How bad would Rome let the situation get in the US, before it allows married Priests?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Catholic29
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

Catholic29

Guest
If the priest shortage in America got bad enough to the point where half or more of current US parishes would have to close, do you think Rome would grant US bishops and Indult to ordain married men to the Priesthood?

Or would Rome allow the Catholic Church in America to fall into formal schism, or let the bulk of US Catholics fall into Protestantism or no faith, before it would ever compromise on its disciplines?

I would personally prefer the celibate state for Priests, and I’m certain God does as well. But is the discipline of celibacy so important as to allow parishes to close, with more Catholics having reduced access to the sacraments, as a result of not enough men being ordained?
 
I think it might force Rome to do just that if the situation gets especially dire. Personally, I think that it’s either the Holy See finally lift the current discpline on the Latin rite, or lift the ban on Eastern rite clergy to do missionary work. Either way, it would be a big step for the Church.
 
40.png
Milliardo:
Either way, it would be a big step for the Church.
Click to expand...
By “big step”, do you mean “good step”? While I agree that allowing Eastern Rite clergy to do missionary work would make sense, I do not believe that caving in to the pressure (for married Latin Rite clergy) would be a good thing.

American dioceses that promote and enforce solid, orthodox practices are not suffering from empty seminaries.
 
The lack of vocations is due to the lack of Catachesis, and the use of birth control, not the fact Latin Rite priests don’t get to marry.
 
40.png
Catholic29:
If the priest shortage in America got bad enough to the point where half or more of current US parishes would have to close, do you think Rome would grant US bishops and Indult to ordain married men to the Priesthood?

QUOTE]
if there was a shred of evidence from the Orthodox or from Protestant denominations that the option of marriage for clergy would solve the priest shortage, Rome would probably consider a change. Since there is not such evidence, what would be the point? The root cause of the priest shortage should be addressed, which is lay Catholics who have rejected Church teaching on marriage and family, and have contracepted future priests out of existence.
Click to expand...
 
What priest shortage? :confused:

It may seem like a shortage to some of us, but to Rome everything is fine!

Let’s be realistic about this, the USA has one of the highest priest to believer ratios in the world. To residents of some countries, it would seem like a glut!

I think that the priest shortage, as we see it in North America, is nowhere near bad enough for Rome to change it’s position on mandatory celibacy. Otherwise they would have done so to ease the acute shortages in countries like Brazil, Mexico and the Phillipines.

The USA could send fully half of it’s current priests out as missionaries (shutting down numerous parishes in the process) and still be better situated than most third world countries.

We Americans are living in a dream world.
 
40.png
Hesychios:
What priest shortage? :confused:

It may seem like a shortage to some of us, but to Rome everything is fine!

Let’s be realistic about this, the USA has one of the highest priest to believer ratios in the world. To residents of some countries, it would seem like a glut!
Click to expand...
I have often wondered about the actual figures on this.
At my parish, right now, we have 4 priests and 8 seminarians.
Are the “Priest Shortage” figures in the US overblown? (or are we just particularly blessed?)
 
see post on related thread

Catholics will not have married clergy until they learn to tithe.
 
40.png
Catholic29:
If the priest shortage in America got bad enough to the point where half or more of current US parishes would have to close, do you think Rome would grant US bishops and Indult to ordain married men to the Priesthood?

Or would Rome allow the Catholic Church in America to fall into formal schism, or let the bulk of US Catholics fall into Protestantism or no faith, before it would ever compromise on its disciplines?

I would personally prefer the celibate state for Priests, and I’m certain God does as well. But is the discipline of celibacy so important as to allow parishes to close, with more Catholics having reduced access to the sacraments, as a result of not enough men being ordained?
Click to expand...
Rome would supply priests from other countries and would encourage the Catholic Church in America to support itself by encouraging young men to become priests. Catholics are only obligated to receive Holy Communion once a year and Confess known Mortal sin once a year when the Sacraments are not normally available to them. Here there are 9 Catholic churches with 9 priests within 20 miles of each other. Even if only one had a resident priest Holy Communion would be available every Sunday at all of them. Reconciliation would be available once every two months at each parish (each week at a different parish). The Sick would be visited once a month and in an emergency situation as necessary. Weddings and funerals and Baptisms could be conducted by Deacons if necessary. Priests would have their primary function as celebrants of Sacraments and parishes would be administrated by lay persons appointed by the Bishop. A married priesthood is not an answer to the priest shortage.
 
Priests used to be able to marry , why did it change?
i heard it was because the church was made liable to pay the spouse money if the priest got divorced.
 
When I hear people suggest that the church ordain married men I wonder if they have really thought it through. A lot of the issues have been talked about here and other places. But the following I haven’t seen addressed.

It’s a calling by God. Not by the would-be-priests wife. Or mother. Or by the parish. I can see some rather pious guy being talked into being a priest by people around him who think he’s swell.

If the would-be-priests think they are called to the priesthood, why aren’t they already permanent deacons? Or studying or discerning? How different is the vocation to be a permanent deacon or being a priest when both are married?

Thoughts please.
 
40.png
Catholic29:
If the priest shortage in America got bad enough to the point where half or more of current US parishes would have to close, do you think Rome would grant US bishops and Indult to ordain married men to the Priesthood?

Or would Rome allow the Catholic Church in America to fall into formal schism, or let the bulk of US Catholics fall into Protestantism or no faith, before it would ever compromise on its disciplines?

I would personally prefer the celibate state for Priests, and I’m certain God does as well. But is the discipline of celibacy so important as to allow parishes to close, with more Catholics having reduced access to the sacraments, as a result of not enough men being ordained?
Click to expand...
I don’t like compromise when it comes to the Church. I would hope that the Holy See would not go down that road on any issue since to do so could open the door to further compromise. Having said that, I don’t believe that having married priests would increase the number of American priests. Believe it or not, not all men view sex as being the most important thing to live for. And when you get right down to it, sex is the only thing that a priest is missing out on since his parish is his family. He has more children to look after than any household on the block. He deals with many things that the typical family deals with and then some.
God bless.
 
Rome would look at other options first.

Right now, the Church is very strong in Eastern Europe and Africa. Their seminaries are full and they are turning away canidates.

The American church would import priests from these locations first.

There are plenty of men in those locations would would appreciate a chance to attend seminary here.

I know that is happening in Detroit. My associate pastor is from Poland, ordained here, I personally know 5 other Polish priests. And I know of 3 parishes that have priests from Nigeria.

No one ever said a priest in America had to be American.
 
Do you realize how much it would cost the Church to allow priests to marry?

Just thinkof all those “big Catholic families” that would be supported by the Church. :whistle:

Shannin
 
40.png
btritone:
Priests used to be able to marry , why did it change?
i heard it was because the church was made liable to pay the spouse money if the priest got divorced.
Click to expand...
The Church has always had married priests. They are generally in the Eastern Catholic Churchs.

In that sense, it never changed.

But around the 10th century, a ‘universal’ celibacy rule slowly came into effect.

The issues were two fold. First of all St. Paul states that celibacy is the preferred state for a clergyman, so the Church therefore prefers a celibate priest.

Secondly, it allows the priest to focus his time more fully on his flock.

And finally, there were cases of abuse, where priests or bishops embezzeled Church funds to enrich their familes. This has also been seen in the Protestant demons as well ( think Jim Bakker)
 
40.png
btritone:
Priests used to be able to marry , why did it change?
i heard it was because the church was made liable to pay the spouse money if the priest got divorced.
Click to expand...
At the time the Latin church made the change there was an ample supply of individuals willing to live a celibate life. The number of candidates for the priesthood was more than sufficient in the most developed areas of western Europe.

The monastic movement was booming in western Europe. The use of priestmonks was considered a reform at the time. There were some areas (such as northern France) where the married priesthood survived much later than the official ‘cutoff’ date. It didn’t disappear all at once.

One other point: the basic costs for a rural church (which most parishes were) was born by the local lords. They paid the costs to build the churches and often supplied the priests expenses out of their own funds. That was the purpose of the endowments of land, it was a way of setting up some income property (like a trust fund).

The local peasantry and workmen didn’t have the means to support a parish on their own, for the most part, when they were bound to the land.

For any number of reasons it might have seemed better to install a celibate in the rectory, as hard as that may have been for him. But that is not the option used in the East, priests and their families continued to run their own farms. So we have ample experience with both married and celibate priests in our culture to draw upon if need be.
 
How will allowing married priest help the situation? People who are called to the priesthood are not becoming priest because they are not open to the call of God. Allowing married priest will not fix the underlying problem.
 
40.png
bogeyjlg:
How will allowing married priest help the situation? People who are called to the priesthood are not becoming priest because they are not open to the call of God. Allowing married priest will not fix the underlying problem.
Click to expand...
Yes, that is exactly the point. We get the number and quality of vocations we deserve.
 
I think that we need to leave this in God’s hands, by waiting, following the laws He gave us, and believing that He will take care of His Church.

I don’t think we should change the Church’s laws to fit our wants and needs, but take note of what is happening around us and change our wants and needs to fit the Church’s laws. Mainly have faith that God will pull us through this trial if we will consecrate our lives to His Will for us, and believe in His Grace.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top