Pressure from Latin Bishops to Not Ordain Married Priests

  • Thread starter Thread starter shlomo3amrooh
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

shlomo3amrooh

Guest
There have been Vatican decrees that have said ordaining married men in the diaspora is canonically illegal. For example, the 1921 decree cum data fuerit. This decree was originally directed to the Greek Catholics in the US, but has been applied universally to all Eastern and Oriental Churches sui juris to prevent the ordination of married men to the priesthood in all of the diaspora. Another example is in 2008 when the Congregation for the Doctrine of the faith reaffirmed the norm of binding celibacy of Eastern Priests outside of ‘Patriarchal Territories’

To read more click below:

qadishat.com/2013/10/pressure-from-latin-bishops-to-not.html
 
shlomo3amrooh said:
There have been Vatican decrees that have said ordaining married men in the diaspora is canonically illegal. For example, the 1921 decree cum data fuerit. This decree was originally directed to the Greek Catholics in the US, but has been applied universally to all Eastern and Oriental Churches sui juris to prevent the ordination of married men to the priesthood in all of the diaspora. Another example is in 2008 when the Congregation for the Doctrine of the faith reaffirmed the norm of binding celibacy of Eastern Priests outside of ‘Patriarchal Territories’

To read more click below:

qadishat.com/2013/10/pressure-from-latin-bishops-to-not.html
Click to expand...
I doubt if any of us are qualified to answer that question. And I wonder if it is really true?

Linus2nd
 
Sounds like an excellent way to produce and/or sustain a priest shortage.

I can’t say I understand the logic involved, particularly in the light of the fact that the Latins, when questioned, defend clerical celibacy as a discipline, highlighting the fact that it can be changed. Maybe this is one of those things like certain very popular private apparitions: You’re not technically required to endorse it, but God help you if you do anything that is seen as being against it… 🤷

The thing about Latins “switching” so that they can be married priests seems weird to me, too, for precisely the reasons outlined in the blog post. How dumb must the Eastern and Oriental churches be if they don’t vet their candidates, and subject them to all the rigors that are supposed to precede the ordination of any priest? Good luck learning Syriac language and patrimony, disaffected or opportunistic Latins! :rolleyes: (And I think the problem of insufficiently-vetted priests has shown itself most tragically in the widespread troubles that have affected the Latin church most accutely…so perhaps they are projecting, like “If they do as bad a job as we do, just imagine what could happen!” What indeed…)
 
The Latin Church in North America, the UK, and Australia ordains married men to the priesthood - via the Anglican Ordinariates. That’s the irony.
 
twf said:
The Latin Church in North America, the UK, and Australia ordains married men to the priesthood - via the Anglican Ordinariates. That’s the irony.
Click to expand...
But of course they can do what they want because for them it’s an internal matter of discipline, and they can dispense as they please. That silly “sum data fuerit” business doesn’t affect the Latins because they dictated it for the “benefit” (it’s really more like “detriment” but I digress) of their perennially naughty Eastern and Oriental children. :banghead: :mad:
 
malphono said:
But of course they can do what they want because for them it’s an internal matter of discipline, and they can dispense as they please. That silly “sum data fuerit” business doesn’t affect the Latins because they dictated it for the “benefit” (it’s really more like “detriment” but I digress) of their perennially naughty Eastern and Oriental children. :banghead: :mad:
Click to expand...
I agree that sadly there are those in the Curia and amongst the bishops in general who do hold this attitude. At the same time, if not for the personal intervention of Pope Benedict, I doubt that those same parties would have tolerated the erection of the Anglican Ordinariates in the first place. I don’t see married priests being a common sight outside of the Anglo-Latin Church anytime soon. The Italian bishops, for example, seem to be particularly antagonistic towards the idea.
 
And why do Italians get to tell Syriacs, Byzantines, and others what to do in the first place?
 
dzheremi said:
And why do Italians get to tell Syriacs, Byzantines, and others what to do in the first place?
Click to expand...
The “Italian connection” is, IIRC, related to the Romanians in Italy who wanted to bring in some married priests to serve their flock. Oh the horror! The “scandal” (oh please…). :rolleyes:

To me, the real question is: why does Rome get to tell us what do do in the first place? But of course the answer is that we’re merely the perennially naughty children who have to be told what to do. You know, “mother knows best” syndrome. :mad:
 
Am I to presume that there is no priest shortage in the non-Roman Rites of the Catholic Church around the world?
 
twf said:
The Latin Church in North America, the UK, and Australia ordains married men to the priesthood - via the Anglican Ordinariates. That’s the irony.
Click to expand...
Irony? That’s the scandal! :sad_yes:
Not only ordains them, but that there are more married priests now in the Latin Church here than there are in our Eastern Catholic Churches. 😦
 
twf said:
The Latin Church in North America, the UK, and Australia ordains married men to the priesthood - via the Anglican Ordinariates. That’s the irony.
Click to expand...
So does the Ukrainian Church, just not men without many years of devotion to byzantine praxis.
 
twf said:
The Latin Church in North America, the UK, and Australia ordains married men to the priesthood - via the Anglican Ordinariates. That’s the irony.
Click to expand...
Oddly enough, I can never bring myself to complain too loudly about the exception-for-ex-Anglicans. Whenever you’re talking about giving incentives for people to convert, you’re going to get into murky areas (of course, it might be said that the Anglicans started the “incentivized conversions” by allowing married priests in the first place, but that’s a whole other can of worms) but let’s keep in mind that it is a pretty minor allowance … an ex-Anglican-minister might be permitted to become a married Catholic priest, but what if he then has a son? He doesn’t have the option of becoming a married priest. (Sorry if I’m stating the obvious.)
 
P.S. To put numbers to it, according to Wikipedia “As of November 2012, approximately 70 married men have been ordained as priests under the Pastoral Provision.” So about 0.2% of LC priests in the US are married (70 out of 40,000).
 
As I understand it, the pastoral provision for the Anglican Ordinariate is that current priests that convert to the Catholic faith can be ordained if they were married but only for already formed priests.
The new candidates to the priesthood that are in seminary still and have not finished the vocation discernment will have to abide by the celibacy discipline like all the rest.

So it is only a transitory dispensation, not a permanent one.

–
 
I’ll honestly say I’m surprised a disgruntled Latin hasn’t posted yet about how this thread is an insulting and somehow, once again, unfair Eastern hostility towards the West. To anyone tempted to say such, read about Archbishop Ireland.

Anyway, this entire thing is rooted in the idiocy of numbers and the assumption that people will start becoming Eastern clergy to dodge the Latin requirement of celibacy (as if we’re so dense we take anyone). Matters like this make me roll my eyes at the claim, particularly prevalent amongst Byzantines, about being “Orthodox in communion with Rome.”
 
twf said:
The Latin Church in North America, the UK, and Australia ordains married men to the priesthood - via the Anglican Ordinariates. That’s the irony.
Click to expand...
TWF, You have a very strange view of what is going on regarding married Anglican minsters who convert to Catholicism and are subsequently ordained into the Catholic Church.

The way you have worded it you give the impression that in the Latin Church if a married Catholic man wants to become a priest, he first becomes an Anglican, then he becomes an Anglican priest, then he converts back to Catholicism and goes on to become a Catholic priest, a married one this time!!!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top