Ordination of (former) Anglican

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Probably he can better understand human circumstances than a celibate priest.

While I can understand why you might think this I would ask you and others to look at this logically.

If we take what you feel as the truth then how can anyone assist someone though an issue unless they have also had the same issue?

I also take offense at the underlined portion of what you have said.

So people who do not marry for the sake of the kingdom of God are not human?

 

[LUKBAN]

My apology if I offended you. There’s no intent of such thing. I think you totally overlooked the word "probably"and it’s intent meaning in my statement. And I don’t claim nor attach truth to my feeling. Our feeling is very subjective. To claim the truth we should be objective. I don’t know why you are looking my statement through a very narrow lens . A Bro should be very open minded in order to approach or judge “human circumstances” objectively. You seem to tell me (if I have to claim truth to my feeling) that you have mastered every subject of human life. My feeling is telling me that you are a know all person. Can I claim truth to my feeling? You tell me. That’s why you were offended when I said that “probably” a married priest can better handle some very special issues in our life (like sexual act). I just want to emphasize to you that every priest or Bro has their own specialty. I will not ask an advice how to run a marathon from a Bro or a priest who can’t even jog for 100 meters. Common sense, I have to seek advice from somebody who is athletic and had run a marathon. Similarly, if I have a problem about sexual act, I would rather approach a married priest. Figure it out.Don’t be judgemental and sensitive Bro I hope I will not further offend you.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

My apology if I offended you. There’s no intent of such thing. I think you totally overlooked the word "probably"and it’s intent meaning in my statement. And I don’t claim nor attach truth to my feeling. Our feeling is very subjective. To claim the truth we should be objective. I don’t know why you are looking my statement through a very narrow lens . A Bro should be very open minded in order to approach or judge “human circumstances” objectively. You seem to tell me (if I have to claim truth to my feeling) that you have mastered every subject of human life. My feeling is telling me that you are a know all person. Can I claim truth to my feeling? You tell me. That’s why you were offended when I said that “probably” a married priest can better handle some very special issues in our life (like sexual act). I just want to emphasize to you that every priest or Bro has their own specialty. I will not ask an advice how to run a marathon from a Bro or a priest who can’t even jog for 100 meters. Common sense, I have to seek advice from somebody who is athletic and had run a marathon. Similarly, if I have a problem about sexual act, I would rather approach a married priest. Figure it out.Don’t be judgemental and sensitive Bro I hope I will not further offend you.

What offended me in your statement is the appearance of you implying that those who live a celibate life can not understand “human” circumstances.

As you say you did not intend that then I accept that, but I caution you on choosing your words.

I make no claim mastering any subject of human life but I do not buy into the idea that one must live something before they can help someone on something.

 

[Traditional_Ang]

You’ve made some excellent points here. I’ve never understood how we could ordain converts but not already married Catholic men. It makes no sense. To me, this is just the first step in a gradual process to allow married priests. I don’t really agree with it but I think within the next 100 years the Church will allow priests to be married.

I think the dioceses that promote the permanent diaconate tend to be the more liberal ones–I think it all comes back to it being another step towards a married priesthood.

Turtle18:

I really think we need to be precise here, because in the Eastern Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churches, Married Men are allowed to ordained as priests (you need to decide on your “marital state” before your Ordination to the Diaconate), but Priest are NOT allowed to marry after they are Ordained, and only Celibate men can be consecrated as Bishops. So, Let’s “Graph this out”:

Marry (or not) before your Ordination to the Diaconate;
Your Marital State prior to your Ordination to the Diaconate is your State as a Priest (except for Widowhood);
Unmarried Deacons take a Vow of Celibacy/Chastity;
If your wife dies or if you divorce (even if you receive an Annulment), you can’t remarry; and
Only Celibate Priests can be consecrated as Bishops.

I hope this is makes it clear.

Your Brother in Christ, Michael

 

[Traditional_Ang]

My apology if I offended you. There’s no intent of such thing. I think you totally overlooked the word "probably"and it’s intent meaning in my statement. And I don’t claim nor attach truth to my feeling. Our feeling is very subjective. To claim the truth we should be objective. I don’t know why you are looking my statement through a very narrow lens . A Bro should be very open minded in order to approach or judge “human circumstances” objectively. You seem to tell me (if I have to claim truth to my feeling) that you have mastered every subject of human life. My feeling is telling me that you are a know all person. Can I claim truth to my feeling? You tell me. That’s why you were offended when I said that “probably” a married priest can better handle some very special issues in our life (like sexual act). I just want to emphasize to you that every priest or Bro has their own specialty. I will not ask an advice how to run a marathon from a Bro or a priest who can’t even jog for 100 meters. Common sense, I have to seek advice from somebody who is athletic and had run a marathon. Similarly, if I have a problem about sexual act, I would rather approach a married priest. Figure it out.Don’t be judgemental and sensitive Bro I hope I will not further offend you.

Lukban:

First thing you need to remember is that the only thing people ca see here is YOUR WORDS. and, Because you don’t have a LONG posting here, you don’t get the BENEFIT OF THE DOUBT some posters might get…

Now, Just as none of would take instruction on how to run a Marathon from someone who had never run further than a city block, none of us would try to deal with a problem such as Sexual Dysfunction with someone who wasn’t a professional. but, If I were dealing with a problem with communication, I don’t think the counsel from a celibate priest is going to be any different than that from a married priest. It’s all going to depend on how well that priest listens and on whether that priest has the gift of counsel.

And, All things being equal, the celibate priest will have more time for his congregation and will be far more flexible (meaning he can go where he’s sent w/o question) than a married priest. We’ve seen that in The Episcopal Church where married priests have had to weigh the problems of taking care of their families and keeping their retirement vs. obeying God & leaving the dead body of The Episcopal Church.

Those priests who were celibate had an easier choice. I knew 2 of them; one took his congregation to the Antiochian Orthodox Church in 1981, and the other tried to take his congregation to Rome in 1979. When the local Ordinary rejected the congregation, he became a Roman Catholic priest in the mid 1980’s after he was accepted into the church in the early 1980’s… As you can see, those priests who were celibate had an easier decision.

I think you’re forgetting that, with the excepting of some specialized knowledge, most human counsel involves questioning & listening, and that God decides to whom He will give the Gift of Counsel, not us. and, Neither is dependent on whether or not someone is married, but on whether someone is willing and submissive to God.

Your Brother in Christ, Michael

 

[LUKBAN]

Bro. David, beauty is in the eyes of the beholder. Any word can give a negative meaning depending on how you want to look at it. I don’t see anything wrong with my choice of words. You were the one who gave a malicious meaning to it. Your statement is an insult to me.

 

[Traditional_Ang]

You’ve made some excellent points here. I’ve never understood how we could ordain converts but not already married Catholic men. It makes no sense. To me, this is just the first step in a gradual process to allow married priests. I don’t really agree with it but I think within the next 100 years the Church will allow priests to be married.

I think the dioceses that promote the permanent diaconate tend to be the more liberal ones–I think it all comes back to it being another step towards a married priesthood.

Turtle:

The Permanent Diaconate is something Pope John Paul II suggested and urged as a remedy for the scourge of people treating Extraordinary Ministers of the Holy Eucharist as Ordinary Ministers of the Holy Eucharist.

I don’t think anyone would accuse JP II of being a Liberal…

You might want to take a look at the requirements to become a Permanent Deacon, and what’s happened to Reverence for our Lord present in the Holy Eucharist in those parishes which have used a LOT of EMHE to Administer the Holy Eucharist vs. those parishes where the Eucharist has been primarily administered by Priests & Deacons.

Your Brother in Christ, Michael

 

[Traditional_Ang]

Bro. David, beauty is in the eyes of the beholder. Any word can give a negative meaning depending on how you want to look at it. I don’t see anything wrong with my choice of words. You were the one who gave a malicious meaning to it. Your statement is an insult to me.

Lukban:

Can you please cool it a bit. I’m pretty sure I was the one who wrote what you’re objecting to now. What I wrote is also in -
Forum Etiquette: Share Your Wisdom
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=52484

Whenever we post anything, we have to ask ourselves how people are going to take what we said. So, I think you might reread what you wrote, remembering that others reading it don’t know you from Adam, and have NO Idea how you feel or what you think outside of what they see ON PAPER.

Now, I really think I’ve spent more than enough time on this, and that this has really gotten off-topic.

Your Brother in Christ, Michael

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Lukban:

First thing you need to remember is that the only thing people ca see here is YOUR WORDS. and, Because you don’t have a LONG posting here, you don’t get the BENEFIT OF THE DOUBT some posters might get…

Now, Just as none of would take instruction on how to run a Marathon from someone who had never run further than a city block, none of us would try to deal with a problem such as Sexual Dysfunction with someone who wasn’t a professional. but, If I were dealing with a problem with communication, I don’t think the counsel from a celibate priest is going to be any different than that from a married priest. It’s all going to depend on how well that priest listens and on whether that priest has the gift of counsel.

And, All things being equal, the celibate priest will have more time for his congregation and will be far more flexible (meaning he can go where he’s sent w/o question) than a married priest. We’ve seen that in The Episcopal Church where married priests have had to weigh the problems of taking care of their families and keeping their retirement vs. obeying God & leaving the dead body of The Episcopal Church.

Those priests who were celibate had an easier choice. I knew 2 of them; one took his congregation to the Antiochian Orthodox Church in 1981, and the other tried to take his congregation to Rome in 1979. When the local Ordinary rejected the congregation, he became a Roman Catholic priest in the mid 1980’s after he was accepted into the church in the early 1980’s… As you can see, those priests who were celibate had an easier decision.

I think you’re forgetting that, with the excepting of some specialized knowledge, most human counsel involves questioning & listening, and that God decides to whom He will give the Gift of Counsel, not us. and, Neither is dependent on whether or not someone is married, but on whether someone is willing and submissive to God.

Your Brother in Christ, Michael

Michael,
Thank you for your thoughtful post. If you can not tell this issue is one of my hot button issues and I sometimes loose my cool when talking about it.

I must add something to what you have said though. Those who say that they want a married priesthood because that priest would “understand” them better is like saying that I could not go to a professional to talk about a sexual dysfunction unless that professional also suffered from the same dysfunction. It is ridiculous to think such a thing.

A pastor knows what he can handle and can refer someone if they need more professional help.

Living the vow of chastity and a celibate life leaves me more open to others than a married man can ever be. Some people believe that intimacy = sex, this is not true, a vowed religious or a secular priest living chastity and a celibate life is more open to intimacy with others in ways that a married person can never be.

Also, while a secular priest may be more available to his congregation that is not necessarily true for a religious priest as he has the responsibility to be there for his community.

 

[Jossy]

I’m not concerned about his ability to be a priest, after all he had that function in the Anglican church and I’m sure he’s quite capable. Many people have spoken about what a good man he is, and he has conducted some bible studies in our parish. Both the bishop and the pastor for the parish are completely supportive of him. I just don’t understand the contradiction. Why is it that Rome, having a firm stance against married priests (which I agree with), allows men who are married in another faith and have converted, to be priests? It seems contradictory at best and hypocritical at worst.

Yes, I support your view point.
Maybe, it would have been better if he was a lay missionary (he will still be doing the
same job) rather than be ordained a priest in the Catholic Church.
It is truly hypocritical and already bending the rule’s.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Yes, I support your view point.
Maybe, it would have been better if he was a lay missionary (he will still be doing the
same job) rather than be ordained a priest in the Catholic Church.
It is truly hypocritical and already bending the rule’s.

It is not hypocritical to dispense from the disciplines of the Church.

 

[diggerdomer]

Living the vow of chastity and a celibate life leaves me more open to others than a married man can ever be.

This seems to be the same type of generalization that you objected to from Lukban’s post.

 

[seagal]

Turtle18:

I really think we need to be precise here, because in the Eastern Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churches, Married Men are allowed to ordained as priests (you need to decide on your “marital state” before your Ordination to the Diaconate), but Priest are NOT allowed to marry after they are Ordained, and only Celibate men can be consecrated as Bishops. So, Let’s “Graph this out”:

Marry (or not) before your Ordination to the Diaconate;
Your Marital State prior to your Ordination to the Diaconate is your State as a Priest (except for Widowhood);
Unmarried Deacons take a Vow of Celibacy/Chastity;
If your wife dies or if you divorce (even if you receive an Annulment), you can’t remarry; and
Only Celibate Priests can be consecrated as Bishops.

I hope this is makes it clear.

Your Brother in Christ, Michael

OK, so I get that celibacy is a discipline for Latin rite priests that other (Eastern) rites aren’t subject to. Not to sound like a broken record (a dense one at that) that doesn’t answer the question why this discipline isn’t required of men who happen to convert to Catholicism.

 

[diggerdomer]

OK, so I get that celibacy is a discipline for Latin rite priests that other (Eastern) rites aren’t subject to. Not to sound like a broken record (a dense one at that) that doesn’t answer the question why this discipline isn’t required of men who happen to convert to Catholicism.

I think that’s a question that the Church has not provided a completely satisfactory answer to, unfortunately, so I don’t know if anyone here will be able to (though it would be great if someone could).