Married men - If married proests were allowed, would you seek ordination?

  • Thread starter Thread starter JRKH
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Last_Things said:
I don’t know of any US diocese that requires a promise of celibacy for deacons unless they intend to become priests soon.
Click to expand...
A promise of perpetual continence is required of ALL single men being ordained to the permanent diaconate, regardless of diocese.
 
Tarpeian_Rock said:
A promise of perpetual continence is required of ALL single men being ordained to the permanent diaconate, regardless of diocese.
Click to expand...
Either they are all doing it wrong, because they aren’t making the promise, or you are wrong.
 
Last_Things said:
Either they are all doing it wrong, because they aren’t making the promise, or you are wrong.
Click to expand...
The promise is right there in the diaconal ordination ritual. Holy Orders is a canonical impediment to contracting marriage. Single men ordained to the diaconate are not able to marry, unless, I assume, they are laicized. Married permanent deacons who lose their spouses are unable to remarry except in quite rare cases involving a dispensation from Rome.
 
Tarpeian_Rock said:
The promise is right there in the diaconal ordination ritual. Holy Orders is a canonical impediment to contracting marriage. Single men ordained to the diaconate are not able to marry, unless, I assume, they are laicized. Married permanent deacons who lose their spouses are unable to remarry except in quite rare cases involving a dispensation from Rome.
Click to expand...
That’s true, but they are not making the promise you are suggesting they are.

Permanent deacons make no promise of continence/celibacy/whateveryouwanttocallit

When temporary and permanent deacons make their promises together, the temporary deacons make an additional promise that the permanent deacons do not.
 
Last_Things said:
You completely change the discernment for men who are single.
Click to expand...
Very true - now they do not have to choose between the two sacraments.

I don’t see how this would necessarily NOT result in more priests. I mean the effect could be a net zero - or maybe not. 🤷…I tend to think priestly vocations would rise some.

Peace
James
 
Forgive me for stating the obvious but isn’t this already allowed and happening within the Eastern Rite of the Roman Catholic Church?
 
JRKH said:
Title pretty much says it…
If the Church were to relax or remove this discipline, would you - as a married man consider the priesthood?

Peace
James
Click to expand...
Absolutely not. My time off work is spent on family (including Grand kids) and myself. I am not cut from the clothe of one who goes to spend the whole night in a hospital waiting room comforting parishioners. I am not “the right stuff”. God Bless those rare souls who are.
 
Tarpeian_Rock said:
But apparently the Eastern Church doesn’t seem to agree so much, and they seem to have arrived at a successful middle ground with respect to a married priesthood. For that matter, taking Paul literally would seem to infer that a married man is unable to please the Lord. I don’t think it’s appropriate to read that binary an interpretation into the text.
Click to expand...
The Eastern Church is not overwhelmed with vocations! Married men can be great priests, for sure, but not because they are married. You do understand that priesthood is not a job, right?
 
Last_Things said:
When temporary and permanent deacons make their promises together, the temporary deacons make an additional promise that the permanent deacons do not.
Click to expand...
No, that’s not accurate. When transitional and permanent deacons make their promises together, the single deacons make an additional promise that the married deacons do not. 😉

I found this worship aid from an ordination rite for deacons. Take a look at page 7:
Bishop: Those of you who are prepared to embrace the celibate state:
do you resolve to keep for ever this commitment as a sign of your dedication to Christ the Lord for the sake of the Kingdom of Heaven, in the service of God and man?
Click to expand...
Unmarried Elect: I do.
Click to expand...
 
Gorgias said:
No, that’s not accurate. When transitional and permanent deacons make their promises together, the single deacons make an additional promise that the married deacons do not. 😉

I found this worship aid from an ordination rite for deacons. Take a look at page 7:
Click to expand...
You are not correcting me, you are replacing one term for deacons for what is conceptually the same.
 
Last_Things said:
You are not correcting me, you are replacing one term for deacons for what is conceptually the same.
Click to expand...
I think the point is that both transitional and permanent deacons, if they are single, make a commitment to perpetual celibacy; not just transitional deacons.
 
Lamentation said:
I think the point is that both transitional and permanent deacons, if they are single, make a commitment to perpetual celibacy; not just transitional deacons.
Click to expand...
Not in any of the many ordinations I went to.
 
Gorgias said:
No, that’s not accurate. When transitional and permanent deacons make their promises together, the single deacons make an additional promise that the married deacons do not. 😉
Click to expand...
I think that is what I said.
 
JRKH said:
Do you base this on anything specific?
Just curious…

Peace
James
Click to expand...
I can answer this: the Orthodox, the Anglicans, etc. The Orthodox have allowed their priests (not their Bishops, of course) to marry for a long time and they are struggling with vocations. The Anglicans, likewise, are seeing drops in numbers.

Celibacy as a discipline has been in effect in the Church since its earliest times - it has been an official discipline of the Latin Church for quite awhile. The seminaries were full 100 years ago and celibacy was the order of the day. It’s not celibacy that is causing a “vocations crisis” - it’s just a Catholic crisis that causes it (fewer people in the pews, fewer priests who know what they’re talking about, etc). So dropping the discipline among secular priests (it could, of course, not work for religious) would not somehow solve any sort of “crisis.” The underlying issues are far easier to solve - have reverent Masses, preach the Catholic faith, show young men and women that they are called to holiness and Catholicism is something worth giving your life for, and we will fill the seminaries back up. Keep preaching watered down nonsense with terrible liturgies and who is going to give up their life? Nobody.
 
No, I wouldn’t have time for my family and a parish:

“An unmarried man is anxious about the things of the Lord, how he may please the Lord. But a married man is anxious about the things of the world, how he may please his wife, and he is divided.” - 1 Cor 7:32-33
 
This has been an interesting discussion to read. I’m surprised that more people don’t feel that men would enter the priesthood if allowed to be married. I know men personally who did not become priests because of that one reason. I also think the percentage who currently end up leaving (some to get married) would drastically drop if they were not living a life that can be lonely. 🤷
 
WingsOfEagles said:
I also think the percentage who currently end up leaving (some to get married) would drastically drop if they were not living a life that can be lonely. 🤷
Click to expand...
I know of a priest (well was a priest) who went through formation, and was at our parish while he was a transitional deacon, and then after only a few years left the priesthood and got married. I never saw this coming as he was so perfect as a priest. It would be nice to still see him as a priest though.

My concern would be this though. IF the church allowed priests to marry, I would think it would drive a wedge in the members just like it did when other controversial things happened (e.g. Vatican 2, etc), and membership would drop.

I know that when they changed/revised the Roman Missal recently, there were a few people in my church who were so fed up, they stopped going to mass. I also know as an Extraordinary Eucharistic Minister, there are some people who will switch lines in communion because they believe they can only receive communion from a priest.

I just have a grave concern that if the church allowed this, we might see a mass of people either abandon the church or just stop coming to church, which would be an awful shame.

Personally, I don’t know what the right thing to do with this topic would be… I will leave it to our Lord to guide us.

God bless,

John
 
Mwalt said:
I don’t think so. Remember, even married priests are bound by Canon Law to observe perpetual continence: canonlaw.info/a_deacons.htm
Click to expand...
Joe_5859 said:
This technically applies to deacons, too, but I don’t know that any bishops have been requiring that of their married deacons or married priests – at least here in the U.S.
Click to expand...
No it does not pertain to anyone who is not a celibate cleric. Neither married deacons nor married priests are bound to perfect and perpetual continence. The Vatican, in response to former USCCB President Cardinal Dolan, plainly stated that those exempt from the requirement of celibacy are not bound.
 
Lapey said:
No it does not pertain to anyone who is not a celibate cleric. Neither married deacons nor married priests are bound to perfect and perpetual continence. The Vatican, in response to former USCCB President Cardinal Dolan, plainly stated that those exempt from the requirement of celibacy are not bound.
Click to expand...
Thank you for the clarification. I came across that exchange with Cardinal Dolan after I made that post back in June. Mea culpa. :o
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top