Priesthood ... off my chest

  • Thread starter Thread starter BryanW
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
B

BryanW

Guest
I would personally like to take this time to thank every Priest through the centuries that has been faithfull to his vocation.

Id also like to ask those that think a married Priesthood would help or solve anything a question. How can you compare a few measly, secular, temporal, benefits to the astounding eternal graces the Church must receive from God for the Christ like sacrifice these men make by being celibate? These graces are probably the biggest thing that will see us through the so called “scandal”.

I forget who said “You can’t out generous God” but I think it applies here.
 
My brother was ordained on May 20, 2000 (Roman RIte Priesthood) and always knew he had the calling since the age of 8. From what he tells me, he is happy with his unmarried status. He sees that his parish that he is assigned to as his ‘extended family’.

On the Eastern side of the Catholic Church, there were married priests in the U.S. until 1930, when the Byzantine Catholic Church had to conform to the Roman RIte practice of celibate priest hood.

I am wondering since of Pope John Paul II’s article Orentale Lumen (1995) would the Byzantine/Eastern Catholic Churches have the married priesthood restored?

I do know that the Orthodox Christian Churches still have married priests and personally met one last year at a conference here in Cleveland for Eastern Spirituality.
 
40.png
BryanW:
I would personally like to take this time to thank every Priest through the centuries that has been faithfull to his vocation.

Id also like to ask those that think a married Priesthood would help or solve anything a question. How can you compare a few measly, secular, temporal, benefits to the astounding eternal graces the Church must receive from God for the Christ like sacrifice these men make by being celibate? These graces are probably the biggest thing that will see us through the so called “scandal”.

I forget who said “You can’t out generous God” but I think it applies here.
Click to expand...
Amen. \0/
 
40.png
Edwin1961:
My brother was ordained on May 20, 2000 (Roman RIte Priesthood) and always knew he had the calling since the age of 8. From what he tells me, he is happy with his unmarried status. He sees that his parish that he is assigned to as his ‘extended family’.

On the Eastern side of the Catholic Church, there were married priests in the U.S. until 1930, when the Byzantine Catholic Church had to conform to the Roman RIte practice of celibate priest hood.

I am wondering since of Pope John Paul II’s article Orentale Lumen (1995) would the Byzantine/Eastern Catholic Churches have the married priesthood restored?

I do know that the Orthodox Christian Churches still have married priests and personally met one last year at a conference here in Cleveland for Eastern Spirituality.
Click to expand...
The ban on marriage was imposed so ast avoid scandal, as this country’s Catholics are predominatly Latin Rite.

It is a disputed point whether or no they can lawfully ordain married men in the US (in practice the bishop sends the seminarian to his homecountry, he gets ordained there and comes back, when they want to ordain a married priest. So there are married Eastern US priests, just not as common as in other countries). Several bishops have threatened to ordain married men, but Rome has not said that the prohibition is rescinded. Whether such a prohibition is lawful is another issue. The Latin Church cannot just impose itself on the Eastern Churches
 
I remember listening to a program on Catholic Answers Live with stated the Church originally ordained single men to the priesthood. The other rites changed the that to allow married men to become priests. Of course I am paraphrasing this. I believe it was always the desire of the Church to ordain single men.

As far as the other statement about allowing priests to be married or ordaining married men to the priesthood to solve the abuse problem, it is a well know fact that majority of sexual abuse is from the live-in boyfriend or situations of the like. They abuse children not because they were chaste and couldn’t take it any longer but because they have a warped sense of being intimate. I also remember Fr Corapi saying it is theologically possible for a married man to become a priest; but it is impossible to a priest to be married. I’m sure C-A will verify this.

I remember reading a couple of months ago about the discovery of the sex abuse in the public school by school employees. The number of sex abuse cases to children is 100 fold to the Church’s numbers. So why aren’t we hearing the outcry of people about this? Simply, its not the Catholic Church.

Kevin
 
My point in making this post was to bring attention to the great sacrifice these men make. Even though we could have married Priests, the graces we get from God far out weigh any thing else. IMHO
 
40.png
BryanW:
My point in making this post was to bring attention to the great sacrifice these men make. Even though we could have married Priests, the graces we get from God far out weigh any thing else. IMHO
Click to expand...
Agreed:thumbsup:
 
The Roman rite has married priests. The largest number are from the Episcopal/Anglican tradition. I understand that there are/may be some from the Methodist tradition, and there is one who was a Presbyterian minister. However, Rome will not permit a married Catholic to be ordained.

Given that we have a married priesthood in both the Roman, and at least some of the Eastern rights, it strikes me as the height of arrogance to imply that a married priest is some sort of second rate individual, that he somehow obtains much less grace from God, that he is much less holy…

Priesthood and celibacy are two seperate, distinct vocations, and neither one requires the other. Celibacy is a great witness to the world. So is marriage. And I really don’t care whether a priest is married or not. I care that he does the work of the Lord, that he shares the Good News, that he does the will of God, and exercises his ministry according to the directions of the Church. I have known celibate priests who were outstanding examples of a holy life. I have also known two who were sexual abusers; one of boys, one of girls. May God have mercy on both of them. Marriage was not the issue with one of them (he was gay); the other I can’t say, as he didn’t share what drove him to sexual relations with a teen age girl.
I have also known a married priest, and would that many of our celibate priests were as holy.
I truly do not think the Roman rite will change its stance on celibacy. But I wish that it could tone down some of the rhetoric that is so insulting to our Catholic married priests.
 
Nobody is insulting the fewmarried Roman clergy. They themselves will point out to you how hard it is to be married and a priest.
 
I have no doubt that married priests would say that it is difficult to be both priest and married. I have also had celibate priests tell me how hard it is to be a priest and celibate. And I have also had numerous married men, who work something longer than an 8 to 5 job tell me that it is difficult to be married and have the demands of their career or profession.
Priesthood is difficult.
Marriage is difficult.
Celibacy is difficult.
I simply do not wish to hear the rhetoric that implies, or outright states, that being a celibate priest is better. It is an insult to the married priests which the Catholic Church has, and there is an implication, not particularly veiled, that if one truly has a vocation to the priesthood, then one obviously has a vocation to celibacy. It just isn’t so. They are seperate and distinct vocations. I am not trying to crusade for married clergy. We already have them in the Eastern rites and in the Roman rite. Our current Pope has made it clear that he isn’t changing the rule. That is fine, too. I don’t see a married clergy as being a “solution” to the number of priests we have. But I do strongly feel that if celibacy is truly a witness to Christ’s calling, then it should not be mandatory; it confuses the issue of the calling to priesthood.
 
THe Church says if you are called to the priesthood in the Latin rite you also must be called to celibacy. The Church is the one doing the linking.
 
I am well aware of the linking and who does it.
I guess I feel that if celibacy is to be held up as a model, then it should pe promoted for all it is worth, and it isn’t promoted when it is the only option. I don’t think celibacy is bad; it is a great witness. I think it woud be a much greater witness when it was chosen, not imposed.
Does that make sense?
 
40.png
otm:
. I am not trying to crusade for married clergy…
…But I do strongly feel that if celibacy is truly a witness to Christ’s calling, then it should not be mandatory; it confuses the issue of the calling to priesthood.
Click to expand...
You state your point well OTM. I don’t doubt your intent.

I heard a Catholic Priest express his thought like this…
To say that it’s wrong or unfair for a Priest to have to choose celibacy to be ordained, is like a married man having to choose to only marry one woman. Remember we are all called to chastity, the Priest to just a different degree. Thats my not so perfect paraphrase.
 
I don’t agree that we are caled to different degrees of chastity, although it appears that some priests have thought so. Chastity is a virtue, and we are all called to perfection of that virtue no matter the status of our life.
There are many priests who would prefer to be celibate, given the option. Great!
There are any number of men who would be priests, but for the fact that they are married. Some of them would make excellent priests. And given the Eastern rits option, I would prefer to see the same in the Roman rit. Let those who have a vocation to the priesthood persue it. Let those who have, in addtition to the vocation to the priesthood, a vocation to either celibacy or marriage, persue that too.
 
As another thought, I strongly disagree that a priest having to choose celibacy is like a married man having to choose to marry only one woman. He needs to go back and brush up on his philosophy, specifically the area of logic. Celibacy and marriage are tow completely different vocations. Marriage is a vocation to one spouse, but there was a time in history when men had more than one spouse. One is still married, whether with one spouse (now) or two; having two does not make it not-marriage (that is, something else), but rather a variation of marriage.
 
40.png
otm:
Celibacy and marriage are tow completely different vocations. Marriage is a vocation to one spouse, but there was a time in history when men had more than one spouse. One is still married, whether with one spouse (now) or two; having two does not make it not-marriage (that is, something else), but rather a variation of marriage.
Click to expand...
Your right they are different I said “like” this makes it a simile not a metaphore. Marriage is a vocation to one’s spouse and Priesthood is a vocation to the church. Do you agree that Christ was married to the Church? Could this be the main reason he never married?
 
Bryan W: I am not sure I want to go there. Professed religious women are seen as the bride of Christ; I am not sure that the analogy applies to professed religious men, that they are married to the Church, although this is applied to priests. However, I only hear that discussion in relation to Roman rite priests, not any of the other rites. Which goes to the fact that the rhetoric in the Roman rite, I think, is somewhat insulting to the married priests in other rites. They come across as some sort of second class citizens, as if they weren’t “willing to give it (marriage)up”. Can a priest devote more time to the Church if he doesn’t have a wife? Theoretically, yes; I’ve seen lazy priests, who seem put out about life in general and the demands of the priesthood (I’ve also seen great ones). I’ve also seen my share of spouses, in both categories.
I’m willing to concede that Christ was celibate, as that was his best response to his mission. But I am not willing to go to the point of saying that if a priest is truly to be an alter Christus, that he must be celibate; that flies in the face of the other rites, making them somehow less than adequate. :twocents:
 
40.png
BryanW:
I would personally like to take this time to thank every Priest through the centuries that has been faithfull to his vocation.

Bryan,

Thanks for sharing these sentiments. I join you in saying THANKS to every man who’s ever said “yes” to God and become a priest for US. May the Lord bring many more faithful, holy, happy men to labor in His vineyard!
Click to expand...
 
40.png
otm:
Bryan W: I am not sure I want to go there. Professed religious women are seen as the bride of Christ; I am not sure that the analogy applies to professed religious men, that they are married to the Church, although this is applied to priests. However, I only hear that discussion in relation to Roman rite priests, not any of the other rites. Which goes to the fact that the rhetoric in the Roman rite, I think, is somewhat insulting to the married priests in other rites. They come across as some sort of second class citizens, as if they weren’t “willing to give it (marriage)up”. Can a priest devote more time to the Church if he doesn’t have a wife? Theoretically, yes; I’ve seen lazy priests, who seem put out about life in general and the demands of the priesthood (I’ve also seen great ones). I’ve also seen my share of spouses, in both categories.
I’m willing to concede that Christ was celibate, as that was his best response to his mission. But I am not willing to go to the point of saying that if a priest is truly to be an alter Christus, that he must be celibate; that flies in the face of the other rites, making them somehow less than adequate. :twocents:
Click to expand...
Keep in mind that no married male may become a bishop anywhere within the Catholic or Orthodox Churches.

There must be a good reason for that…
 
The priesthood is not for everyone. The Church has stated, with good authority, that candidates for the priesthood shall take a vow to live a celibate life. No vow, no priesthood. As a faithful Catholic I accept that decision, no matter what my personal feelings might be.

Additionally, any one who wants to be a priest and does not want to take a vow of celibacy, and wants the Church to change the rules for them, is acting with the wrong intent in his heart. I would suggest that those men read St. Augustine’s Confessions, or St. Benedict’s writings, and see what celibacy is all about.

And once you open the “celibacy” door, what then? Can they have multiple sexual partners? Can they divorce and remarry? Can they marry someone who is not Catholic? What if the wife decides to change her religious affiliation? What if the wife decides she wants to raise the kids to be Jewish or Muslim? What if he is assigned by his bishop to go to Juneau and she doesn’t want to live further north than Nashville? What if his wife insists on having an abortion? What if she has an affair?

That’s just the tip of the iceberg. Do you really want to open those doors?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top