married priests

[Cashue]

I’m reading that former protestant priests that were married can become catholic priests and still be married.

Does this mean they will be like Mary and Joseph and abstain from sex after they are ordained? It doesn’t seem right to me otherwise …

Does that mean one day priests will be allowed to married?

 

[puzzleannie]

no it means that after a clergyman from another faith converts to Catholicism, he can discern whether or not he has a vocation to the priesthood, under the direction of his bishop, and if so prepare for ordination as a Catholic priest, or permanent deacon. If he is already validly married he may remain so enjoying all the privileges and duties of married life. There is a special dispensation for this situation, and he will be placed in ministry where his status will not be a source of scandal or confusion.

It is by no means automatic that a Protestant clergyman who converts has a priestly vocation. The roles of minister and priest have some overlap, but are not the same. Look at people, former clergymen, like Marcus Grodi or Scott Hahn who have found rich ministries as lay persons, after their conversion.

 

[Cashue]

no it means that after a clergyman from another faith converts to Catholicism, he can discern whether or not he has a vocation to the priesthood, under the direction of his bishop, and if so prepare for ordination as a Catholic priest, or permanent deacon. If he is already validly married he may remain so enjoying all the privileges and duties of married life. There is a special dispensation for this situation, and he will be placed in ministry where his status will not be a source of scandal or confusion.

It is by no means automatic that a Protestant clergyman who converts has a priestly vocation. The roles of minister and priest have some overlap, but are not the same. Look at people, former clergymen, like Marcus Grodi or Scott Hahn who have found rich ministries as lay persons, after their conversion.

Thank you for replying but if he does have a priestly vocation will there be 2 types of priests some that are married and some that cannot? Or can a catholic priest decide to marry and be like former Protestants and still carry out his duties?

I’m confused.

 

[CatofAlexandria]

Yes–this means that there are “two types” of priests. It is a special, specific, and reasoned exception to the rule. This does not mean that all priests will one day be married. It means that if a protestant pastor is married before he converts to Catholicism and before he knows that he will convert, he can convert and still become a priest if he is so called, and he need not abandon his marriage vows in doing so.

 

[revert_jen]

It’s important to note that unmarried priests is a matter of discipline, not dogma. My understanding is this: There are several Eastern Catholic Churches (most of them, I believe) that allow married priests, with these two restrictions: A priest cannot marry, but a married man can become a priest (i.e. his marriage must take place before his ordination), and a married priest cannot become a bishop (although I think he may if he becomes a widower).

These same restrictions, as I understand it, apply to protestant clergy who become ordained after their conversion to the Latin-rite Catholic Church. The restrictions may (I don’t know) be matters of dogma rather than discipline.

But there really is only one type of priest, a Catholic priest. Whether he was married before his ordination to either the Latin-rite Church or to one of the Eastern Catholic Churches, it doesn’t make him really a different kind of priest. No priest can marry. If a man is married before his ordination and his wife dies after his ordination, he cannot marry again.

It does look like two different types of priests or two different sets of rules, which is why most married priests currently do not serve as parish priests in the Latin rite, but instead serve the bishop in other ways, for example teaching in the seminaries or serving on the marriage tribunal. (This will be different for Anglican-use parishes however, I believe. Current pastors of Anglican-rite parishes who are married will continue to be able to be pastors of those parishes, but of course any new vocations from these parishes will have to commit to celibacy–at least that is my understanding.)

The Pope, as the head of the Latin-rite Church (which is separate from his role as shepherd of the Universal Church), has the authority to remove (highly unlikely) or relax (as in this case) the discipline of priestly celibacy in the Latin-rite Church. There is no requirement for married Catholic priests to live celibately.

It is possible that at some point in the future, married priests would be possible generally in the Latin-rite Church. The reason it is not generally permitted now is not because Tradition is against it, but because priestly celibacy is still thought to be a good idea for practical and pastoral reasons. I personally agree with that, but it is not impossible (merely unlikely) for it to change.

This is in marked contrast to the ordination of women, about which Pope John Paul II said in 1994, “I declare that the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women and that this judgment is to be definitively held by all the Church’s faithful.” The reason I mention the question of women’s ordination in a thread about married priests is that far too many people lump together married priesthood and women priests as similar things, which they definitely are not. Married priests are possible, women priests are not.

–Jen

 

[Brass_Player]

hm… i dont like this… it is like if they were manipulating the system of priests. In my opinion a preist canot get merried i think it would not be fair for those who are true and been pure catholic priests maybe the married ones from othere religions that what, have a need to be catrholic why cant they be deacons. I might be wrong but i dont like it that our catholic church does that i think it is not fair. Specialy for those preists who try hard. Sorry i cant see priests as merried because then we are being hipocrits to those othere religions that their pastor is merried and we practicly tell them they cant do that because it is not what is written. Even though our religion is the “true one” we cant be hippocrits and just let some preists get merried and practicly tell the othere religions are wrong that their pastor does get merried

 

[revert_jen]

hm… i dont like this… it is like if they were manipulating the system of priests. In my opinion a preist canot get merried i think it would not be fair for those who are true and been pure catholic priests maybe the married ones from othere religions that what, have a need to be catrholic why cant they be deacons. I might be wrong but i dont like it that our catholic church does that i think it is not fair. Specialy for those preists who try hard. Sorry i cant see priests as merried because then we are being hipocrits to those othere religions that their pastor is merried and we practicly tell them they cant do that because it is not what is written. Even though our religion is the “true one” we cant be hippocrits and just let some preists get merried and practicly tell the othere religions are wrong that their pastor does get merried

First, if the priests who are bound to celibacy don’t mind, I’m not sure why you should.

Second, there is nothing hypocritical about it. We don’t tell Protestants (which I assume is what you meant by “those othere religions”) that they can’t have married priests. We have told them that female and openly gay clergy hinder the cause of eventual Christian unity, because they couldn’t be allowed in the Catholic Church. But as I mentioned above, the Eastern rites of the Catholic Church have allowed married priests (some of them I believe throughout their whole history), and these are part of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church. (They are not Eastern Orthodox, but Eastern Catholic.)

Third, I have no idea what you mean by “manipulating the system of priests” or “it is not what is written.”

I’m afraid you may have been getting your information from some unreliable sources.

–Jen

 

[Brass_Player]

in a short way what i ment to say is that i just cant see priests as merried maybe deacons but thats as far as they go

 

[Rolltide]

in a short way what i ment to say is that i just cant see priests as merried maybe deacons but thats as far as they go

Until the eleventh century, only monks were bound to celibacy. Married men could be ordained even in the Latin branch of the church up to that point, when celibacy was instituted as part of a general reform of the church. (It was done partly to stop nepotism, where priests would buy their sons positions in the church, and to stop priest’s families from living too grand of a lifestyle. Also, there were time concerns, since a priest in that era was almost never home. He would have to travel and serve many regions and parishes.) In the eastern branches of the Catholic Church, married men have ALWAYS been allowed to be ordained. In other words, the Catholic Church has ALWAYS has some married priests, and continues to have them. In fact, there are over 100 married priests in the US right now, and that number is about to rise dramatically with the influx of Anglican clergy about to come in thanks to the pope’s document Anglicanorum coetibus. As stated above, celibacy is NOT a dogma, just a pious discipline of the church that can be changed at any time, and for which exceptions can be made by the Vatican.

There’s nothing to get used to. We’ve ALWAYS had married Catholic priests.

 

[Cominghome89]

Rolltide and Jen, excellent posts. I was all ready to start typing, and your answers were wonderful and leave me little to say.

To the original poster, I can completely understand where you are coming from, because this is the tradition (not Tradition) that you are used to. It is important to think beyond the scope of the Catholic Church you are used to. Remember, Catholic means “universal”. There are many Catholics (who are just as Catholic as you) who would be very offended to hear you say that having married priests is not right. Peter was married. If you read 1 Corinthians 7, Paul states that the celibate life is superior to the married state, leaving you free to serve the Church, unconcerned about a family. However, Paul also realized that this was a difficult teaching, and that most were not able to handle lifelong celibacy. You will not find any Church teaching, in scripture or otherwise, that says priests must not be married.

It is a common problem within the Church, I have seen, that people often mistake what they THINK the Church is (from there own experience) with the entire, worldwide, universal Church that spans 2,000 years and the entire planet. It might benefit you to do some research on the Eastern Rite Catholic Churches, or on the history of priestly celibacy. It is so crucial for Catholics to see the difference between essential Church teachings that can never be changed, and traditions that we may have simply gotten used to.

That being said, I agree with the above post that (although not dogma) priestly celibacy is a good idea that will likely never be changed in the Latin Rite Catholic Church. Why? It works, especially in America. It keeps priests free from the ties of a wife and children, it keeps us away from the problem of how to support the wife and children of a priest if he were to pass away, there are a hundred reasons. On the other hand, in certain situations and cultures, people will give you good reasons why the Eastern Catholic tradition of married priests works well in their situation, and they may often be right.

Trust that the Church knows better than our own experience.

In Christ,
Frank

 

[joandarc2008]

Just as a clarification - my understanding is that these men would not be allowed TO MARRY they would only be allowed to stay married. The same as permanent deacon who may become a widower who would be expected to remain celiabte. If I am wrong can someone correct me on this?

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Just as a clarification - my understanding is that these men would not be allowed TO MARRY they would only be allowed to stay married. The same as permanent deacon who may become a widower who would be expected to remain celiabte. If I am wrong can someone correct me on this?

No, you have it correct.