Italian Catholic Episcopal Conference Vetoes Married Priests

[Hesychios]

I imagine the Italio-Greeks/Albanians are probably territorially restricted to the southern most part of Italy, since those were the last areas to retain Byzantine control.

The entire episcopal structure of southern Italy was at one time all Byzantine. After the Latin bishops were appointed they were eventually converted into Latin rite dioceses. So the history of some of these dioceses can be very old, and one would see where they once had Greek rite bishops. The famous monk Barlaam of Calabria, who contended with Saint Gregory Palamas, was one such. He was appointed to be bishop of Gerace which today is a Latin diocese.

However, these two dioceses of Lungro degli Albanesi and Piana degli Albanesi are much more recent in origin, and they are not like the EC dioceses in north America, they do not overlap in territory with the Latin dioceses. They actually are territorial and very small. That is how they decided to deal with it when the Pope gave the Albanians some bishops.



One can see them on this map as two little sets of yellow sprinkles, one near Palermo (1) and the other in Cosoza (2). This of course means they have no authority elsewhere in Italy without the cooperation of the local Latin bishops, and cannot easily serve the immigrant Ukrainians and Romanians (most of whom - I would think - are migrating to the industrial north).

It would be like the BCC getting Brooklyn Heights, but not the rest of Long Island, and McKeesport and a little bit more of Pittsburgh suburbs. It seems strange, but we have to remember that when discussing Eastern Catholics in Italy. It happens to be the case that presently both bishops have retired and the Pope has not named replacements, so they are temporarily being administered by Latin rite Catholic bishops. I think that this circumstance is far more interesting timing than the new Anglican Ordinariates, which probably will have no impact on Italy whatsoever.

 

[Little_Boy_Lost]

Why can’t any of the Eastern Churches erect their own dioceses? Shouldn’t they be able to?

 

[UnworthyApostle]

These Latinizations need to stop, and the Latinazations that have occured need to be removed. We as Eastern Churches must go back to our own history. These bishops are a very audacious bunch indeed!

 

[Little_Boy_Lost]

ahhhhh and i joined CAF today expecting to see actual catholics… i had no idea i would puke on my keyboard the first post i read… you are comparing catholic priest, which have had their souls marked at ordination, to be a spouse to the church. to a minister who sat in a liberal theology class, and was taught untruth.

Granted the comparison does not do justice to the idea of Holy Orders, but Celibacy, and Continence are not Indelible to a person’s ministry. The church accepted the east’s norms and canons which were promulgated at the Quintext Conucil of Trullo as a followup up to the Sixth Ecumenical Council. These norms coexisted within the same Church until the Schism between the Orthodox East and the Catholic West.

 

[WorkerPriest]

I’m sure many will love to make hay of this, but what makes one so sure that priests of the Reformation churches are not similarly marked in their ordinations?

Ah, well… not the point of the OP. Just a spurious charge I had difficulty letting slide. I did not sit in a liberal seminary, and I do not think I was taught any more untruth than a modern Roman seminarian sitting at the feet of the average Jesuit professor these days. The bishop who ordained me has a pedigree going back to St. Peter and St. John, though it passes through the Old Catholics… but as Lutherans, we make less of an issue of our Apostolic Sucession than many of our Roman brethren. I serve alongside those who have not had the advantage of an episcopal ordination according to the historic canons, but their ministry bears fruitful witness to the validity of their presbyterial ordination, none the less.

Perhaps we should be a bit more circumspect, before puking on our keyboards, and out into the ether.

Peace to all.

Granted the comparison does not do justice to the idea of Holy Orders, but Celibacy, and Continence are not Indelible to a person’s ministry. The church accepted the east’s norms and canons which were promulgated at the Quintext Conucil of Trullo as a followup up to the Sixth Ecumenical Council. These norms coexisted within the same Church until the Schism between the Orthodox East and the Catholic West.

 

[WorkerPriest]

Indeed, this kind of treatment given to the Eastern Catholic churches, gives great pause to the catholic minded Reformation churches. I know many a good Anglo-Catholic, who doubts the wisdom of entering the Anglican Ordinariate, for just these kinds of problems… and more than a few catholic minded Lutherans, too.

It does make one wonder, if there are those within the Roman Church, who are doing this intentionally to keep catholic minded Reformation Christians from entering full, visible communion with Rome.

Grace and peace.

These Latinizations need to stop, and the Latinazations that have occured need to be removed. We as Eastern Churches must go back to our own history. These bishops are a very audacious bunch indeed!

 

[BernadetteM]

The Holy Father has set up the Ordinariates in a manner very different than the Eastern Rite Churches are.

I doubt that these Italian Bishops will have much influence over the Pope and he is the head of the Church.

Also the AC does not guarantee beyond certain time limits that priests who are married will be accepted. It will be on an individual basis. Of course it could be years before any thing will change.

There have been married ministers ordiained for many years that came in as individuals.

One must make the decision to be Catholic based on the decision that the Church is the Church founded by Christ, not on personal desires. Once one knows that it is the true Church one should take the steps to enter and accept the leadership of the Holy Father who sits on the Chair of Peter.

There are many Anglo Catholics who cannot or will not join because many within the Anglican Communion can’t accept the Papacy, nor being obedient to anyone other than self. At least this is my perspective as a former Anglo Catholic.

God Bless

Bernadette

 

[5Loaves]

ahhhhh and i joined CAF today expecting to see actual catholics… i had no idea i would puke on my keyboard the first post i read… you are comparing catholic priest, which have had their souls marked at ordination, to be a spouse to the church. to a minister who sat in a liberal theology class, and was taught untruth.

Welcome to CAF and to the Eastern Catholicism section.
Married priests have traditionally been the norm for Eastern Catholics. The Romanian Catholic Church, the topic of the OPs post, is an Eastern Catholic Church, not a Latin Church.

 

[WorkerPriest]

What you say is fair, and true. As much as we might feel free to speak of anyone else’s intentions, it could be that some cannot walk with full submission to Rome’s disciplines because they have made themselves their own total authority… but I know that is not the universal case. There are those who are in submission to their communion’s rule and discipline, with an eye toward submission to Christ as best they understand His call. We ought not impugn them, be they Orthodox, Anglican, or Lutheran.

May Risen Lord grant visible unity in fulness to His Church, which matches the baptismal unity already shared… and may we not in our broken humanity, continue to resist Him.

The Holy Father has set up the Ordinariates in a manner very different than the Eastern Rite Churches are.

I doubt that these Italian Bishops will have much influence over the Pope and he is the head of the Church.

Also the AC does not guarantee beyond certain time limits that priests who are married will be accepted. It will be on an individual basis. Of course it could be years before any thing will change.

There have been married ministers ordiained for many years that came in as individuals.

One must make the decision to be Catholic based on the decision that the Church is the Church founded by Christ, not on personal desires. Once one knows that it is the true Church one should take the steps to enter and accept the leadership of the Holy Father who sits on the Chair of Peter.

There are many Anglo Catholics who cannot or will not join because many within the Anglican Communion can’t accept the Papacy, nor being obedient to anyone other than self. At least this is my perspective as a former Anglo Catholic.

God Bless

Bernadette

 

[ciero]

*Most other denominations allow their ministers to marry and it has not caused any harm or scandle that I can think of.

Also, think how much better a married Priest would be at counselling a couple in a troubled marriage. Many times I have spoken to my Priest about my marriage and felt like he just doesn’t get it, since he has never experienced it.*

ahhhhh and i joined CAF today expecting to see actual catholics… i had no idea i would puke on my keyboard the first post i read… you are comparing catholic priest, which have had their souls marked at ordination, to be a spouse to the church. to a minister who sat in a liberal theology class, and was taught untruth. maybe change your religion tab on profile to protestant? if you dont follow/agree with what the church teaches, why are you claiming Catholicism?

IGNORANCE is nice isn’t it?

 

[MBd]

Another step backwards no?

The article was from St. Elias in Toronto.

see, these are the kind of things I find discouraging and frustrating. Like, I feel terribly bad for my eastern catholic brethren. How can the Roman Church push their traditions down the throats of the Eastern Church? That’s not authority, that’s authoritarianism. That’s exactly what Jesus didn’t want from his church. I feel like it has stopped being about HIM and now it’s about US. I feel the roman church puts these lame excuses in order to spit on the patrimony of eastern churches. This might sound bad, but I don’t blame some of them for converting to the Orthodox Church. It’s not that some of them hate the Church. They just hate authoritarianism and legalism. I mean, if you and your church are treated as second-class citizens, how long can you put up with it?

just 1 suggestion for my eastern catholic brethren… why not “rebel” a little bit and disobey the “law” by keeping their tradition of ordaining married men to the priesthood while taking the case to the Pope??? I mean, what else can they do besides blabbing?

 

[Little_Boy_Lost]

just 1 suggestion for my eastern catholic brethren… why not “rebel” a little bit and disobey the “law” by keeping their tradition of ordaining married men to the priesthood while taking the case to the Pope??? I mean, what else can they do besides blabbing?

Whilst that’s not a terribly humble opinion, I nevertheless at times wish one or several of the Patriarchs would just do what they wanted. Ordain married priests here and there according to their laws. Elect their bishops without having to wait. Set up their own Eparchies where they wanted. But alas, I think it would only backfire…

 

[MBd]

Whilst that’s not a terribly humble opinion, I nevertheless at times wish one or several of the Patriarchs would just do what they wanted. Ordain married priests here and there according to their laws. Elect their bishops without having to wait. Set up their own Eparchies where they wanted. But alas, I think it would only backfire…

Why? it’s not like they would be selfish, or arrogant, or heretical. They would only be doing what the Pope told them they could do. They would be submitting themselves to authority but not authoritarianism.

 

[amenministries]

Whilst that’s not a terribly humble opinion, I nevertheless at times wish one or several of the Patriarchs would just do what they wanted. Ordain married priests here and there according to their laws. Elect their bishops without having to wait. Set up their own Eparchies where they wanted. But alas, I think it would only backfire…

and this is why we have protestants… b/c you think you can break off and do your own thing. let me ask you peeps do you think the bishops and cardinals and popes should marry?

 

[MBd]

**

and this is why we have protestants… b/c you think you can break off and do your own thing. let me ask you peeps do you think the bishops and cardinals and popes should marry?

no one’s talking about breaking off and doing your own thing. I, at least, am talking about not submitting to authoritarianism and not letting the roman church “latinize” the eastern church.
As for your question, you should only marry when God calls you to marry, whether you’re a bishop, a priest or a deacon. If that’s God’s calling for your life then you should. So see, it’s not what you or me believe, it’s what God says

 

[Little_Boy_Lost]

**
and this is why we have protestants… b/c you think you can break off and do your own thing. let me ask you peeps do you think the bishops and cardinals and popes should marry?

If they desire it for themselves they can. However, at this point in time, I think it would be more an innovation than a restoration given western development with a celibate clergy for the last millennium and the influence of modernism. What I am asking for is respect, equality, as brothers for our clergy and our churches, not as servants.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

**

and this is why we have protestants… b/c you think you can break off and do your own thing. let me ask you peeps do you think the bishops and cardinals and popes should marry?

Nice Strawman.

The Eastern Catholic Churches ordain married men to the priesthood. Tell me why a group outside of the sui juris Church should get any say in what priests serve our Churches. Do we get a say who can serve as a priest in the Roman Church?

Also, bishops have always been required to be celibate.

I would also point out that a cardinal is not a part of Holy Orders. The pope could one day say that a secular person could be a cardinal.

 

[dvdjs]

. Tell me why a group outside of the sui juris Church should get any say in what priests serve our Churches.

Thanks for this question. It is simple, and should be considered a bit by all of the Greek Catholics who are posting here.

We are talking about a group that has immigrated to a country that, itself, has a long-established Catholic Church. Should a new Church - ie eparchy, be established for the newcomers? Should established hierarchs oversee new parishes for them? Should they adapt to the established culture? Should immigration be limited, stopped, or reversed? Not all of these questions are germane to the issue at hand, but all are very much part of the discussion in Italy.

It is perfectly reasonable for the Italian bishops to weigh in because they are the bishops in place, and these issues affect their flock. Why shouldn’t they speak? I the same way, Romanian Greek Catholics bishops should speak about activites of Latin priests in the Romania whenever they deem it necessary.

An d what should be said? I don’t think these answers are obvious with any generality. Are the communities composed of permanent residents or transitory guest workers? Should provisions follow language (culture), ritual patrimony, or sui juris church. What the Italian bishops said - and I did not see a “veto” - is that priests of the rite and language should minister to these communities, but that, given the size and uncertainty of permanence they oppose a general dispensation from the special norms.

They are entitled to their opinion. We will see the response and ultimate outcome.

I am shocked, but not surprised by some of the knee-jerk responses here.
If we embrace an ecclesiology that features sui juris churches with overlapping jurisdictions, then we must be able to work together and to defer to one another. People are took quick to take insult, and to respond in kind. And, moreover, to champion a sense of entitlement that seems to suggest that these tensions must be resolved in our favor. One would think that family life is sufficient to dispel these notions.

And people grossly distort the significance of the celibacy issue: it is a large issue historically, but not one of dogmatic essence. It may be traditional, but it is not Traditional. Celibate Eastern priests are not second class.

What makes members of other sui juris churhces here in America feel that they should have a say? I would be interested in any links to the response in Romania or among Romanian Catholics in Italy. They may challenge or ignore this message. Or they may accommodate it in the short term, while the issues of permanance reach equilibrium and the heat of the on-going culture clash subsides.

And who knows, it may turn out that it only takes a couple of centuries for us all (even the Orthodox) to develop a ecclesiologicial perspective that adapts to this new age that started with mass immigration and is quickly reaching toward complete, global mobility. Maybe our thinking about it will help.

But playing victim won’t.

 

[amenministries]

created account yesterday, and after these responses, i will no longer visit CAF. I will say this, i hope we all agree Jesus was the teacher, the way, the ultimate priest? yes, yes, and yes. with that said, his example was to be celibate, why? because he is God, and said so. Priest are better priest to us, when they are not dealing with drama from the family. They are married, they do have kids, its the church and the flock. get over yourselves

 

[Nine_Two]

created account yesterday, and after these responses, i will no longer visit CAF. I will say this, i hope we all agree Jesus was the teacher, the way, the ultimate priest? yes, yes, and yes. with that said, his example was to be celibate, why? because he is God, and said so. Priest are better priest to us, when they are not dealing with drama from the family. They are married, they do have kids, its the church and the flock. get over yourselves

And therefore the Latins have the right to impose their traditions on others. Sounds fair.