Melkite Catholic Church to Ordain Married Men to Priesthood in USA

  • Thread starter Thread starter yosephdaviyd
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
From the article:
Bans on ordaining married men to the priesthood for Eastern Catholic Churches in the USA were imposed by Rome in the last century, but enforcement of the Ban has waned in the past fifteen years causing many Catholics, both Eastern and Latin Rite, to wonder if the Ban should be taken seriously. Earlier, in the 1970s and 1980s, the Melkite Church ordained five married men for service in America as priests but the ordinations were ruled illicit by Rome and their priestly faculties were removed. However, a 1996 ordination of a married Melkite deacon to the priesthood was noted by the press but was considered hardly a trend; with no recorded public reaction by Rome.
Changes have also slowly begun to appear in other Eastern Catholic Churches in the USA. The Ban is no longer absolute in the Ruthenian Byzantine Catholic Metropolia of Pittsburgh, though that Eastern Catholic Church has to obtain individual dispensations from Rome for any married men it might ordain. Ordinations of some married men to the priesthood in the Ukrainian Catholic Church in the USA and Canada are also now beginning to occur. The Coptic Catholic Church, with no hierarchy in place in the USA, made a formal request to Rome last year for an end to the Ban so that married Coptic Catholic priests could serve American parishes.
However, the Ban is apparently still viewed by Rome as being in effect. An official of the Eastern Congregation, one of the offices of the papal curia in Rome overseeing the Eastern Catholic Churches, stated in 2003 that the Ban remains unchanged, but that it would no longer suspend the priestly faculties of married men ordained by Eastern Catholic Bishops in the USA. *America *reported:
Its a tricky situation. There is a need to meet the needs of the Eastern Churches, and to respect their traditions. On the other hand, I suppose there is a danger of this becoming a back door way to avoid priestly celibacy.
 
Traditionally, most if not all of the Eastern Rite Catholic chuches accepted married men into the priesthood; bishops, however, had to be celibate. The Eastern celibacy rule in the United States was an anomoly, not the norm.
 
At his recent enthronement as the Melkite Greek Catholic Bishop in the USA, Bishop Nicholas Samra stated that the Melkite Catholic Church (an Eastern Catholic Church in union with the Pope of Rome) will begin ordaining married men to the priesthood in the USA.

Read More - orthocath.wordpress.com/2011/11/05/melkite-catholic-church-to-ordain-married-men-to-priesthood-in-usa/
The Eastern Catholic Churches, along with the Orthodox Churches, have allowed Priests to marry since the very start. Married Priests may not become Bishops, however. It seems to have worked well for almost 2,000 years, so why the fuss today?:coffeeread:
 
Interesting development. I wonder if the Maronites in the USA will look at this.

I don’t really mind either way. I just find it interesting.
 
Its a tricky situation. There is a need to meet the needs of the Eastern Churches, and to respect their traditions. On the other hand, I suppose there is a danger of this becoming a back door way to avoid priestly celibacy.
Avoid priestly celibacy for who? To be ordained for another Rite requires permission and, trust me, it would not be granted to switch from the Latin Rite to an Eastern Rite for the purposes of priesthood with marriage.
 
Avoid priestly celibacy for who? To be ordained for another Rite requires permission and, trust me, it would not be granted to switch from the Latin Rite to an Eastern Rite for the purposes of priesthood with marriage.
I don’t think he’s referring to a potential sneaky way for current priests to get married.

If I understand it correctly, Eastern priests cannot GET married, they can just be ordained to the priesthood if they are already married. Kind of like our rules for the permanent diaconate.
 
I don’t think he’s referring to a potential sneaky way for current priests to get married.
Right, but he may be referring to, say, a non-Catholic who is thinking about becoming a Catholic priest, and then deciding to (1) get married quick, (2) join an Eastern Rite, and (3) get ordained an Eastern Rite priest.
 
I see absolutely nothing wrong with this. Eastern churches have done this historically so why not now as well?
 
Right, but he may be referring to, say, a non-Catholic who is thinking about becoming a Catholic priest, and then deciding to (1) get married quick, (2) join an Eastern Rite, and (3) get ordained an Eastern Rite priest.
Honestly, I didn’t have any particular scenario in mind. I was simply trying to offer a reason to support the current ban in the West for Eastern Catholic priests to be married. I’m not entirely sure why the ban was instituted.

Removing the ban seems sensible to me.
 
I don’t think he’s referring to a potential sneaky way for current priests to get married.

If I understand it correctly, Eastern priests cannot GET married, they can just be ordained to the priesthood if they are already married. Kind of like our rules for the permanent diaconate.
I think you misread my post. I stated that someone cannot get ordained for another Rite without permission. Thus someone who is married cannot simply switch Rites and get ordained in an Eastern Rite. Permission is needed and it would most likely not be granted.
 
The Eastern Catholic Churches, along with the Orthodox Churches, have allowed Priests to marry since the very start. Married Priests may not become Bishops, however. It seems to have worked well for almost 2,000 years, so why the fuss today?:coffeeread:
I think you mis-spoke here. A married man is allowed under certain rites to be ordained to the Priesthood however an ordained Priest is not allowed to marry in any rite that I know of.
 
Honestly, I didn’t have any particular scenario in mind. I was simply trying to offer a reason to support the current ban in the West for Eastern Catholic priests to be married. I’m not entirely sure why the ban was instituted.

Removing the ban seems sensible to me.
If you’re not sure why something was instituted, it is usually better to understand it first rather than to tear it down without knowing why it was there.

Robert Frost says it more succintly: “Never tear down a fence until you know why it was raised”
 
If you’re not sure why something was instituted, it is usually better to understand it first rather than to tear it down without knowing why it was there.
Indeed. That is why I was trying to offer some kind of defense. I admit that I could have worded my post better, asking others if that is why the policy was instituted rather than than simply stating it.

I still am interested in understanding the rationale for the previous policy, if anyone would like to offer an explanation.
 
Indeed. That is why I was trying to offer some kind of defense. I admit that I could have worded my post better, asking others if that is why the policy was instituted rather than than simply stating it.

I still am interested in understanding the rationale for the previous policy, if anyone would like to offer an explanation.
This is probably a good place to start: newadvent.org/cathen/03481a.htm
 
This is probably a good place to start: newadvent.org/cathen/03481a.htm
Its a hefty article. Since you have already read through it and understand the position of the Church, would you be willing to explain why married men who belong to Eastern Catholic Churches could not be ordained as priests if they lived in the West? I guess I am puzzled that that married Eastern Catholic priests could serve in, say, the US but only if they were ordained elsewhere.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top