Married priests: how to explain 1 Timothy 3:2

[Nita]

Correct. The prohibition of polygamy did not apply to bishops only; it was not allowed for anyone, ever, in Christianity. I’m glad we agree.

The above was just a statement I made and was not the basis of my position. Rather, it was the quote from the Haydock Bible footnote that was the basis for my assertion that the traditional interpretation refers to remarriage and not to polygamy. Have done a bit more researching since, and it would probably be better to consider the verse as covering both - a prohibition of polygamy and a prohibition against remarriage (for bishops).

Here’s another - from the Jerome Biblical Commentary (p354):
2. married only once: Litl, “the husband of only one wife.” Clearly, it is not only polygamy that Paul means to exclude but also a second marriage, a marriage that would take place either in the case of conversion from paganism (1 Cor 7:12-16) or after the death of the first wife. In 1 Cor 7:39 (and Rom 7:2-3) Paul allows remarriage after the death of a spouse, but even there he declares that it would be better for the bereaved spouse to remain unmarried… In the present instance he makes the second marriage a disqualification. However, he does not make celibacy a requirement.

After I made the statement in my other post about the Church never allowing polygamy, I realized I was just assuming it - because of current teaching, Jesus’ teaching in the gospels about marriage, etc… So, I set about trying to verify it. I have not been able to find a clear verification as to if or when the early Church explicitly forbade polygamy. I checked the online Catholic Encyclopedia (monogamy and marriage), also Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma. From googling, I hit an Islamic site that claimed the early Church did allow it, but there was no solid evidence given. Either way, I realized it might not have been that clear cut in the early Church. (For example, how did the Church handle new converts who were in polygamous marriages at the time of their conversion.) I’d really appreciate any references to records that show polygamy was forbidden from the very beginning of the Church. But rather than derail this thread, I will start another.

Nita

 

[3DIFIER]

My opinion,

1 Timothy 3:2 has never mentioned any women or sex status. But for sure, 1 Timothy mentioned about Church but in other Bible version, the Church was never been mentioned.
Therefore, wife was refer to the Church and the head of the church is the Priest.

Let’s put it this way, the first wife of the ARMY is not army’s opposite sex but the riffle or gun. If we compare Priest and Army, they have both similarity. ARMY first wife is the riffle or gun but the Priest has wife and that is the Church. It is very clear that 1 Timothy and Titus 1:6

 

[Nate13]

1 Timothy 3:2 reads -

"Now a bishop (priest) must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, temperate, sensible, dignified, hospitable, etc, etc…"

Now, I believe and defend the Roman Catholic’s teaching on priests not getting married, however, how should we explain this one to “Sola scriptura” lovers??

How do you know the wife he was referring to was not the Church? The Church was referred to as the bride of Christ in other places and this seems the more likely meaning.

 

[rsantos]

Priests, bishops, and popes married and sired children for over a thousand years after Christ as evidenced by children of clerics becoming clerics themselves.

Early Christians thought the parousia was imminent after the resurrection as evidenced by Paul’s statement “time is running out” and “Let those having wives act as not having them…For the world in its present form is passing away” (1 Cor 7:29-31). Advice to remain as one was (as married or unmarried) also reflected a common cultic belief at that time that persons should remain as they were in times of upheaval.

Evidence that Paul did not prioritize celibacy over marriage is Paul’s advice to “come back together after prayer so as not to deprive one another” (1 Cor 7:5), his discussion in Ephesians 5:32 (“Husbands should love their wives as themselves”), and his praise for the ministry of married couples such as Prisca and Aquila (1 Cor 16:19). Paul’s plea for permission to take along a wife like the other apostles ("Do we not have the right to take along a Christian wife as do the other apostles and the brothers of the Lord?” (1 Cor 9:4-5)), suggests that spouses did travel with the apostles and they were married. It also suggests that continence (temporary sexual abstinence), and not life-long celibacy, was Paul’s own lifestyle.

Ministry is compatible with devotion to God as evidenced in sociological studies, in the ministries of married couples in the apostles and Prisca and Aquila, and in the married priesthood in the first thousand years after Christ. Jesus never commanded anyone to be celibate. Paul says "Regarding virginity/ celibacy, I have no command from the Lord” (1 Cor 7:25). What Jesus did, however, command was to love God and to love neighbor as self. While some persons may find loving God, neighbor and self easier in the celibate state, others find it easier in being married. Farley reminds us “God is not in competition with human objects of love” (Farley 2006, 140).

 

[wisdomseeker]

1 Timothy 3:2 reads -

"Now a bishop (priest) must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, temperate, sensible, dignified, hospitable, etc, etc…"

Now, I believe and defend the Roman Catholic’s teaching on priests not getting married, however, how should we explain this one to “Sola scriptura” lovers??

This was the beggining of the Church and people were mostly marriage. they did could not have made choices yet since they were just beggining to understand and receiving the Teachings of God.

As the Church continued many had the desire to be like Christ and probably imitate St Paul and give their lives to the Gospel and the people of God.

g St Paul himself says that is better not to marry. Jesus Himself says that there will be Eunuchs that will dedicate their lives to the cause of the Church. what we have is beautfiul. I hope that our priests remain unmarriage in teh Church. many dont like because it makes the Church different from the rest, of course they want the Church to look less and less defferent from them. God calls man to be celibate to the advantage of His Kingdom. Jesus speaks of virgin men in Revel. also. It is beautiful and noble that we have celibate priests and bishops man in teh Church. This shows only that we dont do as we please but what pleases God.

 

[YipYupYep]

It’s a pretty hard bid for our clergy to serve out. Totally unnatural. But, here is the real deal. A married clergy wont work, at least in America. Who would financially support the wife and kids? Us? I don’t think so. Clothes, education, heath insurance, transportation and the like for a married clergy. That’s a joke. Never happen with that dollar bill you put in the collection.

Catholics are so cheap, it’s a disgrace. A married clergy? Yeah, right.

 

[jmjconder]

**This is a question that surfaces often.

My question is to those that ask it - how many current seminarians are in your life?

I have many seminarians that I know and I am in close contact with. All of them believe married priests are NOT what they desire. They desire to be fully “married” to our Catholic Bride - Mother Church.

They also voice that this speculation is not the answer to any perceived “priest shortage.”

Is seems the only people that are promoting this are those who are outside the priesthood vocation or discernment to - looking in.**

 

[wisdomseeker]

**This is a question that surfaces often.

My question is to those that ask it - how many current seminarians are in your life?

I have many seminarians that I know and I am in close contact with. All of them believe married priests are NOT what they desire. They desire to be fully “married” to our Catholic Bride - Mother Church.

They also voice that this speculation is not the answer to any perceived “priest shortage.”

Is seems the only people that are promoting this are those who are outside the priesthood vocation or discernment to - looking in.**

there is nothing to do with priest shortage. I am sure God is very pleased with their celibacy and desire to serve HIm sole.
I attribute shortage of priests to the lack of faith and bad seminars. I have read many testimony of young people who entered the seminar in brasil and left due to them seeing blasphemy and sacrilege against our Lord within the seminaries down there.

 

[heavy_hand_1]

The celibate clergy is a spiritual discipline. It is not a moral law, just simply a way for the priest to focus fully on his job.

 

[rsantos]

I know about a dozen married Catholic priests who are called to both marriage and ministry and yet the hierarchy has no place for them. What a horrible waste at a time when their work is so needed! If a priest finds value in celibacy then let him be celibate but if a priest finds value and grace in marriage, then who are we to say he cannot do both? Married priests would be happy to serve part-time as priests and part time as employed counselors, teachers, etc in order to support their families and their spouses would of course work too as ministry support and financial supporters. Restricting the priesthood to male celibates is sinful at a time when we need many many more priests all over the world.

“In the last times, some will turn away from the faith by paying attention to deceitful spirits and demonic instructions through the hypocrisy of liars with branded consciences. They forbid marriage and require abstinence from foods that God created to be received with thanksgiving for those who believe and know the truth. For everything created by God is good and nothing is to be rejected when received with thanksgiving” (1Timothy 4: 1).

rosanne

 

[Godconvertedme]

The key to defending Catholic faith against misinterpretation is Acts 1:20

For it is written in the book of Psalms, ‘Let his habitation become desolate, and let there be no one to live in it’; and ‘His office let another take.’

Office here in the greek is ἐπισκοπὴν

Because in 1 Timothy 3:2

Now a bishop must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, temperate, sensible, dignified, hospitable, an apt teacher,

Bishop in the greek is ἐπίσκοπον

Which is who presides over the ἐπισκοπὴν

You establish a direct link between apostle and bishop, they are interchangeable according to the Greek New Testament.

Once established, point out Paul is an Apostle, is unmarried and the writer of 1 Timothy.

1 Corinthians 7:8

To the unmarried and the widows I say that it is well for them to remain single as I do.

Paul could not have been meaning a proabition on single men taking the office of bishop sense he was a bishop.

Hope this helps

RCC4LIFE