W
Will_S
Guest
No problem. Your bishop can call up Fr. Rostand at 816-753-0073 and ask him for a Pastor. There’s 3 or 4 priests in Veneta (Eugene).
- Status
M
mark_a
Guest
So Ireland has a shortage of priests and Poland evidently has a surplus. . . . .
Who knows why?
J
jpjd
Guest
No, I didn’t say it would be the end of the world. That is your hyperbole. I didn’t even make a judgement on whether it would be desirable Catholicism or not. I just said it would be the end the end of Catholicism as we know it. i.e., priests with small families (are they really using NFP?); priests getting divorced (yes, it will happen); priests dating and yes, I do think premarital sex would happen; etc as I made in my points 1 - 6. So, yes, this would be the end of Catholicism as we know it. If you doubt these things would happen, you are being naive.
J
jpjd
Guest
That’s because you didn’t ask me that question. In fact, I didn’t even see a post where you asked that question at all. That must have been in the middle of the thread that I didn’t read.
But since you ask it here, I can’t answer that until you clarify what you mean by a “first diaconal marriage” and a “second” diaconal marriage.
O
O_Duirnin
Guest
My parish priest is a relatively young Pole, who came over a few years ago as part of an agreement between our Diocese and a Polish one, but even he has said that such arrangements may not be sustainable in future, as the number of vocations in Poland too has now begun to decline.
P
ProVobis
Guest
Well, yeh, they were all being exiled to Ireland.
J
jpjd
Guest
The solution to the priest shortage is for families to live with a strong Catholic identity. No young man will consider becoming a priest if Catholicism is a foreign lifestyle. Parents should look with favor on their sons becoming priests, and should encourage all their children to spend some time considering whether a vocation is their calling.
W
Will_S
Guest
So pretty much right after Poland opens up to western secular liberalism, vocations begin to decline? What an unbelievable coincidence!
C
ConstantineTG
Guest
Its not about sex being sinful. Its about marriage is not given to an ordained man. One can be married before ordination, but not after. I’ve heard in Ukraine, in some instances the diaconal ordination is the day after the wedding.
But its not like the celibate priest do not have problems with sexual purity. I mean, we’re already aware of that issue.
Again, there are those today who do have sex even without the intention of marriage. What difference does this make?
Do you get pay increases in your secular job for every child you have? I get paid the same when before my son was born, and after. Why will the Church pay a priest more just because he has a larger family? The priest knows what he’s getting, its up to him to plan his life around his income.
Why will there be a conflict? Also, its clear you have never known the process for ordaining a married man. The wife is involved in the entire process. The wife also gets interviewed by the bishop, and consents to an agreement with the bishop regarding the duties of the husband. If a wife does not agree to the bishop, the bishop will not ordain the man. Its as simple as that.
Do you think celibate priests do not have families? I had a former RC pastor who after the morning Masses on Sundays, spend time with his family (parents, brother) until Monday. I’m pretty sure many diocesan priests are in a similar situation. They usually will be incardinated in the diocese of their home town because that is where they will go to seminary. So they will always have family to see and take care of.
Wow, really? The Eastern Churches, both Catholic and Orthodox, are doing fine. I don’t know why you would think this.
C
ConstantineTG
Guest
I totally agree! And what more would a family that has a strong Catholic identity and good values and catechized soundly than a family with a priest as a father?
I do not have statistics but it seems from what I have come across so far that at least one child of a priest takes up after the father in the service of the Church. Not always a male who becomes a priest, sometimes the woman who either becomes a monastic (a nun) or works as a layperson for the Church.
O
Oneofthewomen
Guest
I have no problem with married men being ordained priests.
I know a couple of permanent deacons who would make wonderful priests,
and have wives who I know would support them.
I have known 2 married priests from other rites (Melkite)
and they were 2 of the holiest men I have ever met.
My diocese ordained a married man this year.
He is a former protestant minister convert. I have not met him,
but by all accounts he is very orthodox and seems to be settling in very well here.
While I am thrilled that we have another priest, I can’t help to think that the Roman rite has a “double-standard” when it comes to the celibacy requirement.
On one hand, we tell men who have been Catholic all their lives that they must choose one vocation or the other- marriage or the priesthood- not both.
And on the other, we say to a convert, “Oh, that’s OK, we’ll dispense with the discipline in this case.”
As as said, I have no problem with ordaining married men, and I believe that the Roman rite could learn something from our Eastren brethern in this case.
I am just very curious as to why the Church allows it is some rare cases, that involve converts,
but is so adamant in it’s defense of the discipline for “cradle-Catholics”.
I know a couple of permanent deacons who would make wonderful priests,
and have wives who I know would support them.
I have known 2 married priests from other rites (Melkite)
and they were 2 of the holiest men I have ever met.
My diocese ordained a married man this year.
He is a former protestant minister convert. I have not met him,
but by all accounts he is very orthodox and seems to be settling in very well here.
While I am thrilled that we have another priest, I can’t help to think that the Roman rite has a “double-standard” when it comes to the celibacy requirement.
On one hand, we tell men who have been Catholic all their lives that they must choose one vocation or the other- marriage or the priesthood- not both.
And on the other, we say to a convert, “Oh, that’s OK, we’ll dispense with the discipline in this case.”
As as said, I have no problem with ordaining married men, and I believe that the Roman rite could learn something from our Eastren brethern in this case.
I am just very curious as to why the Church allows it is some rare cases, that involve converts,
but is so adamant in it’s defense of the discipline for “cradle-Catholics”.
P
PbloPicasso
Guest
God, knows why.
P
Pfaffenhoffen
Guest
It seems from some statistics that the sex scandal in the RC is statistically less prevalent tahn with Physical Educatio Teachers, doctors, Protestan pastors.
Maybe the RCC takes the responsability on He shoulders and cough all the money it has. I regret the victims, but once I heard a victim’s lawyer spreaking and it was nauseating: all he wanted was money, for himself, obviously. They smell the odor of the dollar bills and know that the RCC will go bankrupt if needed for takes responsability.
For the others, maybe the gold lode was not so thick…
Again, I pity and pray for the victims…
As for married Catholic Priest who come from the Protestan they are at a loss. I read an interview with one of them and he said: “People demand from me more, more, more. I am a married person, I am not like the other Catholci Priests”.
Well, to be sure, we , Catholic are spoiled religious fellows…
P
Pfaffenhoffen
Guest
It seems that the reasons apointed here in CAF for marriage of priests are circumstancial:
*]shortage of priests: there are thousand of ways to manage the human resources we have in the Church. Look at Africa where you have to go 8 hours walking to a mass in certain places and you see the priest once a year and Africa is exploding in the rCC
*]cut in sex energy: it is like the trees. You cut one branch for the other to grow. Priests cut on the sexual energy and family in one side to grow on the other. Anyhow, any person, when passes from single to married, he must cut: he cannot date other girsls but his wife. Was Mother Theresa of Calcutta sexual frustrated? Yes, but, boy, for such a cause !!! Would she be a better person if she was married? Equal maybe, better, I doubt !!!
*]It seems the argument is: Priests married? why not?
*]than if it is such a superficial argument, I would say: Bishops? why not? the Pope? why not when we had the scandal of Alexander VI and the Popes of Renaisscance.
*]the why not? does not mean YES.
GBY
P
Pfaffenhoffen
Guest
Never thought on that. Tell me: who do you thnik would win? Of course with a brave woman !!!
P
Pfaffenhoffen
Guest
my highlighting
P
Pfaffenhoffen
Guest
OK, jokes are not to be explained. But, please, explain me that, as if I were stupid. Hint: you mean, go back to the old times? And old times offered many vocation?
B
BellsSmells
Guest
This problem is a lot different than most people think in my opinion. The bishop is right. There is obviously room in the Catholic Church for both celibate and married priests. We have them now, be they Eastern Catholic priests or married men who became Catholic priests after once being Orthodox priests, Anglican ministers, Lutheran ministers, etc. The Holy See clearly recognizes as shown by the fact that the abominable 1929 ban on married Eastern Catholic priests in the USA (rammed through by the Latin Rite Hierarchy at the time) is finally no longer in effect.
The problem is what sort of explosion would happen if the ban were lifted? Would already celibate priests be allowed to date with the hopes of getting married? How about those in seminary? This would be hugely different than ordaining already married (for years) men to the priesthood or permanent diaconate. And if you didn’t allow celibate priests to date and hopefully get married just imagine the tremendous backlash in terms of what many would say is fairness.
There is also the matter of the bishops including the pope. If the Church allowed married priests could only a celibate priest (as it is in the East, traditionally from the ranks of the monastics) become a bishop? Just imagine how that would be attacked as being unfair and what would the ramifications be of married bishops?
I have no question the Church would allow more Latin Rite priests to be married if it could find a way to do so without causing huge problems. Not just big problems Bishop, but problems that could tear apart the Latin Rite priesthood.
Where I disagree with the Bishop is looking at allowing married priests as a means to boost vocations. You would lose far more priests due to turmoil then you would gain and this would be true for 2-3 generations. The largest gains would likely be retired, married men. I base this on the fact that retired, married women are now the #1 profile for Anglican seminarians in the USA and the huge number of permanent deacons (mostly retired, married males) in the USA
I just don’t see a practical way for the Church to allow more married Latin Rite priests without causing huge, practical problems.
D
Darran
Guest
I can’t think of a good side to this at all. It has been fine for 1500 years, why muck around with it now? It’ll only create more problems than it’s worth.
The Belfast Telegraph published a story about a seminarian a couple of days ago. He says he “suffered greatly” for months before his ordaination, and eventually told the bishop that he couldn’t live chaste. Now he blames it on the Church, not on his OWN calling (as if the Church would be in the way of God wanting you to be ordained) and now criticizes Church doctrine in the same paper. The Telegraph obviosly making him out to be a victim and Bishop Daly out to be a messiah.
This is the same paper that churns out anti-catholic filth constantly, and at every possible event. Last year it claimed that St Patrick (born 5th century) was a protestant, just to give you an idea.
The seminarian clearly wasn’t fit to be a priest, and not just because of being unable to be celibate. Would you like someone as changeable as that to be ordained? Because you will get far worse if celibacy is dropped. Anyone supporting Daly here in Ireland isn’t much better than another protestant as far as I’m concerned. Too many people trying to be the “gate of hades” to bring down the Church. Vatican II, now this? You had better be careful it doesn’t become like Trigger’s broom.
The Belfast Telegraph published a story about a seminarian a couple of days ago. He says he “suffered greatly” for months before his ordaination, and eventually told the bishop that he couldn’t live chaste. Now he blames it on the Church, not on his OWN calling (as if the Church would be in the way of God wanting you to be ordained) and now criticizes Church doctrine in the same paper. The Telegraph obviosly making him out to be a victim and Bishop Daly out to be a messiah.
This is the same paper that churns out anti-catholic filth constantly, and at every possible event. Last year it claimed that St Patrick (born 5th century) was a protestant, just to give you an idea.
The seminarian clearly wasn’t fit to be a priest, and not just because of being unable to be celibate. Would you like someone as changeable as that to be ordained? Because you will get far worse if celibacy is dropped. Anyone supporting Daly here in Ireland isn’t much better than another protestant as far as I’m concerned. Too many people trying to be the “gate of hades” to bring down the Church. Vatican II, now this? You had better be careful it doesn’t become like Trigger’s broom.
P
Pilgrim1701
Guest
Lol, though not sure most people here will get the reference to ‘Trigger’s Broom’.
youtube.com/watch?v=pbha4XclSMU
…I can’t help to think that the Roman rite has a “double-standard” when it comes to the celibacy requirement.
On one hand, we tell men who have been Catholic all their lives that they must choose one vocation or the other- marriage or the priesthood- not both.
And on the other, we say to a convert, “Oh, that’s OK, we’ll dispense with the discipline in this case.”
- Status