Pope Francis spoke of being 'dazzled' by girl, possible change of celibacy rule

[katholikos12]

worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/03/20/17386717-pope-francis-spoke-of-being-dazzled-by-girl-possible-change-of-celibacy-rule?lite

The above link is makes it appear as though our Holy Father is open to the subject.

Is the article taking things out of context? Or is the Pope merely talking about celibacy being a discipline that CAN be changed, but likely won’t because it has stood for so long?

 

[JM3]

From your link;

“In the Western Church to which I belong, priests cannot be married as in the Byzantine, Ukrainian, Russian or Greek Catholic Churches. In those Churches, the priests can be married, but the bishops have to be celibate. They are very good priests,” he added.

 

[katholikos12]

“In Western Catholicism, some organizations are pushing for more discussion about the issue [celibacy].”

Also from the post.

I’m just asking if anyone knows about the interview more than what MSNBC is telling?

 

[PaulfromIowa]

If you read the Pope’s words in the interview he is only re-stating the Latin Church’s position of the last 1000 years.

 

[katholikos12]

I titled this poorly…

But anyways does it seem like he is willing to discuss the discipline?

 

[LegoGE1947]

If you read the Pope’s words in the interview he is only re-stating the Latin Church’s position of the last 1000 years.

Churches where ministers are able to marry are NOT exempt from having clergy who abuse children. Also the priests I know of wouldn’t think of hurting a child. One priest even joked that one of the advantages of being celibate is you don’t have to change your child’s dirty diapers

 

[McCall1981]

He’s just noting the fact (because he was asked) that Priestly celibacy can be changed since its a discipline, not doctrine.

Keep in mind that Pope Benedict “allowed it to be discussed” in 2007, and it was “discussed” under JPII as well.

He basically just explained that it can be discussed since its a discipline, and he’s not for changing it now. Nothing too controversial.

 

[McCall1981]

If you read the Pope’s words in the interview he is only re-stating the Latin Church’s position of the last 1000 years.

This…

 

[katholikos12]

He’s just noting the fact (because he was asked) that Priestly celibacy can be changed since its a discipline, not doctrine.

Keep in mind that Pope Benedict “allowed it to be discussed” in 2007, and it was “discussed” under JPII as well.

He basically just explained that it can be discussed since its a discipline, and he’s not for changing it now. Nothing too controversial.

Thanks, this is how I read the interview as well. Just wanted a second opinion.

 

[Linusthe2nd]

I titled this poorly…

But anyways does it seem like he is willing to discuss the discipline?

He clearly stated that it is a discipline that can be changed but he didn’t seem to be personally in favor of doing so. Personally, I can see a lot of pit falls. The first would be that it would severely limit our choice of Bishop candidates, since Bishops cannot be married.

Secondly, Our Lord was celebate and I think that matters a lot. Also most of the Apostles and many of the early Fathers were celebate.

I don’t think it would solve the priestly vocation shortage. I imagine the other Rites of the Catholic Church are experiencing the same shortage.

It would not solve the problems of Sexual excess that have arisen. After all, many of us who live in the lay state as single people must be just as celebate as any priest.

Then, if we must admit a married clergy, what then about married religious communities ? See, you can hardly grant the one and deny the other, can you ?

As far as the loneliness and isolation experienced by some of the clergy, I think that can be solved by the simple expedient of requiring the clergy or at least encouraging them to live in common. There would still be a problem in rural and isolated areas but these could be charted as " mission " territory and open only to the most dedicated among the clergy but not forced on anyone. Linus2nd

 

[Dakota_Roberts]

He clearly stated that it is a discipline that can be changed but he didn’t seem to be personally in favor of doing so. Personally, I can see a lot of pit falls. The first would be that it would severely limit our choice of Bishop candidates, since Bishops cannot be married.

Secondly, Our Lord was celebate and I think that matters a lot. Also most of the Apostles and many of the early Fathers were celebate.

I don’t think it would solve the priestly vocation shortage. **I imagine the other Rites of the Catholic Church are experiencing the same shortage.

It would not solve the problems of Sexual excess that have arisen. After all, many of us who live in the lay state as single people must be just as celebate as any priest.**

Then, if we must admit a married clergy, what then about married religious communities ? See, you can hardly grant the one and deny the other, can you ?

As far as the loneliness and isolation experienced by some of the clergy, I think that can be solved by the simple expedient of requiring the clergy or at least encouraging them to live in common. There would still be a problem in rural and isolated areas but these could be charted as " mission " territory and open only to the most dedicated among the clergy but not forced on anyone. Linus2nd

The UGCC has quite a few seminarians (as in they are forced to turn people away)

What do you mean “many of us who live in the lay state as single people must be just as celebate [sic] as any priest”? Celibacy is abstinence from marriage which laity are not forced to adhere to whereas priests absolutely must adhere to this.

 

[PrayRosary]

I had no idea that the topic was so “open for discussion”. I thought it was something that could never change. Kind of makes me wonder how I feel about it now since it is not a tradition and considered a discipline.

I wonder how much of it is the “well, I had to be celibate, so you should too” attitude.

 

[TimSpalding]

Then, if we must admit a married clergy, what then about married religious communities ? See, you can hardly grant the one and deny the other, can you ?

Why not? We had celibates for 1100 years in the Latin church before celibacy was required for the priesthood. There’s no necessary connection.

I don’t think it would solve the priestly vocation shortage. I imagine the other Rites of the Catholic Church are experiencing the same shortage.

I think your imagination is faulty.

Worldwide each Catholic priest attends to 2,850 laymen. Within the largest eastern Catholic church, Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church, the number is 1612. The Syro-Malebar Catholic church has a ratio of 412, the Romanian Greek-Catholics 1021. I can’t find data for the Maronite and Melike churches (#2 and #3 respectively). If someone can find it, let me know.

I can’t find good numbers for Orthodoxy proper, but it’s well known that Protestant denominations have no such problem. The Anglicans and Episcopals have too many priests, and indeed if it weren’t for their defectors, the Catholic priest shortage would be far worse.

 

[Texsain]

Personally, I can see a lot of pit falls. The first would be that it would severely limit our choice of Bishop candidates, since Bishops cannot be married.

Isn’t this technically a discipline too that could theoretically change? After all, Paul writes,

[BIBLEDRB]1 Timothy 3:2[/BIBLEDRB]

I’m not saying that it will change or should change, just that it could, most likely the day after hell freezes over.

 

[jwinch2]

Why not? We had celibates for 1100 years in the Latin church before celibacy was required for the priesthood. There’s no necessary connection.

I think your imagination is faulty.

Worldwide each Catholic priest attends to 2,850 laymen. Within the largest eastern Catholic church, Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church, the number is 1612. The Syro-Malebar Catholic church has a ratio of 412, the Romanian Greek-Catholics 1021. I can’t find data for the Maronite and Melike churches (#2 and #3 respectively). If someone can find it, let me know.

I can’t find good numbers for Orthodoxy proper, but it’s well known that Protestant denominations have no such problem. The Anglicans and Episcopals have too many priests, and indeed if it weren’t for their defectors, the Catholic priest shortage would be far worse.

Much of this is already improving without rescinding the discipline of celibacy. Many seminaries in the United States are full to the point that additional dormitories are having to be built to accommodate them. The pontificate of Benedict XVI had a huge effect on vocations. In addition, diocese with a strong reputation for orthodoxy to doctrine and faithfulness to the liturgy are seeing very solid numbers in terms of priestly vocations.

Things will continue to be rough in the short terms regarding vocations. However, assuming that Pope Francis continues to appoint solid bishops the way the Benedict did, and that the reform of the liturgy continues and spreads to the whole country, I believe there is solid evidence to suggest that vocations will increase dramatically going forward.

 

[TimothyH]

I had no idea that the topic was so “open for discussion”. I thought it was something that could never change. Kind of makes me wonder how I feel about it now since it is not a tradition and considered a discipline.

I wonder how much of it is the “well, I had to be celibate, so you should too” attitude.

Lower case “t” tradition can change because it is not revealed truth. Lower case “t” tradtion are the things we have done for a long time.

Upper case “T” traditon cannot change because it is revealed truth, revealed by God, AKA Sacred Tradition, of divine origin.

Lower case “t” tradtion may be important, but since it is not revealed truth, it can change. Sacred Traditon can never change.

Celibacy is a gift from God. I had considered it for the past four years but realize that I’m probably not called to it, haven’t been given that gift of an “undivided heart”. There probably is some of the “You too” attitude around, but having spoken to many deacons, priests and formation directors, I think the Church, at least in my archdioces, is very sensitive and caring about the issue. No one wants a priest or deacon who is not called to celibacy to make a mistake and embrace a celibate life - it is a recipie for failure - and neither the priest himself nor the Church really needs that kind of situation.

-Tim-

 

[TimSpalding]

Much of this is already improving without rescinding the discipline of celibacy. …*Things will continue to be rough in the short terms regarding vocations. However, assuming that Pope Francis continues to appoint solid bishops the way the Benedict did, and that the reform of the liturgy continues and spreads to the whole country, I believe there is solid evidence to suggest that vocations will increase dramatically going forward

You are wrong.

This is not an unexplored issue. Georgetown has an entire research organization devoted to the statistics of Catholics life in the USA, the Center for Applied Research in the Apostolate.

When you do the math out, calculating all the relevant factors, it just gets worse and worse. The average age of Catholic priests is now 63. New vocations have increased, but do not come close to plugging the death and retirement rate.

CARA’s projections have a 34.5% decline in absolute numbers of active priests for the next 25 years–about the rate of decline in the 25 years before that. Because the Catholic population continues to grow, the priest/parishioner ratios will go through the roof, and the rate of parish closure can only mirror the declining number of priests. If ordinations continue at the current pace, CARA predicts we’ll hit rock bottom 30 years from now, with 12,500 active priests, and the ratio of active-priests-to-parishioners will more than double, to more than 7,000 priests for every Catholic.

You can tweak the numbers. If ordinations are really swell, maybe we’ll hit bottom in 25 years. But we’re in for decades of decline. “Reform of the liturgy” isn’t going to do much good when there are no priests to say mass anyway. And it’s certainly not going to make priests live 150 years.

A summary: osv.com/tabid/7621/itemid/6532/In-Focus-Facing-a-future-with-fewer-Catholic-prie.aspx

 

[Catholic_Wife]

worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/03/20/17386717-pope-francis-spoke-of-being-dazzled-by-girl-possible-change-of-celibacy-rule?lite

The above link is makes it appear as though our Holy Father is open to the subject.

Is the article taking things out of context? Or is the Pope merely talking about celibacy being a discipline that CAN be changed, but likely won’t because it has stood for so long?

Here’s my :twocents:

NBC is pushing their liberal agenda. Call it taking things out of context if you want, but I think this is nothing more than NBC trying to pull Catholics further and further from the Church by getting them to accept secular thinking and reject the morals taught by the Church. If they can persuade enough people to abandon the Church and her teachings, they can get more people who will support things like same-sex marriage and abortion. They are trying to get enough people who claim to be Catholic, but who don’t actually hold to the Church’s teachings, to speak out against things like priestly celibacy and other teachings in an effort to put pressure on the Church to change. How many times in the past few weeks have we seen in the news and heard on the TV “Catholics” say that the Church needs to “get with the times”? This is just another example…

 

[Diana_Catherine]

Then, if we must admit a married clergy, what then about married religious communities ? See, you can hardly grant the one and deny the other, can you ? Linus2nd

This is a very good point, I had not thought of. In other discussions, on this forum, of this particular topic many use the argument of the issue needing to be “fair”, such as if priests used to be allowed to marry, why can’t they now, or how come protestant pastors are allowed to come in and be married and Catholics can’t or the Eastern Catholics can be married why not the Western. I think you are right. It wouldn’t stop. It would just continue to be a “how come they can and I can’t” issue.

IMHO we need to trust the Church on issues such as this, especially when we see differences we don’t understand. I, also feel that he was just explaining how he issue stands. I don’t think he was making any statement that he would like to see things changed.

Here’s my :twocents:

NBC is pushing their liberal agenda. Call it taking things out of context if you want, but I think this is nothing more than NBC trying to pull Catholics further and further from the Church by getting them to accept secular thinking and reject the morals taught by the Church. If they can persuade enough people to abandon the Church and her teachings, they can get more people who will support things like same-sex marriage and abortion. They are trying to get enough people who claim to be Catholic, but who don’t actually hold to the Church’s teachings, to speak out against things like priestly celibacy and other teachings in an effort to put pressure on the Church to change. How many times in the past few weeks have we seen in the news and heard on the TV “Catholics” say that the Church needs to “get with the times”? This is just another example…

This is so true. Many people are trying to read the pope and make him to be who they want him to be or predict what he is going to do based on their own agendas before he has even had a chance to get started.

This type of story can be heard all over the liberal medias hoping to pull people away from the church and promote what they want.

 

[Tobias22]

Reading the comment at face value I think the Pope is not wedded to celibacy in the Latin Rite but not actively opposed.

I think he will re-open discussion on the topic. maybe among Western bishops. If the bishops clearly favor ending celibacy I think he will agree as I expect him to be more conciliar as a Pope.

Bascially, it could go either way.

I think in nay case he will be a transformational Pope - carrying out the vision of V2.