Great article by a married Catholic Priest

[Tis_Bearself]

Orders aren’t really designed to “provide parish priests”. That was never their purpose.
They each have particular charisms that they are supposed to be practicing, whether that’s working with the poor, teaching, preaching, being missionaries, running seminaries, living a life of prayer and penance in a monastery, etc.

 

[otjm]

That is why the seminaries are charged with vetting.

The same could be said for married deacons; but I have yet to hear that there are problems.

This could get us seriously off topic and possible down a rabbit hole that would get the topic closed or someone banned. Not much to be accomplished there.

 

[otjm]

Our local Benedictine Community is, I believe, staffing one or two parishes; that certainly is not their charism. The local Trappists don’t. The local Brigittines priory does not have any priests, and I don’t believe they intend to have any monks ordained.

The Franciscans were staffing a parish nearby, but they have withdrawn from parish ministry. The Dominicans have a parish in Portland and staff the Newman Center at U of O. I believe the Jesuits have one parish in Oregon. There may be a priest here and there as pastor of a parish who belongs to a community or order, although I am not aware of who and where.

Each order has a charism. Some are missionaries (e.g Maryknoll, and SOLT). some are contemplative, such as the first three I mentioned above.

 

[dochawk]

The Eastern Orthodox and Eastern Rite Catholic churches have always had both married and celibate clergy.

To be clear, though, married is the norm for non-monastic priests in the east. While I believe that almost all will now ordain a single man for the parish, that has not always been the case.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

I presume you meant to say “almost all will now ordain a single man for the parish…” as otherwise your comment is not quite logical.

My question therefore is: Why was there a big preference for ordaining a married man for the parish, to the point that single men were not ocnsidered? Was it because they felt a man needed to show he could be a good husband in order to be a good priest, or because singleness outside of a monastery is generally frowned upon, or because they felt a single man couldn’t advise married people on marriage-related issues, or did they think there was a specific issue with having a priest who wasn’t married (for example, he might start relationships with parishioners, he might get too lonely, etc.), or was it just tradition because Aaron, Peter etc had spouses?

 

[dochawk]

I presume you meant to say “almost all will now ordain a single man for the parish…” as otherwise your comment is not quite logical.

err, yes; fixed.

Why was there a big preference for ordaining a married man for the parish, to the point that single men were not ocnsidered?

Timothy’s instruction to chose a “husband of one wife”.

The monastics/hermits living apart are a separate thing.

hawk

 

[CTBcin]

You need to meet more priests.

I am 72, have had relatives who were ordained, and have met and gotten to know numerous other priests.

He is not that far off the mark on his commentary.

Agreed. I have close friendships with several priests and they have told me that loneliness and temptation is something that most priests struggle with in one way or another. Some much more than others.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

I have close friendships with several priests and they have told me that loneliness and temptation is something that most priests struggle with in one way or another. Some much more than others.

But don’t most people in general struggle with this? Just because one is free to marry and have children, doesn’t mean that they will be able to accomplish either, nor that their family life will be totally fulfilling and free of loneliness if they do.

 

[jack63]

CTBcin:

I have close friendships with several priests and they have told me that loneliness and temptation is something that most priests struggle with in one way or another. Some much more than others.

The short answer to your questions is “yes”…of course everybody struggles with temptation and loneliness.

However, in terms of the debate on priestly celibacy, today you’re not going to find absolute truths, black and white answers, or a formula that fits every case. You weigh the positives of allowing married priests with the negatives. Of course allowing married priests will not fix every problem in the Church, and it will create new problems. The question is…“Is it worth it?”

 

[Tis_Bearself]

As I may have said earlier in this thread (or perhaps it was some other thread on similar topic), if allowing married priests was suddenly going to double the number of priests who are ordained and stay in the priesthood for life, no dropping out later, then I would say give it a try.

However, I have my doubts that we would suddenly get a huge increase in the number of priests by permitting this, so the costs (which would include having to deal with all the ups and downs of priests’ marriages, family life, financial issues, the priest’s wife’s proper role, priests whose marriages end via death or divorce and presumably they couldn’t remarry, and probably some of the more traditional Western Catholics being very put off by yet another big change in the Church) would not be worth the benefits (a small increase in number of priests).

 

[CTBcin]

But don’t most people in general struggle with this? Just because one is free to marry and have children, doesn’t mean that they will be able to accomplish either, nor that their family life will be totally fulfilling and free of loneliness if they do.

Yes, I agree. It’s part of the human condition. Although I’d say priests struggle with it in a particularly unique way.

 

[jack63]

if allowing married priests was suddenly going to double the number of priests who are ordained and stay in the priesthood for life, no dropping out later, then I would say give it a try.

…I think we can both agree this won’t happen.

I think that if you started ordaining older married men in the Latin rite in the US for high need areas (rural areas or higher education), you’d have about a 25% to 30% increase in about 10ish years. However, this would be very high quality group with limited issues…financial issues, divorce, or major issues with children. This seems like a really good deal for the Catholic church. Why not consider this? Why must you need an immediate 2x increase?

 

[JulianN]

Also they should demand that any who are currently married practice perpetual celibacy.

That’s a contradiction in terms. Yes be cannot be both married and celibate.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

A 30 percent increase spread over 10 years is pretty small, especially when according to your model, the men would be older so they would have fewer years to give the Church in return for the relatively large burden of educating them. I would think the middle-aged men would generally continue to enter the diaconate as they’ve been doing.

Also, I thought the idea of ordaining married men was to encourage more younger men to join because they will not have to choose between marriage and priesthood, or face the possibility of a lonely existence as a priest.

 

[jack63]

I thought the idea of ordaining married men was to encourage more younger men to join because they will not have to choose between marriage and priesthood, or face the possibility of a lonely existence as a priest.

This isn’t at all the model that the article by Fr. Longenecker is proposing. Specifically he says…

Would not the formation and support of our priests be better if those who were celibate were also members of a religious community? This is the practice of the Eastern Orthodox. Then would it not be a complement to the celibate priesthood if more tested and mature married men were to be ordained?

 

[Tis_Bearself]

I’m not necessarily buying into Fr. Longenecker’s proposal as the main reason why the Church would do such a thing.
The Church is like any other business. It wants young blood. It will take the occasional qualified older person, but it really doesn’t want a workforce that is going to age out quickly and need retirement pay.
Plus there are a lot of headaches trying to form an older person to enter the priesthood. A guy in his late 30s might have ideas of his own and not be able to be influenced, mentored or otherwise made to follow authority.

Priests like Fr. Longenecker were accepted with an eye towards the Church wanting to bring the Anglicans back into the fold. Which seems to have hit a roadblock when the Anglicans and Episcopalians started ordaining women.

 

[jack63]

Bearself…your responses are interesting…at least, and they help me understand where people are coming from. I don’t think we’re ever going to agree on much though…that’s ok. Thanks for responding.

The church is not a business to me. It plays an entirely different role.

A man who is 30 on up will be hard to control, influence, and manipulate.That is no doubt true. Perhaps this is exactly what the church needs.

If money is the biggest roadblock preventing viri probati priests, I think that is really good news. It will be the easiest issue to overcome. Priests and their families will gladly pay for training and education in many cases if that is really the main roadblock.

 

[InThePew]

A guy in his late 30s might have ideas of his own and not be able to be influenced, mentored or otherwise made to follow authority

I was 33 when I entered the seminary (others I’ve known have been older - some only a small amount others a considerable amount). I definitely had ideas of my own and, having had a career that’s to be expected. Granted, the seminary system is more accustomed to younger men without the same level of life experience and so does have some difficulties when it comes to forming older applicants. However, that’s not the same as saying that older applicants are any less able to be influenced, mentored or otherwise made to follow authority. Certainly, in every workplace I’ve experienced (or heard of for that matter) following authority was a given as was being open to the idea, influence and support of others - especially those with more experience. If anything I’d say that these difficulties arise to a greater extent in younger applicants. So this in itself, should not be a barrier to admitting older, married men to the priesthood.

 

[jack63]

So I thought about this thread further. One concern was raised (a concern that has really just baffled me). The concern was that somehow allowing more married men as catholic priests will lead to woman being catholic priests or deacons. I’m often amused when I read some progressive opinions about married Catholic priests. They warn that people should be careful for what they wish for because these men (i.e. married catholic priests) will be very conservative. This is pretty much what I think will happen…

However, somehow some people still worry that allowing more married men as catholic priests is a slide toward secularism in the Catholic church. I couldn’t disagree more with this. Likely married catholic priests will be great allies against secularism in the Catholic church. The same author, Longenecker, put out another opinion piece on why woman can’t be Catholic priests.

Why Women Can’t Be Catholic Priests | Fr. Dwight Longenecker

 

[Dhc8_Type]

The farmers from fisher prosecuted the pastor that was dipping into the offering to pay for his kid’s hockey goalie equipment. So that’s a nonstarter. No one ever questioned bing presents I got. But my mom worked too.