Priests, why can't they get married?

[followingtheway]

In the Western/Roman/Latin Rite Catholic Church. Men, in order to become Priests need to be celibate. In the Latin Rite, the Church claims it’s because a man’s main duty is to God, with no distractions (wife).

But then again, in the Eastern Catholic Churches, men can marry before their ordination but not after.

My question is doesn’t the fact that the Eastern Catholic Churches’ married priests are in great relations with God, sort of hinder the Latin Rite’s point? Also, why can’t they marry after their ordination. What’s the difference? And would celibacy just be repressing someone natural attraction?

Also, I heard somewhere that 1,000 years ago the Latin Rite Church made celibacy a requirement as opposed the 2,000 year old apostolic tradition of married priests. Is this true? What do you think of these arguments?

 

[pollycarp]

I know all the arguments, but imho - as a person who is moving to the Eastern church - they should have an option to marry. (The RC church views women as a hindrance instead of the help they can give.)

I’m glad there are deacons now. My Byzantine church has a wonderful deacon (married).
:twocents:

 

[shom-bms]

St. Bridget (1303-1373), in The Revelations of Saint Birgitta, says she received the following instruction from Our Lady:

"…Hear now the things that I want to reveal to you: namely, concerning that archbishop who said that if he were pope, he would give leave for all clerics and priests to contract marriages in the flesh. He thought and believed that this would be more acceptable to God than that clerics should live dissolutely, as they now do…

But now I shall tell you God’s will in this matter… You will make these things known to my bishop and say to him that circumcision was given to Abraham long before the law was given to Moses and that, in that time of Abraham, all human beings whatsoever were guided according to their own intellect and according to the choice of their own will and that, nevertheless, many of them were then friends of God. But after the law was given to Moses, it then pleased God more that human beings should live under the law and according to the law rather than follow their own human understanding and choice. It was the same with my Son’s blessed Body.

For after he instituted in the world this new sacrament of the Eucharist and ascended into heaven, the ancient law was then still kept: namely, that Christian priests lived in carnal matrimony. And, nonetheless, many of them were still friends of God because they believed with simple purity that this was pleasing to God…

…After those earlier Christian priests had observed these practices for a time, God himself, through the infusion of his Holy Spirit, put into the heart of the pope then guiding the Church another law more acceptable and pleasing to him in this matter: namely…that Christian priests, who have so holy and so worthy an office, namely, of consecrating this precious Sacrament, should by no means live in the easily contaminated, carnal delight of marriage.

And therefore, through God’s preordinance and his judgment, it has been justly ordained that priests who do not live in chastity and continence of the flesh are cursed and excommunicated before God and deserve to be deprived of their priestly office. But still, if they truthfully amend their lives with the true purpose of not sinning further, they will obtain mercy from God.

Know this too: that if some pope concedes to priests a license to contract carnal marriage, God will condemn him to a sentence as great, in a spiritual way, as that which the law justly inflicts in a corporeal way on a man who has transgressed…

…For that same pope would be totally deprived by God of his spiritual sight and hearing, and of his spiritual words and deeds. All his spiritual wisdom would grow completely cold; and finally, after his death, his soul would be cast out to be tortured eternally in hell… Yes, even if Saint Gregory the Pope had made this statute…he would never have obtained mercy from God if he had not humbly revoked his statute before his death."

 

[twf]

St. Bridget (1303-1373), in The Revelations of Saint Birgitta, says she received the following instruction from Our Lady:

"…Hear now the things that I want to reveal to you: namely, concerning that archbishop who said that if he were pope, he would give leave for all clerics and priests to contract marriages in the flesh. He thought and believed that this would be more acceptable to God than that clerics should live dissolutely, as they now do…

But now I shall tell you God’s will in this matter… You will make these things known to my bishop and say to him that circumcision was given to Abraham long before the law was given to Moses and that, in that time of Abraham, all human beings whatsoever were guided according to their own intellect and according to the choice of their own will and that, nevertheless, many of them were then friends of God. But after the law was given to Moses, it then pleased God more that human beings should live under the law and according to the law rather than follow their own human understanding and choice. It was the same with my Son’s blessed Body.

For after he instituted in the world this new sacrament of the Eucharist and ascended into heaven, the ancient law was then still kept: namely, that Christian priests lived in carnal matrimony. And, nonetheless, many of them were still friends of God because they believed with simple purity that this was pleasing to God…

…After those earlier Christian priests had observed these practices for a time, God himself, through the infusion of his Holy Spirit, put into the heart of the pope then guiding the Church another law more acceptable and pleasing to him in this matter: namely…that Christian priests, who have so holy and so worthy an office, namely, of consecrating this precious Sacrament, should by no means live in the easily contaminated, carnal delight of marriage.

And therefore, through God’s preordinance and his judgment, it has been justly ordained that priests who do not live in chastity and continence of the flesh are cursed and excommunicated before God and deserve to be deprived of their priestly office. But still, if they truthfully amend their lives with the true purpose of not sinning further, they will obtain mercy from God.

Know this too: that if some pope concedes to priests a license to contract carnal marriage, God will condemn him to a sentence as great, in a spiritual way, as that which the law justly inflicts in a corporeal way on a man who has transgressed…

…For that same pope would be totally deprived by God of his spiritual sight and hearing, and of his spiritual words and deeds. All his spiritual wisdom would grow completely cold; and finally, after his death, his soul would be cast out to be tortured eternally in hell… Yes, even if Saint Gregory the Pope had made this statute…he would never have obtained mercy from God if he had not humbly revoked his statute before his death."

If this is to be taken literally, what then do you make of our Holy Father Pope Benedict who has indeed allowed married former Anglican priests to be ordained to the priesthood via the institution of the Anglican Ordinariates? Or for that matter the perpetual tradition of married priests in the Eastern Catholic Churches…

 

[TimothyH]

Also, I heard somewhere that 1,000 years ago the Latin Rite Church made celibacy a requirement as opposed the 2,000 year old apostolic tradition of married priests. Is this true? What do you think of these arguments?

Celibacy has been a practice in the Church long before the East and West seperated.

Monastics have been celibate from the time of St. Benedict in the 600’s and before that the Desert Father’s and hermits were celibate. Tradition holds that one of the reasons that Jesus on the Cross gave his Virgin Mother into the care of to St. John was that John was celibate. It makes sense that Jesus would have given his Vigin Mother into the care of a celibate man.

And we can read about Nazarites - people consecrated to the Lord - in the Old Testament as far back as the 6th chapter of the Book of Numbers. Part of the Nazarite vow was celibacy, or continence during the time they were under the Nazarite vow, for those who took vows only for a specific time period. These were both men and women.

Speak to the Israelites and tell them: When men or women solemnly take the nazirite vow to dedicate themselves to the LORD, they shall abstain from wine and strong drink; they may neither drink wine vinegar, other vinegar, or any kind of grape juice, nor eat either fresh or dried grapes. (Numbers 6:1-3)

At God’s command, Nazarites did not drink wine or spirits. We hear the angel tell Zechariah that his son John the Baptist will not drink wine or strong drink;

But the angel said to him, “Do not be afraid, Zechariah, because your prayer has been heard. Your wife Elizabeth will bear you a son, and you shall name him John. And you will have joy and gladness, and many will rejoice at his birth, for he will be great in the sight of [the] Lord. He will drink neither wine nor strong drink. He will be filled with the holy Spirit even from his mother’s womb, (Luke 1:13-15)

It is commonly understood that John the Baptist would have thus been a Nazarite and therefor a celibate. Nazarites also did not cut their hair while under the vow.

While they are under the nazirite vow, no razor shall touch their hair. Until the period of their dedication to the LORD is over, they shall be holy, letting the hair of their heads grow freely. (Numbers 6:5)

So it was common for a nazarite to shave his head clean just prior to taking a vow. Paul himself was more than likely a Nazarite;

Paul remained for quite some time, and after saying farewell to the brothers he sailed for Syria, together with Priscilla and Aquila. At Cenchreae he had his hair cut because he had taken a vow. (Acts 18:18)

Acts 21 tells about four other unnamed Nazarites among the Jewish converts to Christiantity.

So do what we tell you. We have four men who have taken a vow. Take these men and purify yourself with them, and pay their expenses that they may have their heads shaved. (Acts 21:23-24)

Way back in the Old Testament, Samson, one of the twelve Judges was a Nazarite.

…for you will conceive and bear a son. No razor shall touch his head, for the boy is to be a nazirite for God from the womb. It is he who will begin to save Israel from the power of the Philistines. (Judges 13:5)

All these men and women were dedicated to God and celibate. Celibate priests of the Roman Rite are no different. They are dedicated to God and part of the discipline of that dedication to God is celibacy.

My post has no bearing on the decision by an other Rite, or any other religion for that matter, to allow their clergy to marry. I’m only commenting on the question in the original post about hindering the Latin Rite’s point of enforcing the discipline of a celibate clergy.

Celibacy for those dedicated to God goes back at least to the time of Moses.

-Tim-

 

[jimrob]

There are two different points to consider:
Should married men be ordained priests?
Should a priest already ordained be allowed to marry?

Many parts of the Catholic Church ordain married men to the priesthood although they cannot become bishops. In the Latin Rite, this is exceptional, but it happens in the case of converting Anglican clergy. Married Anglican bishops joining the Catholic Church may be ordained priest, but not bishop. That gives some odd relationships within the Ordinariate. In England and Wales, the Ordinariate is administered by two former Anglican bishops who are now mitred Catholic priests.

As far as I am aware, in all parts of the Church once ordained, priests and deacons are not allowed to marry or remarry if their wife dies.

The concept of priesthood within the Catholic and Orthodox Churches is based upon Paul’s teaching as recorded in a number of his Epistles. Much of Paul’s theology was of Pharisaic origins and this explains quite a lot of what he had to say on the subject of priesthood and women. As far as the Pharisees were concerned, celibate men were a vastly superior group to those who felt the need to associate with women. So despite the first Pope having had a mother-in-law (there’s no record of Peter’s wife) we’ve had a mostly celibate clergy ever since.

In the Latin Rite, having single men as priests in administratively convenient. It means they can live off the job and don’t need to be paid a salary. The custom is that they use the Christmas and Easter collections to buy personal items and pay the golf club fees. Where we have married priests (we’ve been ordaining married former Anglican priests for nearly 20 years) they need to be housed and salaried which requires a very different kind of Parish organisation. Many are in salaried roles such as prison chaplains. Because we are a large and comparatively rich parish (by UK standards) we can support a married priest and his family, but few parishes in our Diocese are able to do so.

The Ordinariate uses the Anglican model of stipendiary clergy. I suspect that the potential influx of large numbers of married former Anglican clergy was a major factor in the Pope’s agreement to the Ordinariate.

 

[pilots13]

The RC church views women as a hindrance instead of the help they can give.

If this is true, that is just sad.

In the Latin Rite, having single men as priests in administratively convenient. It means they can live off the job and don’t need to be paid a salary. The custom is that they use the Christmas and Easter collections to buy personal items and pay the golf club fees. Where we have married priests (we’ve been ordaining married former Anglican priests for nearly 20 years) they need to be housed and salaried which requires a very different kind of Parish organisation. Many are in salaried roles such as prison chaplains. Because we are a large and comparatively rich parish (by UK standards) we can support a married priest and his family, but few parishes in our Diocese are able to do so.

1. if the priest is given Christmas and Easter collections, isn’t that basically a salary? Also, you don’t have to support the priest and his family. You know his wife could go get a job too right? 2 incomes, suddenly it’s no different a cost to the parish than a single priest.

In my opinion, I think we see married clergy return within my lifetime. Rome will eventually need to do something to boost the dwindling number of priests (especially in the US and Europe). There is no Dogma banning it.

 

[Philomeena]

If this is to be taken literally, what then do you make of our Holy Father Pope Benedict who has indeed allowed married former Anglican priests to be ordained to the priesthood via the institution of the Anglican Ordinariates? Or for that matter the perpetual tradition of married priests in the Eastern Catholic Churches…

Really, this is an excellent question.

 

[FLGreg]

Celibacy and the Priesthood

 

[JimG]

An unmarried priesthood has been the norm for a very long time in the Catholic Church. The Eastern Churches allow married men to be ordained by do not allow marriage after ordination, and all bishops must be unmarried.

The Church in the U.S. allows for the ordination of married former episcopalian priests as a special exception. A married priest was once assigned to my parish. His wife mentioned once in a talk that she does NOT recommend a married priesthood for the Catholic Church.

On a more practical level, the question arises: Catholics are not known as the most generous of tithers. Would parishioners contribute enough to support not only a priest but also his family?

 

[ConstantineTG]

An unmarried priesthood has been the norm for a very long time in the Catholic Church. The Eastern Churches allow married men to be ordained by do not allow marriage after ordination, and all bishops must be unmarried.

The Church in the U.S. allows for the ordination of married former episcopalian priests as a special exception. A married priest was once assigned to my parish. His wife mentioned once in a talk that she does NOT recommend a married priesthood for the Catholic Church.

On a more practical level, the question arises: Catholics are not known as the most generous of tithers. Would parishioners contribute enough to support not only a priest but also his family?

The complication here is that a married priesthood is not part of the culture of many RC countries today. Its different in a culture when seminarians are viewed as “eligible bachelors” and where spiritual, religious women would rather marry someone seeking the priesthood. Its a lifestyle they know coming in that they will live that way. Its difficult if a man and woman live a secular life then the man decides to discern a calling. The wife may not be ready for the life of a priest’s wife. But of course in any case of a married man seeking ordination, the bishop will not ordain if the wife does not ascent.

 

[Anna_Claire]

*The RC church views women as a hindrance instead of the help they can give.
*

True and I would add that The RC Church doesn’t believe women,although different, are equal in God’s eyes. The Church hierarchy doesn’t believe women can be leaders. Or…they are threatened by the possibility that women just might be better at leading the People of God.

 

[Anna_Claire]

I believe part of the problem priests don’t marry is because in our society it would be necessary to provide benefits such as healthcare for families. That would have to be worked out. I’m sure it’s not an insurmountable problem but something that RC clergy have never had to consider.

 

[Carolus_Martell]

Priests why can’t they be married?

Because that’s the way it is and if souls don’t like it they can move on. Some folks are happier with a christian-Lite type faith and in this moment in time the Pope says no to married clergy and that’s that.

 

[Lapey]

The RC church views women as a hindrance instead of the help they can give. Ludicrous, life ends without women. How are women a hinderance?

True and I would add that The RC Church doesn’t believe women,although different, are equal in God’s eyes. The Church hierarchy doesn’t believe women can be leaders. Or…they are threatened by the possibility that women just might be better at leading the People of God.

This is not true. If the High Priest, Jesus, is a man, how can a woman serve in “persona Christi”?

There have been many church leaders who happened to be women, many saints, and doctors of the Church (St. Teresa of Avila, St. Catherine of Siena, & St. Threse de Lisieux.) Please look deeper than what the world would have you look.

 

[Sacred_Heart_1]

In the Western/Roman/Latin Rite Catholic Church. Men, in order to become Priests need to be celibate. In the Latin Rite, the Church claims it’s because a man’s main duty is to God, with no distractions (wife).

But then again, in the Eastern Catholic Churches, men can marry before their ordination but not after.

My question is doesn’t the fact that the Eastern Catholic Churches’ married priests are in great relations with God, sort of hinder the Latin Rite’s point? Also, why can’t they marry after their ordination. What’s the difference? And would celibacy just be repressing someone natural attraction?

Also, I heard somewhere that 1,000 years ago the Latin Rite Church made celibacy a requirement as opposed the 2,000 year old apostolic tradition of married priests. Is this true? What do you think of these arguments?

When the Church first started out priests, bishops, deacons, etc…could get married. Paul talks about it in the scripture.

 

[Lapey]

When the Church first started out priests, bishops, deacons, etc…could get married. Paul talks about it in the scripture.

…and he also talks about celebates. Celebacy has been around long before the Christian Church. Maybe not as a whole, but as a part of sacred ministers lives.

PS. Paul himself was a celebate man.

 

[pollycarp]

This is not true. If the High Priest, Jesus, is a man, how can a woman serve in “persona Christi”?

There have been many church leaders who happened to be women, many saints, and doctors of the Church (St. Teresa of Avila, St. Catherine of Siena, & St. Threse de Lisieux.) Please look deeper than what the world would have you look.

Just want to clarify that I was speaking of women being of support and helpers, not church leaders. At least could they have pious housekeepers? Studies show married men live longer. abcnews.go.com/Health/Depression/story?id=2298049#.TxXFrYGOtIU Just for one example, it’s more difficult to eat right when you’re single.

 

[ConstantineTG]

In the Latin Rite, having single men as priests in administratively convenient. It means they can live off the job and don’t need to be paid a salary. The custom is that they use the Christmas and Easter collections to buy personal items and pay the golf club fees. Where we have married priests (we’ve been ordaining married former Anglican priests for nearly 20 years) they need to be housed and salaried which requires a very different kind of Parish organisation. Many are in salaried roles such as prison chaplains. Because we are a large and comparatively rich parish (by UK standards) we can support a married priest and his family, but few parishes in our Diocese are able to do so.

Who says priests aren’t paid salaries? They are. Secular priests are paid salaries. I think religious priests too if they do work for the diocese but they don’t keep the money and forward it to their Order instead.

I don’t know how things would be different if the priests were married. Most parishes I have come across have housing which can fit a family. Our Ukrainian parishes is the same way. In fact, one of our celibate priests was transferred to another part of the Eparchy and a married one with 2 kids moved into his previous parish and is now living in the house attached to that parish. Married priests need not be paid any different than celibate priests, the same way that programmers, doctors, lawyers, etc. are paid by their experience and qualification, not if they are married or not.

 

[Anna_Claire]

This is not true. If the High Priest, Jesus, is a man, how can a woman serve in “persona Christi”?

There have been many church leaders who happened to be women, many saints, and doctors of the Church (St. Teresa of Avila, St. Catherine of Siena, & St. Threse de Lisieux.) Please look deeper than what the world would have you look.

That old argument again…
…allthough I wasn’t necessarily talking about ordaining women…
However, since you brought it up… we are all (women and men) equal in Christ by virtue of our baptism, therefore women should also be able to act “in persona Christi”

The women you mention above were wonderful leaders and saints we can certainly admire. They were often persecuted for their beliefs and sometimes disobeyed in order to bring about needed changes and reform.
Who today would you put in that category?