Of 'viri probati' to alleviate the shortage of priests

[SuscipeMeDomine]

I asked about a precedent regarding the changing of canon law. You’ve provided an example of canon laws which have not been implemented, which is something different, IMO.

I misunderstood. I thought you wanted to know about applications to different parts of the world. If your question is whether canon law can be changed, the answer is still yes. For example, a change made under Pope Benedict (I think in 2009) eliminated the ability to formally defect from the Church and had implications for marriage validity (see here).

 

[Denise1957]

post deleted

 

[Denise1957]

Yes, yes, and yes, but lotsa luck with that number 4. Catholics have generally bought into the secular view and sexual deprivation as sacrifice is simply speaking a foreign language to most.

How does the issue of some Catholics (certainly not all Catholics, btw) having bought into a secular view affect Church teaching? Are Church teachings to be based on secularism, and why?

 

[otjm]

How does the issue of some Catholics (certainly not all Catholics, btw) having bought into a secular view affect Church teaching? Are Church teachings to be based on secularism, and why?

I think the comments that Tigg was responding to posit that; the two of them can answer for themselves.

Some of Scientia Dei’s comments show a lack of historical knowledge of the Church, and in particular the matter of married clergy in the Roman rite.

Secularism has nothing to do whatsoever as to the question of whether or not the Roman rite should or should not have married clergy; currently, factually, they do, and every single one of them was ordained with permission of Rome.

Someone who is ultra conservative (and I am not including Scientia Dei in this) could object that the Church does not have the authority to change Canon law, but the Church has been doing so for enough history to lay that one to rest, unless one posits that the Church has strayed from Christ.

As it stands, in the Roman rite, the rule is that the Church will not ordain married men (and historically has not allowed celibate priest to marry). The rule does not say that the Church does not have the authority to or the power to ordain married men; only that married men may not be ordained.

The rule has obviously been waived for those married men who were Protestant ministers, who converted, and were then ordained. So that in itself shows that the Church can modify Canon law, change it, or provide exceptions to it.

I sincerely have my doubts that the issue of ordaining men has not been brought up with Rome; and I would suspect that it has been brought up multiple times.

One can look at the issue practically in two ways. One is to look at the matter as a gradual opening to ordaining married men (other than protestant minister converts); Brazil’s possible exploration could be the next step in a process of possibly opening up the issue.

Another way to look at it is that Rome may feel they do not wish to open that door any farther than it has been opened. If they choose to not open it farther, that is not an indication that it cannot be opened farther, but would be a likely indication that such a change will not be forthcoming in some time (likely decades rather than years).

What becomes of the matter may not be decided for several years to come, or possibly could come to some sort of decision within the next year. At this point it is all a guess.

It has often been said that Rome moves very slowly. The permanent deaconate was restored in 1967 by Paul 6th and allowed married men to be ordained to that position. I believe it was in 1980 that John Paul 2 allowed the pastoral provision of ordaining married converted ministers to the priesthood. Whether or not the Church wishes to proceed further is anybody’s guess. Given the history, it certainly is not an impossibility. It also will not be a cure to any priest shortage, but it can provide more priests, which for ever one ordained, is one less in the shortage (just as for every celibate ordained is one more priest).

And none of it would "eliminate celibacy. It would simply exist along side celibacy.

 

[ProVobis]

The rule has obviously been waived for those married men who were Protestant ministers, who converted, and were then ordained. So that in itself shows that the Church can modify Canon law, change it, or provide exceptions to it.

True, but many Protestant ministers have undergone the necessary priestly formation. Or at least most of it. This is also true of the Anglican Ordinariate.

Extending it to married Catholics, of course, will probably not bring instant priests, as it requires many years of seminary study and formation before ordination. I’m thinking that there aren’t too many marrieds in training currently. And then one has to hope that the next Pope doesn’t reset the rules of celibacy. Then a lot of seminary training would have been wasted. But since no Pope can bind his successor, this is entirely possible.

 

[otjm]

True, but many Protestant ministers have undergone the necessary priestly formation. Or at least most of it. This is also true of the Anglican Ordinariate.

Extending it to married Catholics, of course, will probably not bring instant priests, as it requires many years of seminary study and formation before ordination. I’m thinking that there aren’t too many marrieds in training currently. And then one has to hope that the next Pope doesn’t reset the rules of celibacy. Then a lot of seminary training would have been wasted. But since no Pope can bind his successor, this is entirely possible.

Well, since the whole issue is only under exploration, whether they will or will not need as extensive a training as current priests do is an issue to be explored likewise.

It would appear that the Church in the past has had room for not-as-well trained priests - Father Solanus Casey did poorly in the seminary, and was ordained sacerdos simplex, so the matter is not exactly unique, although perhaps rare.

As to any change of direction subsequent, we are now on our third Pope and I suspect the minister crossover ordinations will continue. Yes, it could be stopped; But I suspect that if in my lifetime we see Catholic married men accepted for ordination, it won’t be soon after that starts. The Church does not seem to have much history of short reversals.

 

[Denise1957]

I misunderstood. I thought you wanted to know about applications to different parts of the world. If your question is whether canon law can be changed, the answer is still yes. For example, a change made under Pope Benedict (I think in 2009) eliminated the ability to formally defect from the Church and had implications for marriage validity (see here).

Okay, I see that there has been a case of canon law being changed in what you’ve posted above. It seems a relatively minor change, which few people likely noticed. But still, it’s a change. If the canon law regarding the (non) ordination of married priests changed, it would be a huge change, and would have direct effect on the entire Church, even if it’s just Brazil that would be able to ordain married men. It would be headline news, because the mainstream media wants to see the Church change it’s old ways, and become more “modern.”

 

[otjm]

Okay, I see that there has been a case of canon law being changed in what you’ve posted above. It seems a relatively minor change, which few people likely noticed. But still, it’s a change. If the canon law regarding the (non) ordination of married priests changed, it would be a huge change, and would have direct effect on the entire Church, even if it’s just Brazil that would be able to ordain married men. It would be headline news, because the mainstream media wants to see the Church change it’s old ways, and become more “modern.”

Not to make too fine a point of it, but if the Church were to allow married Catholic men to be ordained, it would not become more modern; it would actually become more ancient - since this was the Church for the first millennium, which had both a celibate and a married clergy.

 

[Tarpeian_Rock]

Well, since the whole issue is only under exploration, whether they will or will not need as extensive a training as current priests do is an issue to be explored likewise.

It would appear that the Church in the past has had room for not-as-well trained priests - Father Solanus Casey did poorly in the seminary, and was ordained sacerdos simplex, so the matter is not exactly unique, although perhaps rare.

As to any change of direction subsequent, we are now on our third Pope and I suspect the minister crossover ordinations will continue. Yes, it could be stopped; But I suspect that if in my lifetime we see Catholic married men accepted for ordination, it won’t be soon after that starts. The Church does not seem to have much history of short reversals.

For the record, though, the issue with Fr. Solanus was that he came from an Irish family, and the seminary courses were largely taught in German, which led to the perception that he wasn’t academically bright, and was therefore not allowed to preach a doctrinal homily or hear confessions after his simplex ordination. Post-mortem analysis of his writings revealed a high IQ. I think the idea of a simplex priesthood - experienced deacons for example after additional training - is a great idea. They could say Mass and do anointings, Reconciliation maybe only in emergencies, never be pastors. No salary expectations, children typically grown, spouse used to ministry demands. I think there are a lot of priests who would welcome someone else being able to respond to 2 AM anointing calls.

 

[otjm]

For the record, though, the issue with Fr. Solanus was that he came from an Irish family, and the seminary courses were largely taught in German, which led to the perception that he wasn’t academically bright, and was therefore not allowed to preach a doctrinal homily or hear confessions after his simplex ordination. Post-mortem analysis of his writings revealed a high IQ. I think the idea of a simplex priesthood - experienced deacons for example after additional training - is a great idea. They could say Mass and do anointings, Reconciliation maybe only in emergencies, never be pastors. No salary expectations, children typically grown, spouse used to ministry demands. I think there are a lot of priests who would welcome someone else being able to respond to 2 AM anointing calls.

Particularly when they may be tens or hundreds of miles away. Someone in this thread put the are in need at something like well over 200,000 square miles. Brazil is a huge country.

 

[Mark121359]

Oh, the conundrums this will present. Books have been written of the difficulties of clerical marriages. A biggie is availability and the conflict of a married man obligated to meet the immediate needs of family vs the celibate priest sacrificially and wholeheartedly committed to God.

And then there is that special character of Holy Orders, the sacerdotal dignity……reserved not for all, but for those specially and mystically committed to a unique way of life.

I find the entire concept a dilution of something very divine and very special.

Well said! And I couldn’t agree more with you. :tiphat:

---

Peace, Mark***

 

[Tigg]

I think the idea of a simplex priesthood - experienced deacons for example after additional training - is a great idea. They could say Mass and do anointings, Reconciliation maybe only in emergencies, never be pastors. No salary expectations, children typically grown, spouse used to ministry demands. I think there are a lot of priests who would welcome someone else being able to respond to 2 AM anointing calls.

'scuse me, but did something change I know nothing about? The diaconate level of ordination does not include a ministerial function. In other words, a deacon cannot absolve sins, nor administer the sacrament of the Anointing of the Sick:

THE MINISTER OF THE ANOINTING OF THE SICK

Can. 1003 §1. Every priest and a priest alone validly administers the anointing of the sick.

vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P3L.HTM

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT OF PENANCE

Can. 965 A priest alone is the minister of the sacrament of penance.

vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P3G.HTM

For further clarification:
“Now, let us talk about the last sacraments which includes the continuous rite of penance (only a priest can hear confession), anointing (which only a priest can administer)”

satodayscatholic.com/Lombardi_111612.aspx

 

[Tigg]

How does the issue of some Catholics (certainly not all Catholics, btw) having bought into a secular view affect Church teaching? Are Church teachings to be based on secularism, and why?

I was speaking of the reception of celibacy vs secular thought. Celibacy which is not a church teaching, but rather a discipline.

 

[Denise1957]

I was speaking of the reception of celibacy vs secular thought. Celibacy which is not a church teaching, but rather a discipline.

Celibacy for priests is not a Church teaching? Then what do you call the affirmations of maintaining priestly celibacy from ecumenical councils and papal encyclicals?

 

[Tarpeian_Rock]

Celibacy for priests is not a Church teaching? Then what do you call the affirmations of maintaining priestly celibacy from ecumenical councils and papal encyclicals?

It is not a “teaching” in the sense of “doctrine.” It is a “discipline” which has been affirmed by councils and encyclicals. Disciplines can change, doctrines cannot.

 

[commenter]

Maybe 50 or 60 years ago, the argument against married priests was based more on the attitude to celibacy. I think the caution against married priests today reflects far greater concern over the fragility of the married state. Divorce among Catholics (and Protestants, and others) today is far worse than anyone could have predicted in 1960. I have relatives who have been enormously impacted by issues with their children through the teen years, often well into their kids’ young adulthood.

It’s tempting to say “ordain Bob, we can limit his duties to Sunday mornings and Saturday afternoon”. But you KNOW what will happen: the pastor gets sick, and there’s no back up plan; that hospital can’t find a priest to come in at night; they need a priest to say Mass for the K of C, the alumni gathering, the convent, the Scouts, the this, the that; this emergency, that crisis, and so on. “If you’re a priest, how can you turn us down”. He is scheduled for only a half hour of confessions, but one confession opens up a huge can of worms that he has to deal with.

Bob’s family life seemed stable 5 years ago when he entered seminary. Today Fr. Bob’s son is on drugs, and it’s stressing Fr. Bob’s marriage, especially since the phone won’t stop ringing for him to come help. I know an awful lot of Christians who had a seemingly stable family life, who are raising their grandchildren, or dealing with their 20-something daughter’s mental illness, or other concerns, not predicted a decade earlier, none of which are their “fault”. It’s easier for deacons to limit their ministry duties than priests, but even deacons have had family life sometimes stressed by their ministry.

I’m not denying the arguments presented here for a married priesthood, which I agree with; I’m simply looking at the issue from another direction - or rather, from the other sacrament.

 

[otjm]

Well said! And I couldn’t agree more with you. :tiphat:

---

Peace, Mark***

So, Mark, are you saying that the Eastern rite priests who are married are lacking in sacerdotal dignity? And that they have been for 2000 years?

 

[SuscipeMeDomine]

It’s tempting to say “ordain Bob, we can limit his duties to Sunday mornings and Saturday afternoon”. But you KNOW what will happen: the pastor gets sick, and there’s no back up plan; that hospital can’t find a priest to come in at night; they need a priest to say Mass for the K of C, the alumni gathering, the convent, the Scouts, the this, the that; this emergency, that crisis, and so on. “If you’re a priest, how can you turn us down”. He is scheduled for only a half hour of confessions, but one confession opens up a huge can of worms that he has to deal with.

While the demands on a priest’s time may come from many sources, do keep in mind that we are talking about rural Brazil where one diocese reports 27 priests to serve 800 parishes. I sincerely doubt that a place that sees a priest two or three times a year has Knights of Columbus, Catholic alumni, and other first-world demands.

These are people who are absolutely starving for the Eucharist and other sacraments. How would you feed them if you were the bishop?

It would be interesting to hear from married deacons – and I know there are some on CAF – about how they are able to balance demands from the parish with family and work commitments.

 

[Mark121359]

So, Mark, are you saying that the Eastern rite priests who are married are lacking in sacerdotal dignity? And that they have been for 2000 years?

Here, here, and here. Maybe these articles will help you to understand what I have always held to be true, and will continue to firmly believe.

Peace, Mark

 

[ProVobis]

While the demands on a priest’s time may come from many sources, do keep in mind that we are talking about rural Brazil where one diocese reports 27 priests to serve 800 parishes. I sincerely doubt that a place that sees a priest two or three times a year has Knights of Columbus, Catholic alumni, and other first-world demands.

These are people who are absolutely starving for the Eucharist and other sacraments. How would you feed them if you were the bishop?

OTOH, those who don’t have priests available aren’t obligated to attend Mass. Just sayin…