O
OraLabora
Guest
It’s a promise, not a vow. Only Religious make vows.
- Status
G
Gorgias
Guest
Notice that this is a model. It’s not a literal marriage; rather, it models that kind of relationship.
O
OraLabora
Guest
I know exactly one, a vowed Benedictine monk, who assists the chaplain at a woman’s abbey.
He is also groundskeeper and handyman.
C
Cor_ad_Cor
Guest
Made a minor correction to your statement^ for you.
P
phil19034
Guest
Priests and male religious are “married” to the Church.
Nuns & religious sisters are “married” to Christ.
Nuns & religious sisters are “married” to Christ.
P
phil19034
Guest
Yeah, religious orders don’t have a permanent diaconate program, like dioceses do.
From my understanding, TODAY, the ones who remain as Deacon either had trouble with the academic work OR discerned that they were not called to be a priest (either ever or at that particular time).
In the religious order, they get to stay. But when a diocesan seminary decides he doesn’t want to be a priest after ordained as a Deacon, the Church will not allow him to exercise his Diaconal ministry. (Which I think is a shame - unless he’s expelled for misconduct)
H
HeDa
Guest
Religious orders don’t have permanent deaconate programmes simply because the “deacon to be” is not married as he has taken a vow or promise not to marry when he became a brother in the religious order. A brother ordained as a deacon, could remain as a deacon for years if the religious order/monastery where he resides needs him in the house and then later continue studies to be ordained as a priest in the future. The diocesian deaconate programme has a focus on how married men and their wives are to become “deacon together with their wife” and not brothers in religious orders. It makes sense to send a religious brother and a single man to seminary.
Deacon Greg Kandra has written about this. Looks pretty thought through.
www.patheos.com
Deacon Greg Kandra has written about this. Looks pretty thought through.
What Happens To A 'Transitional' Deacon Who Is Not Ordained A Priest?
A deacon writes: Knowing that you have posted many discussions about diaconate-related questions, I have a question about transitional deacons. I
www.patheos.com
G
Gorgias
Guest
That’s fine. It works as an analogy. And, of course he should love the Church! And he should love her like a husband loves his wife! But… that doesn’t mean he’s married to the Church…
Umm… no.
Marriage is “till death do you part”.
Priests experience an ontological change at their ordination, so “once a priest, always a priest.” The way that they exercise that priesthood might change in heaven, but… “always a priest.”
Umm… no.
Marriage is “till death do you part”.
Priests experience an ontological change at their ordination, so “once a priest, always a priest.” The way that they exercise that priesthood might change in heaven, but… “always a priest.”
Only in the sense that you need those quotes there, to show it’s not literal, but by analogy.
M
MagdalenaRita
Guest
I’m pretty sure being a married priest in the Western church is an exception to the rule, such as when a priest from a protestant denomination, such as Anglican. converts to the Catholic church, he can be married and be a priest, but again these are exceptions.
In th Eastern churches married men, with permission, can become priests but there are certain restrictions on that also.
Last edited:
O
OraLabora
Guest
In principle true but in reality, there are exceptions. I gave one above, of a Benedictine monk being ordained a permanent deacon.
It is also possible for a man, ordained a permanent deacon (and who is widowed if he was married), to enter a religious order like the Benedictines, remain a deacon, and exercise his diaconal ministry within the monastery.
J
jimXroberts
Guest
The norm in the Latin Rite is that priests should be celibate. However, a papal licence may be given for a married man to be ordained a priest. That normally only applies to former Anglican priests who have joined the Catholic Church. Most Eastern Rite Churches will ordain married men to the priesthood. In all Catholic Rites, a married man cannot be ordained a bishop. Once ordained, a priest cannot marry or remarry.
The rule in the Latin Rite probably dates back to the belief in both Jewish circles and the Roman Empire that celibate men were the highest form of human life. Married men were a way down the pecking order and women were last in the queue. In the 21st century, it’s very convenient. Single priests are not usually paid a salary, but have all the necessities of life provided by the parish. They then get a share of the Christmas and Easter collections for their personal use. Married men are far more expensive to maintain.
The rule in the Latin Rite probably dates back to the belief in both Jewish circles and the Roman Empire that celibate men were the highest form of human life. Married men were a way down the pecking order and women were last in the queue. In the 21st century, it’s very convenient. Single priests are not usually paid a salary, but have all the necessities of life provided by the parish. They then get a share of the Christmas and Easter collections for their personal use. Married men are far more expensive to maintain.
Last edited:
O
OraLabora
Guest
I’ve known of a few priests that were independently wealthy. If we were to have a married priesthood, in theory it could be on the same principle as the permanent diaconate: a "day job, with the priest providing a liturgical and sacramental service only. However I think such priests could only be parochial vicars, not parish administrators. Either that, or parish administration would have to be given over to the laity. It almost is, de facto, in many places.
There’d be quite a bit of reorganization of how things are done, which is probably the main practical reason it hasn’t yet. All the talk about splitting the vocation is just smoke-and-mirrors, I’m married to a doctor who sees her career as a vocation, and she has been able to juggle family and vocation just fine, though with lots of effort. It’s the modern reality. My wife had call-outs in the middle of the night for delivering babies, new admissions into the hospital, accompany patients on ambulance trips to tertiary centres, etc. Not much different that sick calls or other emergencies of a priest.
M
MagdalenaRita
Guest
The priest would then definitely still be torn with calls in the middle of the night, that only he could handle, plus the needs of those during the day that only a priest could handle and family events and issues. Just thinking of such things as annointing of the sick. When you are sick or in the hospital and wanting prayers, you want a priest, not an extraordinary minister.
If the parish administration was given over to the laity, they would still need or want paid and so then there would still be a cost and as much as I think the laity need to be involved in the church, personally the thought of the laity taking over parishes is frightening because we are already seeing some of the harm that can do.
While I agree there are many women who do juggle both job and family and do it just fine, that is far from a reality for all women. Many women are exhausted after trying to juggle both and the juggling of both has led to many a break up of the family because in the end the woman has to make a choice as to which she wants more because juggling both is too difficult and unfortunately it ends up her job that she keeps. I am afraid the same would happen to our priests if they were to have to try and juggle both. In the end they would need to make a choice as to which vocation they wanted.
Last edited:
O
OraLabora
Guest
Just like a family doctor. Yet most are married, go figure. As I said my wife, and both her male and female colleagues, had exactly the same pressures. My wife, and some of her male colleagues, would sometimes be up all night with a difficult delivery, and then have to run a full day’s office the next day at 9 am.
The Church, if she wants to have vocations in today’s world, is going to have to start thinking a bit out of the box.
Or we can always import priests from Asia and Africa…
Just like when you are sick in hospital and you need a doctor, a nurses’ aid won’t do. And why my wife, and her colleagues, would drag their tired bodies to the hospital in the middle of the night, for procedures that would often last a lot longer than the anointing of the sick, such as handling a breech delivery or assisting the OB-GYN at a C-section that was preceded by hours of labour before concluding that a C-section was required.
Last edited:
H
HopkinsReb
Guest
Which is why this conversation is about priests, not EMs.
M
MagdalenaRita
Guest
So, I agree this is the pressures of doctors and many do this, usually when they are young. I work part time for a doctor and realize they are under such pressures. I remember one saying, after being asked about his vacation, saying, I am going to catch up on my kids activities via family videos. Wearing two hats is difficult and doctors when needed can clear a day, cancel appts, or change appt times. In this way a doctor can unwind after an event such as you described, a priest can not always do that, especially as they get older.
Yes and while agree there are those that do that or can do that, you can’t expect that from everyone because somewhere something has to give. People rarely can do two things at the same time and as I mentioned earlier many times after doctors are up all night, they crash or take a day off somewhere to catch up. Not all doctors keep such schedules, and those type of events are not usually the norm for most doctors. At least in our state, once you enter the hospital, you belong to the hospital staff doctors not your primary care physician, unless yes of course you are expecting.
I live in a small town community and we have a lot of elderly and an elderly retirement center and our pastor is super busy with that and two other small town churches and I just can’t even imagine him taking on a second job to make a living, let alone dealing with his own health issues.
Yes, it is and why it is so important to have those priests and the important role they play in our salvation.
Last edited:
O
OraLabora
Guest
I agree but so far what I’ve seen around here is that we should pray for more vocations. And while that is important, we shouldn’t overlook practical steps and thinking outside the box to make the sacraments available to the faithful, i.e. get more vocations.
I’m reminded here of a joke. A man has been praying to God for 40 years to win the lottery. But never does. Finally, in exasperation, he gets angry with God and says “Lord I’ve been praying to win the lottery for 40 years but I never do, you NEVER listen to my prayers”.
A big voice booms down from the sky, and God says to the man “AT LEAST YOU COULD DO YOUR PART AND BUY A TICKET”.
So unless we take practical steps to solve the problem, those prayers may never be fulfilled. Benedictines are very practical, and prayer (“Ora”) needs to be coupled to action (“Labora”) for prayers to be effective. Otherwise we’re just tossing empty words into the sky.
M
MagdalenaRita
Guest
I agree with you that there needs to be more than prayer, though prayer must come first.
I have always liked the Benedictine, ora and labora. It is very important and a good rule to live by.
I have always liked the Benedictine, ora and labora. It is very important and a good rule to live by.
R
runningdude
Guest
“Married” is a metaphor. Both are true, to the extend that it is understood to be an illustration of the elements commons to be both the vocation of marriage and vocation to priestly service.
G
Genesis315
Guest
This–it’s just an analogy or metaphor.
Ultimately, celibacy anticipates the heavenly state, where there is no marriage.
- Status