Priests were allowed to marry at first

[edwest2]

I have no personal problem with allowing Latin Rite priests to marry, at this stage. Were Rome to eventually permit it, fine with me. Makes no difference to me, one way or the other.

I think, however, that some people would imagine that would magically solve the Church’s vocations crisis, as if there are alot of men out there just dying to balance a career, a family, and the Roman Catholic priesthood, all at once. Or, if a career and the priesthood are one and the same, attempting to raise a family on a priest’s income.

I don’t think young men, for the most part, decide against the priesthood because of the celibacy rule. I think they decide against it because there isn’t anything about it that impresses them anymore. Look at the church 75 years ago when vocations flourished. Celibacy obviously wasn’t an issue back then. The church had so many priests they didn’t know what to do with all of them.

In the past, a curate would wait a long time to become a pastor. Today, a young seminarian can be ordained a priest and immediately be named the pastor of one or more parishes.

There was something about yesterday’s priesthood that attracted men like flies. And there is something about today’s priesthood that simply does not. It seems to me that the priesthood–or at least the perception of the priesthood–was desacralized beginning in the 1960s. Once that desacralization took a firm hold in the culture, it began to seem like nothing special…just a career…a career with bad pay, no perks, and a singularly monotone wardrobe.

Now, in the wake of the successive abuse crises, not only is the priesthood no longer that greatly respected thing it once was, it is downright suspect and even despised by some.

So, allow priests to marry, if you will. But don’t imagine that’s the solution to the vocations crisis.

The number of seminarians has increased, not decreased. Where sin abounds, grace abounds even more.

The social engineering project that began in this country in the late 1960s demanded the downfall of all authority. “Down with the Establishment!” The radicals, anarchists and Hippies created ‘alternative lifestyles’ that included cohabitation with sex. Marriage meant nothing.

Other denominations that allow priests to marry are in the same boat as Catholics. The other problem is the greater media attention on atheism.

God bless,
Ed

 

[StTommyMore]

I just have a quick simple question about the church demanding celibacy from priests. Since priests were allowed to marry centuries ago, and apostolic tradition and sacred scripture don’t require a priest to be celibate, what authority does the church have to demand priests to be celibate? If someone wanted to be a priest and wanted to be married too, wouldn’t that person have a legitimate complaint?

I’m not trying to bash the church, I just want to know the specifics of this issue. Would this be considered development of doctrine? Thanks!

Priests have NEVER been allowed to marry. Even in the East today, a priest may not marry. What has been allowed is that married men to become priests. This is the discipline in the East, and under certain circumstances in the Latin Rite it may occur (Fr. Ray Ryland is one example of a married Latin Rite priest).

 

[laszlo]

The requirement to for the celibate priests started when the Church get power, and to be priest meant social advantage too. The requirement for the celibate meant a pre-selection.

About half of the candidates in the seminaries leave the vocation, and most of them due to the celibacy requirement. Many of those married, then finished their theological studies and work as pastoral associates. There men are natural candidates to be ordained as married priest.

So are the permanent married deacons, some 16,000 (40% of the active priests) are potential candidates for married priesthood.

Also the example of the Eastern Catholics is Central Europe shows that children of priests are more likely to be priests than children of laymen.

In itself to allow married men to be ordained as priests will not resolve all the problems, but will help significantly. The practice of the Eastern Catholics in Central Europe is legal precedence.

 

[Seamus_L]

And the practice of a celibate priesthood in the Latin Church could serve as precedent for the Eastern Church.

 

[laszlo]

And the practice of a celibate priesthood in the Latin Church could serve as precedent for the Eastern Church.

Yes, if they get enough candidates. Unfortunately recently the moved a dozen married men to Ukraine from Canada, ordained them and tried to move them back.

It would be much better if the priesthood would have the previous respect and monetary security, and thus would be enough candidates to the celibate priesthood. But this is dream, not reality. Priests are needed to provide opportunity for confession.

 

[malphono]

And the practice of a celibate priesthood in the Latin Church could serve as precedent for the Eastern Church.

Perhaps it might be better not to suggest the further imposition of Roman Church disciplines on the East and Orient.

 

[malphono]

About half of the candidates in the seminaries leave the vocation, and most of them due to the celibacy requirement. Many of those married, then finished their theological studies and work as pastoral associates. There men are natural candidates to be ordained as married priest.

So are the permanent married deacons, some 16,000 (40% of the active priests) are potential candidates for married priesthood.

Yes, that’s true, and it brings up a point that I haven’t yet seen in this thread, but which deals with a question posed earlier:

ByzCath;7199496:

Once a man is ordained he can never marry. The Church has never allowed ordained men to get married.

When we speak of married priests we are always speaking of the ordination of married men. That is a man must be married before he is ordained to the diaconate.

That would lead more men into hurried marriages, wouldn’t it? I would think once a man decides it’s his calling to be a priest, he should think solely on that vocation only. There should be enough single and unattached men out there who would, under the right circumstances, be attracted to the priesthood.

In Eastern practice, the ordination of married men normally happens later in terms of the age of the candidate. They marry, finish their studies, and once some years have passed, they may become eligible for ordination to the diaconate. It doesn’t become a matter of “rush marriages” any more than if they were not seeking ordination.

 

[WetCatechumen]

Yes, that’s true, and it brings up a point that I haven’t yet seen in this thread, but which deals with a question posed earlier:

In Eastern practice, the ordination of married men normally happens later in terms of the age of the candidate. They marry, finish their studies, and once some years have passed, they may become eligible for ordination to the diaconate. It doesn’t become a matter of “rush marriages” any more than if they were not seeking ordination.

I believe that 30 is the youngest age at the Eastern Orthodox allow. A wonderful priest I know was ordained at the age of 26. He is an amazingly pious and holy man. My town was truly graced by God to have him. He was transferred out of the country.

I guess he was doing too good of a job. Believe me, he left in good standing. The bishop just thought he was needed elsewhere.

Wonderful family. Presvetera was as amazing as him, and he has three well-behaved children, who will grow up to be wonderful Christians.

 

[yorkshiregirl]

I don’t really know the history of the Church in this and so cannot comment on that but just wanted to make an observation from a purely lay perspective.

I came back last year after a few years ‘floating’ around Baptist and Anglican churches. In the last church I attended I became a bit uncomfortable with the fact that the vicar allowed his wife to take (to my mind) far too much of the service. In fairness, I wasn’t there long enough to know if she had had any training for this but anyway, thought it strange at the time.

However, the big big problem for me was that the vicar and his wife and 3 daughters lived in a huge, gorgeous newly built vicarage. Most of his parishioners lived in ‘social housing’. The last time I attended that church was the day when the sermon was all about the church finances. We were told that if the church wasn’t to close we would have to give an average of £12 per week per adult. Most of those attending were minimum wage earners or those on pensions. I thought this was an appalling thing to ask for. Like asking for money for God’s grace

There used to be a sitcom here called Father Ted. It was not always very complimentary to either the Church or the Irish but the thing that made me smile was the decor of the presbytery. I remember one of the priests slept in a He-Man duvet and all the other bits of the house had obviously been ‘donated’. This is what I remembered about my old parish - the odd chairs and non-matching soft furnishings. The priest didn’t care about that kind of thing, but about his people. I think that once you put a wife into the mix all that must change - it would take an extraordinary woman not to care about the asthetics of her home.

And a married priest cannot possibly give all him time to both his parishioners and his family. It must be impossible to split the time between the two - considering that a priest must surely be on call at all times. The poor wife must then come second place - I know I wouldn’t like to come second place to my husbands job.

(And just by the by, we have a married priest in our parish. I spoke to him when I first came back and found it a little unsettling that he had been a CofE vicar and was not only married but a grandfather. I spoke to him about various things in the Church and found out he had no time for Mary and thought the latin mass to be ‘supersticious hocum’. I never returned to his parish!)

 

[Aramis]

I know that permanent deacons can be, in very special circumstances, be allowed to re-marry. Wouldn’t this apply to married priests? For example, they have very small children that would benefit from the care of a mother?

The rules are the same for both.

 

[Seamus_L]

Malphono
It was suggested in other threads as well, that since the East has a tradition of a married priesthood in many areas, that this set's a precedent that could be used for the ordination of married men in the Latin Rite. I'm merely suggesting that the precedent be used as a two way street, i,e the precedent of a celibate priesthood in the Latin Church could be used to create a celibate priesthood in the East. If the former is somehow OK, but the latter suggestion wrong, I frankly can't help but see the hypocrisy in it.

 

[Julian0404]

The church made it mandatory in the 2nd century AD that priests were to be celibate. The EC Church will not allow a man, once ordained to marry, but if already married can become a priest.

SELF CORRECTION: Re: Catholicism for DUMMIES, Pg 216. The West made it normative in 306 AD at the Council of Elivra and mandatory in 1074 by Pope Gregory VII and reaffirmed in 1139 AD in the Second Lateran Council

 

[malphono]

Malphono

                                  It was suggested in other threads as well, that since the East has a tradition of a married priesthood in many areas, that this set's a precedent that could be used for the ordination of married men in the Latin Rite. I'm merely suggesting that the precedent be used as a two way street, i,e  the precedent of a celibate priesthood in the Latin Church could be used to create a celibate priesthood in the East. If the former is somehow OK, but the latter suggestion wrong, I frankly can't help but see the hypocrisy in it.

FWIW, I [post=7136252]objected[/post] to both premises in the previous thread, and continue to object to them in this one.

 

[Curious_Hobbit]

I think celibacy is a good idea and some of the apostles encouraged it and it’s not practical for a priest to be fully available to his parish and to a family.
I guess I need to get a better understanding of the difference between doctrine and discipline. Catholics always get accused by protestants of “adding stuff” to Christianity that wasn’t there in the beginning and this seems like it fit that category. What are some other disciplines of the church?

 

[notredame_999]

Malphono

                                  It was suggested in other threads as well, that since the East has a tradition of a married priesthood in many areas, that this set's a precedent that could be used for the ordination of married men in the Latin Rite. I'm merely suggesting that the precedent be used as a two way street, i,e  the precedent of a celibate priesthood in the Latin Church could be used to create a celibate priesthood in the East. If the former is somehow OK, but the latter suggestion wrong, I frankly can't help but see the hypocrisy in it.

The fact that St. Patrick, the greates saint of Ireland, was son to a deacon and grandson to a priest shows that a married priesthood, or at the very least a continent married priesthood, existed in the latin church up into the second millenium.

 

[MarkThompson]

The fact that St. Patrick, the greates saint of Ireland, was son to a deacon and grandson to a priest shows that a married priesthood, or at the very least a continent married priesthood, existed in the latin church up into the second millenium.

St. Patrick died circa 493, which is still the first half of the first millennium.

 

[Captain_America]

Over the years, I’ve had occasion to think this issue through, and here’s my thoughts:

(1) The pro marriage people believe that it will lead to more priests. . . this is a pretty far-fetched claim, a bald assertion or hope or guess. There is no logical connection.

(1’) Nor would a married priesthood somehow stop homosexuals with a devotion to serve from becoming priests.

(2) The experience Prot denominations have had with female clergy seems to suggest some circumspection here. One big argument for female ministers was the dearth of male ministers and the belief that there would be MANY females signing on to pastorhood. This really has not happened, and, in fact, many denominations face the same problem Catholics face of a diminishing interest in ministerial responsibilities.

(3) Judge a society by where it’s cash goes. What institutions get power and money? In America, it’s the big corporations. . . hence the whole cult of CEO worship. Not too many magazine profiles on workaday priests. . . so we’re all impressed with helicopters, power suits, lodges in Aspen and business suites. Not so much with priests. I feel the goodies our society hands out suggests that being priest ain’t worth a hill of beans. You know what I mean.

 

[laszlo]

(1) The pro marriage people believe that it will lead to more priests. . . this is a pretty far-fetched claim, a bald assertion or hope or guess. There is no logical connection.

Why do you think that the 16000 married deacons and numerous married pastoral associates with theological degrees are not appropriate pool for future priests?

Their total number is more than half of the actual celibate priest today, and a rapidly growing number; while the number of existing celibate priests are aged and their number is rapidly diminishing.

 

[ConstantineTG]

Why do you think that the 16000 married deacons and numerous married pastoral associates with theological degrees are not appropriate pool for future priests?

Their total number is more than half of the actual celibate priest today, and a rapidly growing number; while the number of existing celibate priests are aged and their number is rapidly diminishing.

What I wonder is if these permanent deacons who have full time jobs are willing to leave their jobs and become full time priests? I can’t imagine priests being expected to fulfil purely liturgical function as its not the entire ministry of the priest.

 

[notredame_999]

What I wonder is if these permanent deacons who have full time jobs are willing to leave their jobs and become full time priests? I can’t imagine priests being expected to fulfil purely liturgical function as its not the entire ministry of the priest.

what if the deacon was retired and had a pension coming in