim 3 and 4, would we have perfect leaders? Never. Yet I believe we would in general have better leaders and teachers than we have now.

Of note, most Protestant denominations, if any, do not apply 1 Tim 3 very well, in my opinion. Many, if not most, Protestant ministers were not married when they started to study for ministry, nor when the were ordained. So those that hold to Scripture alone, seem to also be selective in how they emphasize or interpret God’s Word.

Michael

 

[Titus]

Didn’t think that at all, and thank you for your dialogue.

**Jolly good. I’m always willing to debate with someone so polite! **

Why? Well, assuming the intention for implementing celibacy for priests was good, and the interpretation was made with good intention, in my opinion, celibacy as a requirement for priests does not appear consistent with Scripture, and historically has been inconsistently applied even when it was recommended or affirmed by synods or councils.

The church had a number of concerns that led to making celibacy mandatory. Prior to that it was definitely supported, as a way of giving yourself more completely to God. For example the loss of church lands due to inheritance, the dual tug on a priest’s daily duties of family and Church. I believe there were others.

It seems plausible when looking at short passages, and not plausible when taken in larger context of New Testament, and Old Testament.

**The best quote I’ve picked up from you was that a bishop ‘must be husband of one wife’. Is that fair? Have I missed some? If so, please forgive me. I did speak to that in an earlier post, so not a lot of point going over my view again here! **

Many of the arguements for celibacy are practical arguements, which, in my opinion are not consistent with what we see in everyday life. Other important vocations due not require celibacy, and are well performed by single and married people. The practical arguements due not seem to hold up to a reality comparison. I can understand how the practical arguements are appealing, yet have not seen God limited in how He uses individuals based on practical factors. Look at married people like Scott Hahn and others who God is using in marvelous ways, and the practical arguements do not seem to stand up, marriage does not hinder his ministry, and he would probably say it helps strengthen him and his ministry for God.

**I agree that other important vocations do not require celibacy. The vocation to the diaconate, to the married life- all do not require celibacy. But Scott Hahn is not the person who gets the 3am phone call for Extreme Unction while trying to get his baby to sleep. His work, while great, is not sacramental. **

Not intending to dwell on it, and knowing my sins are not any less serious or less frequent than others, however the scandal which has in effect festered for decades, and continues to affect the Church, does not demonstrate that a vow of celibacy left us with some leaders and teachers whose behavior and leadership has been less than role model material. We are known by our fruits, including the fruits of our labors, and my faith has been strengthen more by people like Scott Hahn, and others, who are not celibate, than by the parish priest I listened to on Sundays while I was growing up. The bishop Gregory has stated that homosexuality in the priesthood is a major issue. If we listened to 1 Tim 3 and 4, would we have perfect leaders? Never. Yet I believe we would in general have better leaders and teachers than we have now.

I agree totally that a person’s ability to be a good defender of the faith is not about their celibacy. But that isn’t the #1 role of the priest. He confects the Eucharist and absolves sin. The reason we have these sex scandals isn’t celibacy, it’s that there are a certain percentage of weirdos in society and for whatever reason, in the past, a greater than average percentage got through the formation to become priests. It’s tragic, but not intrinsically connected to celibacy. In addition, I have heard that the majority of child sex crimes are committed by family members (eg fathers). That would seem to fly in the face of your assumption. But I may be wrong?

Of note, most Protestant denominations, if any, do not apply 1 Tim 3 very well, in my opinion. Many, if not most, Protestant ministers were not married when they started to study for ministry, nor when the were ordained. So those that hold to Scripture alone, seem to also be selective in how they emphasize or interpret God’s Word.

So is it fair to say your approach to celibacy is more Eastern Rite/ Orthodox?

Michael

 

[FCEGM]

Why, cannot those considering clerical celibacy discuss and/or defend the discipline? Are they not to be exposed to proposed Scriptural and historical objections to the discipline required of Latn rite priests in general?

I am quoteing Cochini, a Jesuit, his book “the Apostolic Origins of Priestly Celibacy”, published by Ignatius; as well as reference on Alexander VI from newadvent, the Catholic Encylopedia. . .

and:

. . . Why? Well, assuming the intention for implementing celibacy for priests was good, and the interpretation was made with good intention, in my opinion, celibacy as a requirement for priests does not appear consistent with Scripture, and historically has been inconsistently applied even when it was recommended or affirmed by synods or councils.

What you have neglected to quote of Cochini’s work would have illustrated that even though the Church had married priests and bishops, the issue wasn’t so much married priests and bishops, but such practicing chastity, i.e., marital continence. THAT is the crux of the Church’s discipline regarding priestly celibacy.

“Let us next open the archives of the Council of Trent, at the page recording the discussions of the theological commission studying the theses relative to clerical marriage: here is the African document, standing out, in the files of the experts. And when, after hesitating for a long time, Pius IV finally decided to give his answer to the German princes asking Rome to authorize the marriage of priests, his first word on the matter would be a quotation from the decree of Carthage.

“Here then is the document that was to play such a part in the history of ecclesiastical celibacy:

Epigonius, Bishop of the Royal Region of Bulla, says: The rule of continence and chastity had been discussed in a previous council. Let is [now] be taught with more emphasis what are the three ranks that, by virtue of their consecration, are under the same obligation of chastity, i.e., the bishop, the priest, and the deacon, and let them be instructed to keep their purity.
Bishop Genethlius says: As was previously said, it is fitting that the holy bishops and priests of God as well as the Levites, i.e., those who are in the service of the divine sacraments, observe perfect continence, so that they may obtain in all simplicity what they are asking from God; what the apostles taught an what antiquity itself observed, let us also endeavor to keep.
The bishops declared unanimously: It pleases us all that bishop, priest, and deacon, guardians of purity, abstain from [conjugal intercourse’ with their wives, so that those who serve at the altar may keep a perfect chastity.[/COLOR]

“This text is interesting in many respects. Mention is made of the clerics’ wives, and particularly, the wives of the hierarchy’s high-ranking members: bishops, priests, and deacons. Most of those – or at least a large number - were thus bound by marriage. Such men are being asked by the African synod to give up no less than all conjugal intercourse and to observe perfect chastity. Because they are ministers at the service of the divine sacraments, it is deemed that marital life would prevent them from carrying out simpliciter (in all simplicity) their intercessory function. Moreover, we are assured that such a discipline is not a new one: the Fathers of Carthage are only stressing the obligation of something that was ‘taught by the apostles and observed by antiquity itself,’ The Apostolic Origins of Priestly Celibacy, Christian Cochini, S. J., Ignatius Press, pp. 4 & 5.”

Simply put, the discipline of celibacy stems from the nature of the priesthood itself, namely that a priest offers sacrifice (THE Sacrifice of the Mass). As we see practiced in Old Testament times, priests rotated terms of service in the Temple and were required to practice sexual fasting during the time of their service. (We see this at the beginning of St. Luke’s gospel when he presents us with the account of Zachary and Elizabeth and the conception of John the Baptist).) So it is quite consistent with Scripture.

continued. . .

 

[FCEGM]

Following this example, but most especially the example of Christ the High Priest of the New Covenant, when married men were chosen to be deacons, priests, and bishops in the early Church they were required to be continent or be disbarred from the clergy, following the Apostolic example, who themselves were following the example of Christ in giving all to the furtherance of His Kingdom.

There were simple reasons for this: the Twelve were living celibate when they left their families to follow Our Lord and so were living with and like Him. Moreover, the Apostolic Offices of the Twelve was the highest office of the Church, which the Episcopal offices comes closest to but not equal to. The continence required of bishops followed the Twelve’s vocation to live totally for the Kingdom, as Our Lord says in Matthew 19 that some are eunuchs for the sake of the Kingdom.

At first this did not mean separation from one’s wife, but only separation from conjugal sex; this normally would not be a problem, since priests and bishops, and even deacons were chosen from the elders, i.e., those whose children were already raised.

The Church has always allowed couples who had no responsibilities towards offspring or others to mutually separate and enter religious life. In the first period of the Church when spirituality was higher than later (first 300 years) this was not so unusual and the Church following the practice of the Apostles as well as their example chose priests and deacons from among these spiritually mature elders, who though not separating from their wives who needed their financial and social support before such things as monasteries, lived like brothers and sisters with regard to sex. A great example of this in the West is St. Nicholas of Flue: after a prolific marriage, he and his wife spent the last 20 years in continence and he was blessed with prophecy and even living only on the Eucharist (15th century).

So it is a question of lowering the standards of priestly life and sacrifice, a spiritual issue rather than a doctrinal one. The East did that with significant provisos for deacons and priests – but NOT for bishops. But, the East has a greater monastic witness in the local Church than the West does.

 

[mark_a]

I had not heard someone suggest that before.

I wonder if those in another thread who have questioned whether I am Catholic, called me a cafeteria Catholic, and suggested that I have a problem with authority and obedience, would say the same to the priest you refer to. Perhaps he should refrain from expressing how he feels, someone might judge his faith?

Do you know what his reasons/rationale are?

Michael

I’m not sure. He is a very holy man though. He is a Jesuit, great administrator, and I don’t know anyone with the guts to challenge him.

His view about ordaining married deacons was said at the 11 AM mass, which is always a packed house.

Some other things I know of him:

He is not a fan of the current president.

He also provides some non-anti-Palestinian balance to the normally pro-Israel Christian right.

Other questions:

How has the celibacy discipline helped or hurt the Roman Church over the past 1000 years?

Has celebacy been important to the spread of Catholicism?

 

[Titus]

His view about ordaining married deacons was said at the 11 AM mass, which is always a packed house.

He is allowed to have those opinions, no? I’m not wild about him saying it in a homily but we can’t judge until we see context. In fact, I share them. (My idea is that after 20 years service as deacons, they get ordained). Don’t imagine it’s very practical, but there you go.

Some other things I know of him:

He is not a fan of the current president.

He also provides some non-anti-Palestinian balance to the normally pro-Israel Christian right.

Non anti= pro! But his political views don’t really come into it, do they? And here’s the big litmus test: what is his view on abortion

Other questions:

How has the celibacy discipline helped or hurt the Roman Church over the past 1000 years?

Has celebacy been important to the spread of Catholicism?
My simple answer is: How many members does the Catholic Church have? How does that compare to other denominations with married ministers?

 

[mark_a]

Hello Titus,

****He is allowed to have those opinions, no? I’m not wild about him saying it in a homily ****

**
My bad. He said it during the anouncements at the end of mass.
**
**

And here’s the big litmus test: what is his view on abortion

**
His view is orthodox. Whenever there is to be a gathering at an abortion clinic, he asks that no one confront anyone, only to pray.

**

My simple answer is: How many members does the Catholic Church have? How does that compare to other denominations with married ministers?

**
That’s stomping on thin ice in my opinion. For the most part, Christianity has been spread by the sword. Even Pope Benedict has had a few words to say about how Latin America was “evangelized”.

 

[Titus]

Hello Titus,
That’s stomping on thin ice in my opinion. For the most part, Christianity has been spread by the sword. Even Pope Benedict has had a few words to say about how Latin America was “evangelized”.

For the most part!!! Whoah! Really? Sure there were the Crusades and the Conquistadores and a lot of other bad stuff, but the real work was done by Paul et al travelling the globe in peace in the 1st century.

And how is that even relevant anyway to a discussion of celibacy?

 

[mark_a]

And how is that even relevant anyway to a discussion of celibacy?

I was responding to your post.

But I do it all the time on these forums. I’m especially adept at turning a thread into:

• a moral authority thread
• a contraception thread
  So poke that in your smipe!!

 

[Titus]

I was responding to your post.

But I do it all the time on these forums. I’m especially adept at turning a thread into:

• a moral authority thread
• a contraception thread
  So poke that in your smipe!!

That’s hijacking and technically against the rules. And what’s a smipe?

 

[Patrick_Eastin]

** Caution! ** This thread is wandering. Please get back on track.

 

[mark_a]

The link below concerning Roman priestly celebacy was in the ask an apologist forum (of all places). The article seems fairly old and of a different mindset than today’s.

newadvent.org/cathen/03481a.htm

writes Professor Mahaffy, “there can be little doubt that married life creates great difficulties and hindrances. The distractions caused by sickness and other human misfortunes increase necessarily in proportion to the number of the household; and as the clergy in all countries are likely to have large families the time which might be spent in meditation on their discourses is stolen from them by other duties and other cares. The Catholic priest when his daily round of outdoor duties is over, comes home to a quiet study, where there is nothing to disturb his thoughts. The family man is met at the door by troops of children welcoming his return and claiming his interest in all their little affairs. Or else the disagreements of the household demand him as an umpire and his mind is disturbed by no mere speculative contemplation of the faults and follies of mankind but by their actual invasion of his home.” (Mahaffy, The Decay of Modern Preaching, London, 1882, p. 42.)

Particularly interesting are the thoughts about how it might be for a married priest to come home to a marauding hoard of kids after a hard day’s work.

Which is something that’s unlikely to be at the forefront of most modern day Catholics, since most of us have only 2.1 kids.

It is strange how we have come to think of “modern preaching” as including those 2.1 kids.

Could accepting (and following) the Church teaching about ABC lead us to acceptance of the priestly celebacy discipline? Or keep us so busy with our family life that we just don’t have time for the priestly celebacy issue???

 

[Patrick_Eastin]

A general discussion of the why’s or why not of celibacy belongs on the Apologetics fora. Celibacy issues are, of course, appropos on the Vocations fora but only insofar as they apply to the discernment of one’s vocation or the up-keeping of one’s vocation.

Thanks to all who participated.

Sincerely,

Patrick Eastin