Priests and marrige?

[Isa_Almisry]

Well, technically, from his wife’s parents,… I suppose.

Peter was married before his “ordination”. She remained his “other half”, his Eve, his wife until one or the other died, as marriage is indisoluble until death of the spouse.

But until he was “de-married” to his spouse, which may have been at his death, he lived a chaste life within the rules of the Church concerning “married priests”.

So,… what’s your point again…?

What “rules” do you speak of?

 

[latinmasslover]

But converts can become priests if unmarried?

The problem is the mandate on celibacy made the exception the rule, with disasterous results.

On another thread in the Easterrn Christianity forum, a Coptic uniate argues that ban on married uniate clergy is “temporary” (now a century of being “temporary”). The Father of Orthodoxy in America, Abhp Ireland, became so because he refused to accept Fr. St. Alexis Toth, who was just a widower. Like you, in his eyes St. Alexis was a “false” solution to the real need of the parish for a priest.

From what you said, I take it that the agreements with that formed the uniates are “caving in,” and should be revoked. That of course would prove us Orthodox right.

I said nothing against widowers being ordained. I said married men, as in *currently *married, and though it is *permitted *in the Church it shouldn’t be encouraged. And how exactly was the mandate of celibacy disastrous?

 

[Isa_Almisry]

This doesn’t make much sense to me.

I, for one, would strongly consider pursuing the Priesthood if married men were accepted in the Latin Church. (I was never very religious before I was married, so didn’t consider it then.) I will also discern the permanent Diaconate when I am older. I could certainly see married Priests as “part-timers” like Permanent Deacons; responsible for their own financial support.

If I was able to pursue the Priesthood, I would be willing to fund my own seminary training. I also wouldn’t need Church pay (although it would be nice )

I could say Mass on Sundays at my home parish, and during my lunch hour I could say daily Mass or hear confessions.

I wouldn’t be of as much service as a celibate Priest, but I can’t see how it wouldn’t be a help given the Priest shortage.

God Bless

Speaking of the deaconate, deacons were subject to the same celibacy rules, when did that change?

 

[Isa_Almisry]

Interesting opinion, but that’s all it is. Women tend to be more religious than men, should women become priests? Other ecclesial communities do very well with women pastors. With your reasoning, why not start to ordain women? they might “be called?”

Actually the femization of Church is a Western phenomena.

Though we depend on the babushki, yayas, and sitts (and now just grandma) the males are very much in evidence in the East (and our Churches, actually especially, in the West).

So how about our reasoning: there have been married priests since the Apostles (many of whom, including St. Peter, were married), the Fathers, eg. St. Paphnuti at Nicea I, upheld this, and we have them today.

We’ve never had women priests.

 

[Isa_Almisry]

Personally, the idea of marrying a priest would be a thrill. When I was younger (before I knew better) I wanted to marry a priest (not one in particular). It would be nice to be married to a priest, *if *he didn’t have a parish to run. You have to be available to your parish 24/7, and a married priest cannot do that without neglecting his family, especially with a shortage of priests. I myself am not in favor of married men becoming deacons, but that’s a matter of opinion. I will have to settle for a holy man of God who maybe seriously considered the priesthood.

St. Frances of Rome said:
A married woman, even when praising God at the altar, must when needed by her husband or the smallest member of her family, quit God at the altar and find him again in her household affairs.

These words ring true for the husband. It’s a noble thought to want to do both, but consider the time that your family wouldn’t get if you were a priest. How many times you’d have to leave to help a fellow parishoner. The parishoners would have more time with you than your wife and children. This isn’t a sarcastic question, but would you really want that for them?

You talk from what ifs, we talk from what is.

Btw you can’t marry a priest, only your husband may be ordained.

Also, married clergy are not the solution to a problem. They have their own raison d’etre.

 

[Isa_Almisry]

Why do you find priestly celibacy so offensive? (My tone is not haughty but genuine concern). Just because the discipline *can *be relaxed doesn’t mean it should.

Why do you make that accusation?

NOTHING was said against celibate priests.

The discipline shouldn’t have been there in the first place.

 

[Isa_Almisry]

To encourage marriage for priests is making the exception the norm, and that is the only problem. This Church has gotten lazy, and to keep giving in is only going to make to problem worse. Exceptions aren’t bad, when they stay exceptions.

The married clergy are the norm, and it has nothing to do with being lazy, or any problem we had to solve.

 

[latinmasslover]

Why do you make that accusation?

NOTHING was said against celibate priests.

The discipline shouldn’t have been there in the first place.

I corrected to wrong assumption that I made regarding the others’ opinion already.

Why should the discipline not been there? It’s encouraged (multiple times) by God Himself in the Scriptures, as well as by St. Paul. The list of Saints (the celibate ones) is endless. Where in the New Testament is it encouraged for a priest/bishop to be married *rather than *remain celibate?

 

[Isa_Almisry]

I said nothing against widowers being ordained. I said married men, as in *currently *married, and though it is *permitted *in the Church it shouldn’t be encouraged. And how exactly was the mandate of celibacy disastrous?

Abp Ireland did, hence how the celibate became the Father of Orthodoxy in the US .

And it should be discouraged?

The fact that it took a thousand years of reiteration before the rule on celibacy more or less took, and then came the Protestant reformation, fueled by the clericalism and the reaction of anti-clericalism that rocked the church in the West, a clericalism that grew out of the mandated celibacy.

 

[latinmasslover]

The married clergy are the norm, and it has nothing to do with being lazy, or any problem we had to solve.

If I don’t dust my house every day I’m lazy. If a mother of five doesn’t dust every day that doesn’t mean she’s lazy. My comment was directed at the Catholic Church relaxing laws binding on Catholics, not other communities with different obligations.

 

[latinmasslover]

Abp Ireland did, hence how the celibate became the Father of Orthodoxy in the US .

And it should be discouraged?

The fact that it took a thousand years of reiteration before the rule on celibacy more or less took, and then came the Protestant reformation, fueled by the clericalism and the reaction of anti-clericalism that rocked the church in the West, a clericalism that grew out of the mandated celibacy.

So the problems in the Church revolve around this one issue? I don’t base my beliefs on the remarks of a single bishop so quoting him (at me) is pointless.

 

[Isa_Almisry]

I corrected to wrong assumption that I made regarding the others’ opinion already.

Why should the discipline not been there? It’s encouraged (multiple times) by God Himself in the Scriptures, as well as by St. Paul.

The choice of celibacy for those called is, mandating it as a prerequisite for ordination is not.

The list of Saints (the celibate ones) is endless.

The list of Saints (the married ones) is endless, including St. Peter.

Where in the New Testament is it encouraged for a priest/bishop to be married *rather than *remain celibate?

I Timothy 3

---

1 Faithful is the saying, If a man seeketh the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work. 2 The bishop therefore must be without reproach, the husband of one wife, temperate, sober-minded, orderly, given to hospitality, apt to teach; 3 no brawler, no striker; but gentle, not contentious, no lover of money; 4 one that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity; 5 (but if a man knoweth not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?) 6 not a novice, lest being puffed up he fall into the condemnation of the devil. 7 Moreover he must have good testimony from them that are without; lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil.

I Corinthians 7

Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote: It is good for a man not to touch a woman. 2 But, because of fornications, let each man have his own wife, and let each woman have her own husband. 3 Let the husband render unto the wife her due: and likewise also the wife unto the husband. 4 The wife hath not power over her own body, but the husband: and likewise also the husband hath not power over his own body, but the wife. 5 Defraud ye not one the other, except it be by consent for a season, that ye may give yourselves unto prayer, and may be together again, that Satan tempt you not because of your incontinency. 6 But this I say by way of concession, not of commandment. 7 Yet I would that all men were even as I myself. Howbeit each man hath his own gift from God, one after this manner, and another after that.
8 But I say to the unmarried and to widows, It is good for them if they abide even as I. 9 But if they have not continency, let them marry: for it is better to marry than to burn.
10 But unto the married I give charge, yea not I, but the Lord, That the wife depart not from her husband 11 (but should she depart, let her remain unmarried, or else be reconciled to her husband); and that the husband leave not his wife.

17 Only, as the Lord hath distributed to each man, as God hath called each, so let him walk. And so ordain I in all the churches. 18 Was any man called being circumcised? Let him not become uncircumcised. Hath any been called in uncircumcision? Let him not be circumcised. 19 Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing; but the keeping of the commandments of God. 20 Let each man abide in that calling wherein he was called.
21 Wast thou called being a bondservant? Care not for it: nay, even if thou canst become free, use it rather. 22 For he that was called in the Lord being a bondservant, is the Lord’s freedman: likewise he that was called being free, is Christ’s bondservant. 23 Ye were bought with a price; become not bondservants of men. 24 Brethren, let each man, wherein he was called, therein abide with God.

25 Now concerning virgins I have no commandment of the Lord: but I give my judgment, as one that hath obtained mercy of the Lord to be trustworthy. 26 I think therefore that this is good by reason of the distress that is upon us, namely, that it is good for a man to be as he is. 27 Art thou bound unto a wife? Seek not to be loosed. Art thou loosed from a wife? Seek not a wife. 28 But shouldest thou marry, thou hast not sinned; and if a virgin marry, she hath not sinned. Yet such shall have tribulation in the flesh: and I would spare you. 29 But this I say, brethren, the time is shortened, that henceforth both those that have wives may be as though they had none; 30 and those that weep, as though they wept not; and those that rejoice, as though they rejoiced not; and those that buy, as though they possessed not; 31 and those that use the world, as not using it to the full: for the fashion of this world passeth away.

 

[Isa_Almisry]

If I don’t dust my house every day I’m lazy. If a mother of five doesn’t dust every day that doesn’t mean she’s lazy. My comment was directed at the Catholic Church relaxing laws binding on Catholics, not other communities with different obligations.

I thought your uniates were considered Catholics. At least that’s what’s claimed.

Perhaps its not the lazy but the overworked. Many spend an inordinate time forced to chose between marriage and ordination, when it’s a false dichonomy.

 

[Isa_Almisry]

So the problems in the Church revolve around this one issue? I don’t base my beliefs on the remarks of a single bishop so quoting him (at me) is pointless.

No, as I stated it was fuel for the fire.

Btw the pope of Rome is a single bishop

 

[latinmasslover]

Perhaps its not the lazy but the overworked. Many spend an inordinate time forced to chose between marriage and ordination, when it’s a false dichonomy.

False how?

People spend to much time thinking instead of acting because they’re decisions are constantly being questioned, they’re encouraged to become “aquainted with the ways of the world” before committing to God. This has nothing to do with the discipline but the worldly mindset.

 

[latinmasslover]

The choice of celibacy for those called is, mandating it as a prerequisite for ordination is not.

The list of Saints (the married ones) is endless, including St. Peter.

I Timothy 3

---

1 Faithful is the saying, If a man seeketh the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work. 2 The bishop therefore must be without reproach, the husband of one wife, temperate, sober-minded, orderly, given to hospitality, apt to teach; 3 no brawler, no striker; but gentle, not contentious, no lover of money; 4 one that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity; 5 (but if a man knoweth not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?) 6 not a novice, lest being puffed up he fall into the condemnation of the devil. 7 Moreover he must have good testimony from them that are without; lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil.

I Corinthians 7

Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote: It is good for a man not to touch a woman. 2 But, because of fornications, let each man have his own wife, and let each woman have her own husband. 3 Let the husband render unto the wife her due: and likewise also the wife unto the husband. 4 The wife hath not power over her own body, but the husband: and likewise also the husband hath not power over his own body, but the wife. 5 Defraud ye not one the other, except it be by consent for a season, that ye may give yourselves unto prayer, and may be together again, that Satan tempt you not because of your incontinency. 6 But this I say by way of concession, not of commandment. 7 Yet I would that all men were even as I myself. Howbeit each man hath his own gift from God, one after this manner, and another after that.
8 But I say to the unmarried and to widows, It is good for them if they abide even as I. 9 But if they have not continency, let them marry: for it is better to marry than to burn.
10 But unto the married I give charge, yea not I, but the Lord, That the wife depart not from her husband 11 (but should she depart, let her remain unmarried, or else be reconciled to her husband); and that the husband leave not his wife.

17 Only, as the Lord hath distributed to each man, as God hath called each, so let him walk. And so ordain I in all the churches. 18 Was any man called being circumcised? Let him not become uncircumcised. Hath any been called in uncircumcision? Let him not be circumcised. 19 Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing; but the keeping of the commandments of God. 20 Let each man abide in that calling wherein he was called.
21 Wast thou called being a bondservant? Care not for it: nay, even if thou canst become free, use it rather. 22 For he that was called in the Lord being a bondservant, is the Lord’s freedman: likewise he that was called being free, is Christ’s bondservant. 23 Ye were bought with a price; become not bondservants of men. 24 Brethren, let each man, wherein he was called, therein abide with God.

25 Now concerning virgins I have no commandment of the Lord: but I give my judgment, as one that hath obtained mercy of the Lord to be trustworthy. 26 I think therefore that this is good by reason of the distress that is upon us, namely, that it is good for a man to be as he is. 27 Art thou bound unto a wife? Seek not to be loosed. Art thou loosed from a wife? Seek not a wife. 28 But shouldest thou marry, thou hast not sinned; and if a virgin marry, she hath not sinned. Yet such shall have tribulation in the flesh: and I would spare you. 29 But this I say, brethren, the time is shortened, that henceforth both those that have wives may be as though they had none; 30 and those that weep, as though they wept not; and those that rejoice, as though they rejoiced not; and those that buy, as though they possessed not; 31 and those that use the world, as not using it to the full: for the fashion of this world passeth away.

My question was:

Where in the New Testament is it *encouraged *for a priest/bishop to marry **rather than **remain celibate? And please don’t quote where St. Paul says only when one lacks self control.

 

[Isa_Almisry]

False how?

marriage OR ordination instead of marriage AND ordination.

People spend to much time thinking instead of acting because they’re decisions are constantly being questioned, they’re encouraged to become “aquainted with the ways of the world” before committing to God. This has nothing to do with the discipline but the worldly mindset.

Many priests leave because they still feel the call to marrige, and do marry. Problem then of course is that they can resume the priesthood, which would not be the case if they had answered that call first, then the priesthood.

 

[Isa_Almisry]

My question was:

Where in the New Testament is it *encouraged *for a priest/bishop to marry **rather than **remain celibate? And please don’t quote where St. Paul says only when one lacks self control.

Faithful is the saying, If a man seeketh the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work. 2 The bishop therefore must be without reproach, the husband of one wife…4 one that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity; 5 (but if a man knoweth not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?)…
let each man have his own wife,… 3 Let the husband render unto the wife her due:…10 But unto the married I give charge, yea not I, but the Lord, …that the husband leave not his wife…Only, as the Lord hath distributed to each man, as God hath called each, so let him walk. And so ordain I in all the churches. … 20 Let each man abide in that calling wherein he was called…25 Now concerning virgins I have no commandment of the Lord: but I give my judgment, as one that hath obtained mercy of the Lord to be trustworthy. 26 I think therefore that this is good by reason of the distress that is upon us, namely, that it is good for a man to be as he is. 27 Art thou bound unto a wife? Seek not to be loosed.

What part did you miss?

Oh, and oldie but a goodie: Be fruitful and multiply, th efirst commandment.

 

[latinmasslover]

Many priests leave because they still feel the call to marrige, and do marry.

It’s because they give into temptations. If he can’t be faithful to one calling why does anyone suppose he’ll be faithful to another when he “feels” called somewhere else?

 

[latinmasslover]

Faithful is the saying, If a man seeketh the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work. 2 The bishop therefore must be without reproach, the husband of one wife…4 one that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity; 5 (but if a man knoweth not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?)…
let each man have his own wife,… 3 Let the husband render unto the wife her due:…10 But unto the married I give charge, yea not I, but the Lord, …that the husband leave not his wife…Only, as the Lord hath distributed to each man, as God hath called each, so let him walk. And so ordain I in all the churches. … 20 Let each man abide in that calling wherein he was called…25 Now concerning virgins I have no commandment of the Lord: but I give my judgment, as one that hath obtained mercy of the Lord to be trustworthy. 26 I think therefore that this is good by reason of the distress that is upon us, namely, that it is good for a man to be as he is. 27 Art thou bound unto a wife? Seek not to be loosed.

What part did you miss?

Oh, and oldie but a goodie: Be fruitful and multiply, th efirst commandment.

I missed none of it, but there’s something about my question that I guess I haven’t made clear.

Where in the New Testament is marriage for a priest/bishop preferred over celibacy? What you quote only says it’s not wrong for him to be a bishop if he’s married. I’m asking: where is marriage encouraged/preferred *over *celibacy?