Married Priests

  • Thread starter Thread starter TaraLouise
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
JElane:
…how could a priest possibly divide his loyalties between a wife and his duties to God? Their hearts are supposed to be totally devoted, wholly, 100% to God…all their love is for God and love for others in Christ. They can’t share their hearts and lives with a wife.

JELane
Click to expand...
actually, we are all called to be 100% devoted to the love of God and of others and if God has called single and married people alike to do this then it is possible to love a wife (or husband) and love God fully, in fact, the love between spouses is a representation of the love between us and God.

and futhermore (to another poster) Peter didn’t leave his wife. Paul talks about the fact that Peter and the other apostles travelled with their wives and “other women”. the celibacy of priests is a discipline (not a Tradition but a tradition) and can be changed at any time (or exceptions can be made). you are allowed to think it is the most wonderful thing in the world or hope and pray for the day that priests can marry and still be a faithful catholic.
 
I don’t think anyone is saying that you can’t love God and love your wife 100%. I think that it has to do with fulfilling the obligations of the vocation.
 
40.png
bengal_fan:
actually, we are all called to be 100% devoted to the love of God and of others and if God has called single and married people alike to do this then it is possible to love a wife (or husband) and love God fully, in fact, the love between spouses is a representation of the love between us and God.
Click to expand...
I know this, as well as the most Christians probably know that we are all called to be wholly devoted to God. But I am married. I know how hard it is for me to be married and to be wholly devoted to God. I couldn’t imagine a priest having to go through what I do because he has a wife. Your time is split. You can be interiorly united to God, but there are exterior events that prevent a married person, even if for just a moment, from being 100% totally God’s. Or at least that’s how it is for me.

Spouses make demands of you, as is probably their right, and it’s a spouse’s obligation to respond (one way or another) to them. It just seems so much easier and less of a temptation to do wrong if a priest doesn’t have to concern himself with a spouse. It just seems logical. I actually believe it is easier to be wholly God’s by having a religious vocation and not vocation of marriage.

JELane
 
1 Corinthians chapter 7:32-- says that he who is married is anxious about the things of the Lord. He that is married is anxious about the things of the world, how he may please his wife.
 
and futhermore (to another poster) Peter didn’t leave his wife. Paul talks about the fact that Peter and the other apostles travelled with their wives and “other women”.
Click to expand...
Of course the Apostles would have supported their wives financially. But the Fathers unanimously believed that they lived continently with them after they were called by Christ, and this would seem to be consistent with both Christ and Paul’s teachings on the subject.

If being a “eunech for the sake of the Kingdom” is a characteristic of Christian perfection, should not those closest to Christ be expected to follow this standard? Scripture certainly implies as much. (Remember Christ’s discourse about “leaving all things, family, friends, etc.” and Peter’s reply on behald of the 12: “Lord, we have done this . . .”)
the celibacy of priests is a discipline (not a Tradition but a tradition) and can be changed at any time (or exceptions can be made). you are allowed to think it is the most wonderful thing in the world or hope and pray for the day that priests can marry and still be a faithful catholic.
Click to expand...
While Catholics certainly are free to think as you suggest, such a minimalistic apporach to the faith is not very Catholic at all.

While we are free to differ in opinion on this and other issues, we’re supposed to form these opinions in light of the Church’s tradition. I find it very hard to believe that, as a concession to modern mores, we are to discard rashly what has been a tradition, allowed by the Holy Spirit, for some 1700 years, and one which has “incubated,” as it were, some very, very holy men.

I think that allowing married ex-Protestant clergy to be ordained is a legitimate development of this discipline, but to make this the norm I think would be quite drastic, and not at all in accord with the spirit of Catholic priesthood.
 
I think historically there used to be a balance between celibate priests and married ones. Celibate priests were absolutely essential because the required less financial support and had more time to dedicate themsleves to missionary work. A married priest with a family would find it extremely difficult to keep moving from place to place around the world. On the other hand, celibate priests who remain in a single parish would find it difficult to relate to the everyday lives of ordinary married parisheners.

To compensate, Rome has started promoting the deaconate again. It has been seeing double digit increases year after year. Many deacons are married with family. So you would have an obstensibly married deaconate and an obstensibly celibate presbytery and bishopric, which is how it should be I think. You have to seek balance in everything.
 
40.png
DominvsVobiscvm:
No, it isn’t.

And technically a married couple cannot live “celibately,” since to be celibate is to be unmarried.

QUOTE]

To be Celibate is to abstain from sexual relations wether married or not. In fact priests/bishops could be married and celibate at the same time and were during the early church.
Click to expand...
 
To be Celibate is to abstain from sexual relations wether married or not.
Click to expand...
Again, you’re confusing “celibacy” with “continency.” It’s a common mistake.

To be celibate simply means to be unmarried. I can fornicate with 100 women a day, but as long as I’m unmarried, I’m celibate.

At least, this is the historical understanding of the word. It comes from the Latin caelebs, meaning “unmarried.”

Nowadays, it’s come to mean “refraining from sexual intercourse,” but this is a late, 20th-century development. The Church’s language uses the word in its traditional sense of “unmarried.”
 
Why is it that deacons can marry, but priests cannot?

The notion that the deacon’s sacrifice is somehow beneath that required of the priest doesn’t sail. The deacon sacrifices big time. If a priest had to support a family, hold a full time job in the world, and do his work for Christ, he would suddenly realize how great a sacrifice the deacons make. The deacons have become the work horses of the Church. The notion that their role is somehow diminished by the fact that they sleep with their wives is lacking in charity, never mind sense.

I sometimes weary of the arrogance of priests who order deacons around like underlings. I have known deacons who should be supervising a few of the priests I’ve known.

(P.S. I’m not a deacon.)
 
JElane:
I know this, as well as the most Christians probably know that we are all called to be wholly devoted to God. But I am married. I know how hard it is for me to be married and to be wholly devoted to God. I couldn’t imagine a priest having to go through what I do because he has a wife. Your time is split. You can be interiorly united to God, but there are exterior events that prevent a married person, even if for just a moment, from being 100% totally God’s. Or at least that’s how it is for me.

Spouses make demands of you, as is probably their right, and it’s a spouse’s obligation to respond (one way or another) to them. It just seems so much easier and less of a temptation to do wrong if a priest doesn’t have to concern himself with a spouse. It just seems logical. I actually believe it is easier to be wholly God’s by having a religious vocation and not vocation of marriage.

JELane
Click to expand...
I wholeheartedly agree! My father was an Episcopalian priest from the time I was eleven years old, and it was a struggle for him and for us as his family to balance parish with family. I can only imagine his feelings of being torn asunder from the demands of two separate and full-time vocations. If push comes to shove, I suppose I would support the notion of married priests, but it makes me fearful that allowing a change in this tradition will inch us closer to even more liberal changes, such as women priests - and the good Lord knows that’s what began the Episcopal church’s slide down the slippery slope (or maybe it was being the first Christian denomination to officially approve of artificial birth control)! :hmmm:
 
Celibacy is still a discipline for the Latin Rite, not a doctrine. Some future Pope may lift it (theoretically).

Eastern Catholic married men may be ordained priests but bishops are selected from the celibate. This is just as ancient a tradition and the Vatican has insisted that this be preserved for the Easterns. But once ordained, a single priest cannot marry.

A similar discipline applies to Latin Catholic deacons.

And married Latin priests (e.g. former Anglicans/Lutherans/Episcopalians) who have been given dispensation do not necessarily live continent lives. They enjoy the full benefits of the marital embrace.

In all cases, these are matters of discipline, not dogma. No one is forbidden to marry; priests enter the state with the full awareness of the discipline involved.
 
Carl:

Consecrated celibacy is, in a sense, preferred even for a deacon, since by virtue of his ordination he, too, is required to emulate the chastity of Christ, over and above the obligation of a layperson to do so.

The dutis of the priest, however, are supposed to be over and above those of a deacons. Since priests are confessors, they’re supposed to give themselves up for spiritual direction more so than deacons are. (However, under some circumstances deacons, heck even lay people, can be spiritual directors) And so a good priest does need to sacrifice his life for his parishioners more so than deacons.

As far as the Church’s hierarchical organization goes, priests represent the bishop to the congregation. Deacons serve the bishop, and so they serve the priests who act in the bishop’s name. Even on the natural level, an assistant is not supposed to work as hard as the one he’s assisting. I think this applies on the supernatural level at all.
 
40.png
TaraLouise:
Can somebody explain to me the official reason why Roman Catholic Priests cannot marry? I have heard that at one time Priests were allowed to marry. Also Why is that Former Anglican Clergy that have come over the the Catholic Church and are married, are allowed to become Roman Catholic Priests? These questions partially arose after locating a web site on married Priests: marriedpriests.org/ . I would also be interested to see what opinions people hold on these issues.

Thank you!! 🙂
Click to expand...
In the early Catholic church they were allowed to get married. There was always a debate as to whether they should be allowed. Scripture backs it up.
6 But I speak this by indulgence, not by commandment. 7 For I would that all men were even as myself: but every one hath his proper gift from God; one after this manner, and another after that. 8 But I say to the unmarried, and to the widows: It is good for them if they so continue, even as I.
Click to expand...
There were many people who were for it in the early church but they could not make a final decision on it. In the eleventh century Gregory VII I think made the final decision that no preist was allowed to marry.

The reasons for it are that if you are married you are divided between your family and God. You can not serve God as fully if you are divided.

Many of the church fathers were fpr celibacy including Augustine and St. Jerome and St. Ambrose.

Here are some articles that you could read to get the background.

newadvent.org/cathen/03481a.htm

catholic.com/library/Celibacy_and_the_Priesthood.asp
 
There were many people who were for it in the early church but they could not make a final decision on it. In the eleventh century Gregory VII I think made the final decision that no preist was allowed to marry.
Click to expand...
Continence for anyone ordained at least to the diaconate was made obligatory by Pope Saint Damascus I in the 4th century. Saint Gregory VII was but one of many successors who had to reinforce this discipline, which had for several reaons been negelcted in many areas.

Mnay Modernists, however, continue today to expound the myth that this was only made obligatiry by Gregory VII. The facts simply do not bear this out.
 
40.png
AmandaPS:
If I remember correctly, Fr. Ryland (former Anglican priest, now Catholic priest) and his wife are now living celibately so perhaps that is something that is required for priests coming in from outside Catholicism.
Click to expand...
It is not required. Married persons who enter Catholicism and are priested are not required to refrain from participating in the normal activities of marriage.
 
40.png
Carl:
Why is it that deacons can marry, but priests cannot?

The notion that the deacon’s sacrifice is somehow beneath that required of the priest doesn’t sail. The deacon sacrifices big time. If a priest had to support a family, hold a full time job in the world, and do his work for Christ, he would suddenly realize how great a sacrifice the deacons make. The deacons have become the work horses of the Church. The notion that their role is somehow diminished by the fact that they sleep with their wives is lacking in charity, never mind sense.

I sometimes weary of the arrogance of priests who order deacons around like underlings. I have known deacons who should be supervising a few of the priests I’ve known.

(P.S. I’m not a deacon.)
Click to expand...
Carl,

Deacons can’t marry (under normal circumstances). Before a man is raised to the dignity of the diaconate he makes a promise of celibacy. This applies to both permanent and transitional deacons. Those deacon candidates who are married make this promise with the understanding that it does not take effect unless his wife should pre-decease him. In the United States some 95% of the permanent deacons are married. Once ordained, a deacon who is widowed is expected to remain celibate. Exceptions may be made for a deacon with young children who need a mother to help raise them, for a deacon with elderly parents who needs a wife to help care for them, or for a man who would otherwise cease to be of service as a deacon unless permitted to remarry. In these carefully considered cases a dispensation to remarry may be granted. Note that this is not because a deacon is more valuable than a priest, but because the Church is a true Mother who cares for and considers the needs of all Her children.

Deacon Ed
 
Here is a link byzantines.net/epiphany/ordination.htm to a webpage on ordination of married men in the Eastern Churches, it is quite interesting.

But any shortage of priests the Western Latin Rite Church may be experiencing now is due largely to decreasing birthrates among Catholics. Along with an unwillingness to sacrifice one self or make long term commitments resulting from a general lukewarmness in the faith. Of which the Church in Ireland is a prime example deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,595076528,00.html 😦
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top