Priesthood Celibacy Poll (Reworded for Clarity)

  • Thread starter Thread starter Greg_McPherran
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Hi Rose! Great to hear from you!

1 Timothy 3:2 a bishop must be the husband of one wife…,

This certainly seems to allow for both celibate and married priests. Some people say that doesn’t mean a bishop must be married and I agree, but it certainly doesn’t seem to authorize a strict requirement of celibacy and it certainly seems to allow a bishop to be married.

1 Timothy 3:4 He must manage his own household well, keeping his children under control with perfect dignity; for if a man does not know how to manage his own household, how can he take care of the church of God?

For all the people here who say a married man cannot be a priest because of responsibilities, then why does Scripture point out that a man who runs a family has given evidence that he can be a good bishop?

Could the wisdom of Scripture be telling us that we can avoid scandals and dissent by seeing how well a man runs his own family before we let him run a church? Have we been missing the wisdom of Scripture?

Maybe if bishops had experience raising children, they would not hesitate to correct dissent and other misdeeds of priests.

Greg
 
Greg,

I did not suggest that the Church is not able to allow married priests, as you have so correctly pointed out, scripture allows for it, as has the history of the Church. If it were a matter of Dogma, it would be unchangable. It is not.

It is a matter of Obedience to the Magisterium. As such, this is a decision for the Pope, and the Bishops in union with the Pope. It is not a matter which will be decided by the Laity, however you are welcome to take your case to the Pope for his consideration.

I never said anything about an individual’s responsibilities (e.g. family) affecting their ability to function in the role of either priest or bishop.

It is sad when we have priests who are unfaithful to the Magisterium. It is sad when we do not see this dissent being addressed by their Bishops. While you earlier gave the example of your risking your job if you didn’t do what your boss asked, would you expect his first response to be one made in public, in front of your peers or the clients? Or might he perhaps pull you aside privately and chastise you?

Is it possible that an employee might badmouth the boss for quite a while before anyone finally got around to telling the boss that this was going on? Is it possible that such an employee was “hitting the numbers” for his position and the person reporting the poor behavior was known as a “malcontent”? Would these “facts and labels” change the reality of the badmouthing and the damage such behavior causes to an organization.

The boss could see a department which is continuing to grow in sales or productivity, with only a few “malcontents” who bring up issues in such a way as to be easily written off. Or, the boss could be busy dealing with what he humanly perceives to be a more pressing concern, not realizing his company is rotting from within while he’s looking the other way.

I know nothing of the particulars of your diocese, and parish, or the steps you and others may have taken to address the concerns you observe. I am unaware of how your bishop is addressing them or if he realizes that something needs to be done.

But issues of dissent are not likely to be corrected by further dissent. I recommend that you begin to set the example of obedience you so desire. Pray for your priests and your Bishop. Pray for vocations and that the leadership of the Church continue to be led by the Holy Spirit to do God’s will. Pray that the leadership be couragous in all their decisions, whether or not they are popular, so long as they are the Will of God, not Man.

CARose
 
Hi Rose,
40.png
CARose:
But issues of dissent are not likely to be corrected by further dissent.
Click to expand...
The title of this thread was “suggestion to the Magisterium”😉

What are your thoughts about the Scriptures in my previous post?

Others welcome to join in.

Greg
 
I stand corrected.

Let me restate. Issues of dissent are not best addressed by requests to change the rules, especially if the rules to be changed have little to do with the dissent which raises concern.

You have mentioned several issues of dissent, (including Catholic voting on abortion, “Catholic” politicians not living their faith in and out of office, and contraceptive use). These examples include the laity as well as the priesthood. I do not see how these issues / concerns relate to allowing married priests, other than perhaps our seeing more concrete examples of their position with regards to contraception. But even here, we must be careful not to assume we know why any couple has any given number of children.

The importance of chastity applies to all persons, each of us according to our station in life. I sincerely wish the Church would do a better job of teaching the faithful the fullness of the Truth, as it is best understood, and has been pondered by the Saints through the ages. I have yet to read Theology of the Body, by John Paul II (I believe he wrote it before he was Pope), but I hear it is an excellent writing on the meaning of intimate relations within the context of a marriage.

What I find interesting is that so much of what the Popes have written over the past century about subjects such as contraception and abortion preceded the issues and foresaw the challenges our society now faces as a result of our changes in public policy.

I believe that the vows of Celibacy, Poverty and Obedience for Clergy have made their work of evangelization significantly easier when the non-believer stops to consider what possible motive a person might have for the sacrifices they face if it is not Sex, Money or Power, the most common Human motivators. This also assists in weeding out those who might be encouraged to consider the Priesthood a “career choice”.

One may have the natural talents necessary to be Pope, but without immense humility, a desire to serve and a willingness to sacrifice, the office cannot be properly served. It may be possible for a married person to be priest, as allowed by scripture, but we are not a Sola Scriptura Church. We are not even a Sola Tradition Church, or we would not have changed 1500 years ago to disallow married clergy. We have a Magisterium, and we allow for the fact that Christ has promised us that the Church would prevail even against the gates of Hell. The Holy Spirit has done an excellent job of communicating with our leadership, and our current leadership is managing to steer the barque of Peter on a steady course through the tumoultous seas of our current times.

The priesthood functions in Persona Christi. To me, this suggests that the priest is married to the Church, as the Church is the Bride of Christ. I acknowledge that there have been married priests in the past, and there are cases of married priests currently in the Latin Rite, but I am comfortable with this being the exception, rather than the rule.

If the Pope were to change his mind, I would be comfortable that he understands the issues far better then I, and I would gladly read his thoughts on the changes thus implemented.

But you asked for my opinion, would I recommend such a change, do I think it would be a good idea.

No, I would not make such a recommendation. Unless presented by the Pope, I do not anticipate the need to further examine this issue for “clarification” of why the Church does not current endorse married priests.

CARose
 
Great (name removed by moderator)ut Rose,

I acknowledge your good point about the holiness of priests.
40.png
CARose:
Let me restate. Issues of dissent are not best addressed by requests to change the rules, especially if the rules to be changed have little to do with the dissent which raises concern.

No, I would not make such a recommendation. Unless presented by the Pope, I do not anticipate the need to further examine this issue for “clarification” of why the Church does not current endorse married priests.
Click to expand...
First, I am not raising the question only to correct dissent, but rather because we may be missing some of the wisdom of Scripture. I think that as an organization of humans, this is possible.

Secondly the Church encourages and welcomes (name removed by moderator)ut:

They should openly reveal to them their needs and desires with that freedom and confidence which is fitting for children of God and brothers in Christ. They are, by un of tho knowledge, competence or outstanding ability which they may enjoy, permitted and sometimes even obliged to express their opinion on those things which concern the good of the Church (7).* When occasions arise, let this be done through the organs erected by the Church for this purpose. Let it always be done in truth, in courage and in prudence, with reverence and charity toward those who by reason of their sacred office represent the person of Christ.

vatican.va/archive/hist_…gentium_en.html

Thirdly, what about those Scriptures I showed you?

Greg
 
Asked and answered.

I agree that scripture does not disallow married priests.

I state that we are not a Sola Scriptura Church. So scripture allowing it, is not sufficient for doing so.

Magisterium determines which course to take, if scripture does not dictate. Scripture allows, but scripture does not require that we allow married priests.

Moses allowed divorce, because of the Hardness of their hearts, not because God ordered divorce. God often allows us to do things which we desire, not because it is good for us, but because our hearts are hardened to His desire. We then must live with the consequences of our desires.

In many cases throughout Scripture we have been given examples of how he gives people what they want, and they then, over time, see the error of their desires. Frequently the problems exhibit over time, with a generation or two later suffering the full consequences. (The desired a King, like the other nations, where did that get them?) When in the wilderness, they were tired of eating Manna, and desired meat. They then had so much meat, they were innundated with it and suffered plagues (from eating rotted flesh?).

Be careful what you desire. God may just give it to you.

CARose
 
Hi Rose, (By the way, clear your inbox, I could not send you a PM.)
40.png
CARose:
Scripture allows, but scripture does not require that we allow married priests.
Click to expand...
That’s an interesting discernment on your part. You have just entered my elite “grasshopper” club. (you know - kung fu) 🙂

However, grasshopper, I think indeed Paul in Scripture may never have intended that we disallow married clergy. I think the Church needs to be careful about this (I’m sure they are). Consider my point that we may be missing some of the wisdom of Scripture and the possibility of this?

Also consider, for example, the Church says they don’t feel authorized to ordain women based on the disciples (male) and/or Scripture. How then, can they feel authorized to disallow married priests when scripture does not disallow this and even indicates that a bishop being a family man can be a good indication of his stewardship?
40.png
CARose:
Be careful what you desire. God may just give it to you.
Click to expand...
Ahhhh grasshopper, you have almost graduated from the McPherran school of debate.:clapping: Or perhaps, it is I who have found a new teacher. 😃 (It’s Staurday night, gotta have ***some ***fun.)

Greg
 
OK, I’m tired, so I may not answer as well as I’d like (this grasshopper is in serious need of sleep), but I’d like to make one final response before signing off for the night.

There is a significant difference between the Church’s position regarding married priests and women in the priesthood. Married Priests is a matter of obedience to authority, it is a matter of tradition, lower case “t”, and can change over time as determined by the current needs of the Church and as defined by the current Authority of the Church. It is NOT a matter of Dogma. It has never been Infallibly taught that we cannot have married priests, nor could it ever be taught such, for this (as you have stated) would be contradictory to scripture (and the Church never teaches contradictory to scripture) and we have previously had married priests.

On the other hand, it has been infallibly taught, by the Pope, according to the dictates of Infallible teaching, that there CANNOT be women priests. I once questioned this position of the Church, but now that I understand that it is a position which has been taught infallibly, I accept the Church’s teaching.

If I felt, in my heart of hearts, that the Church was in grave error on this point, I would do everything in my power to learn more about the issue. I would research scripture on the point (e.g. the use of the word “Man” when referring to the Episcopasy, used in the generic “mankind” sense?) and I would read early documents of the Church Fathers.

But I would pay special attention to the teachings of the Popes on this issue, especially that which is claimed to be infallible on the subject. I would read the references cited, I would seek to understand the source language(s) and I would pray for the guidance of the Holy Spirit.

But even then, I would accept that I may simply be too Human to understand all that is to be understood, or at least to merit the knowledge and wisdom I seek, at this particular point in time.

And I would pray for the humility necessary to accept that Christ has selected a most worthy Bride, for the Faith necessary to believe her to be unblemished, and the Charity necessary to Love Her with all my heart.

By the way, there have been many exceptional women saints over the years who believed they were called to be priests, including St. Theresa of Avila and St. Therese, the Little Flower, both of whom are Doctors of the Church. I don’t think they would continue to insist that the call they felt was due to the Church’s need for them to serve as Priests, even if their humanness led them to believe that being a priest was in some way “better” than the cloistered life open to a “mere” woman.

There are days I feel the life of a wife is similar to being cloistered. And I seek to understand how I am to be sanctified through accepting my “little” role.

Christ be with you,

CARose
 
Rose, you are a model for us all. You have been very helpful. I take your words to heart.

Greg
 
Rose is brilliant and I don’t really have anything to add, except this.
40.png
Greg_McPherran:
I think indeed Paul in Scripture may never have intended that we disallow married clergy. I think the Church needs to be careful about this (I’m sure they are). Consider my point that we may be missing some of the wisdom of Scripture and the possibility of this?
Click to expand...
Greg, I mentioned before that I thought you should be wary of being a little overly-Protestant 🙂 about this, and you suggested that I was being paranoid, but this is what I mean.

No one disagrees that the Church could change the teaching if it were determined to be in the best interests of the Church. And I don’t disagree that it’s fair for Catholics to ask whether this might be such a time (though I would suggest that you look at who else is making the argument and why–a lot of it has to do with attacks on Church teaching re: sexuality). But I think you are going way beyond that and attacking (okay, questioning, I’ll be fair) Church authority in suggesting that the reason for celibacy over the past however many years is simply that the Church misunderstood St. Paul and has been in error, which sounds like what you are saying above. Of course, that is what Luther thought. 🙂

The bigger point is just that I don’t see why this is a time that requires that the discipline to be gotten rid of. In prior times celibacy didn’t prevent good men from following their callings. What is different now perhaps is just that there’s a greater attack on celibacy and Church teaching generally (I actually think there’s more to it, as I said above), but if so should the Church give in to those attacks? I think that would result in fewer vocations, not more.
 
Greg,

What is it you don’t understand about what 83% of your poll responders are telling you?" :confused:

Anna
 
Hello Daria,

In my recent posts you can see that I have conceded. I now seek to better understand our Church.

Thank You,
Greg
 
40.png
Greg_McPherran:
Excatly! That’s my point! Does no one see this? Who is closer to Christ, a dissenting celibate or an obedient married?
Click to expand...
This is a false choice. It is a well-established fact that religious orders that do things traditionally have no problem finding vocations. Celibacy promotes the credibility of the priest vis-a-vis all kinds of situations and problems. Evolved ecclesiastical tradition is by no means random.
 
I have been reading along here and I’m really feeling bad for Greg. Lighten up a little here people. Celibacy is a great thing. I love my celibate priest and I deeply admire him and all good and holy men in the priesthood.

I have read people comparing Greg to Martin Luther (ouch) that is just not fair. From what I have read, Greg’s arguments are well thought out, and he honestly seeks the betterment of the Church. At worst I would say he is a pragmatist. Of course God is in control of the Church and He usually operates through ordinary means. In other words he operates through us. To sit on our hands and “let God handle it” is the worst kind of laziness and presumption. This sort of intellectual exercise is good for the Church if it is conducted with love and a desire for holiness.

Just a historical note, the priesthood was made celibate in part to deal with issues that arose within the social frame work of the time. It is altogether possible that our society has reached a point where we need to change. Lucky for us the Pope gets to make that decision and we can rest assured he will do God’s will for the Chuch.

Now play nice kids

Adam
 
40.png
DadAdam:
I have read people comparing Greg to Martin Luther (ouch) that is just not fair.
Click to expand...
Oh, that was me, and to be fair, I indicated that I was doing so partly in jest. And–the main point–that I wasn’t criticizing the support for ending the celibacy rule (though I disagree with Greg’s position for reasons stated above). Just the one argument that the celibacy rule is wrong because it contradicts the Bible, which the Catholic Church misunderstood. That argument was actually made by Luther about celibacy. So, while it was partly a good-natured jibe (I have enjoyed many of Greg’s threads and posts), I also think it was fair comment on that argument.

No one has disagreed as to whether the rule could be changed. Just as to whether it should be.
 
Adam, thank you for the very kind words. Hi Daria, thank you also.

Greg
 
I think it is right that celibacy should be practiced by priests. I don’t believe that a priest can give himself fully to his flock if by the same token and in principle, a married man should give himself fully to his wife and family. I don’t see how we can have it both ways. I have a very close friend who is devoutly Catholic, married and a parent of several wonderful children. When I call him on the telephone I’ve always found that it is near impossible to keep his full attention on our conversations. Even when I visit with him and his wife at their home, I become overwhelmingly aware of how his attention is divided between his family and on the visiting time he and I are trying to share. I’m not complaining about that, because that’s the way it should be. He should be focused on his family in that way, that’s his vocation. On the other hand, if it were a priest that was in the same situation as my friend here, I don’t see how such a priest could truly be giving himself fully to me and my spiritual needs. I believe that in priestly celibacy, I can be assured that a priest can give himself fully to me. If my immortal soul is on the line, how could I ask for any less then that a priest should be able to give of himself fully in this way? How could a priest not desire to give himself as fully as possible for the sake of my salvation? On top of this (and I’m sure there are countless other issues), I don’t see how I could be telling a priest (if he were married) my darkest and worst sins, when I know that he will be sharing covers at night with someone with whom he would otherwise share every intimacy that he has to offer in a married state. How could I feel the seal of the confessional was without the risk of compromise? I guess I could go on and on. I just wanted to share a few of my thoughts on this.

I Corinthians 7:7-8, 32-35: “But I would have you to be without solicitude. He that is without a wife is solicitous for the things that belong to the Lord, how he may please God. But he that is with a wife, is solicitous for the things of the world, how he may please his wife: and he is divided. And the unmarried woman and the virgin thinketh on the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body and spirit. But she that is married thinketh on the things of this world how she may please her husband. And this I speak for your profit, not to cast a snare upon you, but for that which is decent and which may give you power to attend upon the Lord without impediment.”
 
Not at this time.

The answer to the priest sex scandal is obedience to celibacy, not a loosening of celibacy.
 
In this terrible sexual, secular world in which we live, it can be hard to see the Truth and know the Will of God if we don’t seek it out.

In all charity let me remind folks that we are all called to a celibate lifestyle unless we enter into a sacramental marriage.

I have heard many stories about the priest shortage, and have seen it first hand at my parish (No priest to celabrate Mass, no confessions etc … ) But I will leave my trust in God.

How about if our current priest seek out holy men to fill their position? How about regular sermons on vocations to the religious life or the priesthood? How about if we express to our children what a gift it would be to enter the priesthood or the religious life? How about when we see an altar boy who seems to be drawn into the Mass we ask him if he’s ever considered the priesthood?

We are all members of the Body of Christ. I don’t think we can leave this problem of a priest shortage at the feet of the Church Leaders. We all need to do something about it.

I myself felt a calling to the religious life when I was younger, but recieved little encouragement from those around me. Now that I’m older, the calling has become stronger with each passing day. As I strive to find my way, I’m not going to blame the Church for my lack of strength when I first felt the call, nor ask ask them to make an exception/or change just because I feel I want to be a priest now.

There are many options and I must remember it’s not what I feel I should be doing, it’s what Our Lord is asking me to do … within the obedience of His Church.

In His Peace!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top