Restrictions on the Eastern Churches

  • Thread starter Thread starter twf
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
T

twf

Guest
Canon Law for the Oriental Churches states that a patriarchal church represents a fully “mature” Eastern Catholic Church sui iuris. Vatican II clearly taught that all Churches sui iuris are equal in dignity. The Latin Church with its 1 billion faithful is not “greater” than the Melkite Church with her couple million faithful. That being said, we are all very aware that there are certain restrictions in place on even the fully “mature” patriarchal churches outside of their “traditional” territories…when it comes to such key issues as the election of bishops and the ordination of married men. My question is - is it really Rome that opposes lifting these restrictions? Is there any evidence that the Holy Father personally feels that the Eastern Churches require this degree of supervision? I’m wondering if it is, perhaps, certain elements of the Latin episcopate that oppose change in this regard…and Rome is simply trying to keep the peace. Take for example the Latin episcopate in Italy - did they not attempt to ban all married Eastern clergy from the country? (As an aside, it would seem to me that American and Canadian Latin bishops have no issue with married clergy - there are, after all, dozens of married Anglican/Latin Catholic priests in North America).
 
twf said:
Canon Law for the Oriental Churches states that a patriarchal church represents a fully “mature” Eastern Catholic Church sui iuris. Vatican II clearly taught that all Churches sui iuris are equal in dignity. The Latin Church with its 1 billion faithful is not “greater” than the Melkite Church with her couple million faithful. That being said, we are all very aware that there are certain restrictions in place on even the fully “mature” patriarchal churches outside of their “traditional” territories…when it comes to such key issues as the election of bishops and the ordination of married men. My question is - is it really Rome that opposes lifting these restrictions? Is there any evidence that the Holy Father personally feels that the Eastern Churches require this degree of supervision? I’m wondering if it is, perhaps, certain elements of the Latin episcopate that oppose change in this regard…and Rome is simply trying to keep the peace. Take for example the Latin episcopate in Italy - did they not attempt to ban all married Eastern clergy from the country? (As an aside, it would seem to me that American and Canadian Latin bishops have no issue with married clergy - there are, after all, dozens of married Anglican/Latin Catholic priests in North America).
Click to expand...
Rome* is* preserving the traditions by observing the ancient traditional territories. Ordination of married men is allowed where it is traditional (there is does not cause scandal). All Catholic bishops are approved by the Holy See, but for elections the least involvement of the Holy See, for the election of a head of a Church sui iuris, is assent.
 
I get so sick of the excuse that we can’t practice some of our Eastern traditions in the West because they might cause scandal. If there really is a concern for scandal, then why allow any married priests in the West? What about all of these former Protestant ministers who’ve been ordained as Roman Catholic priests? Where was all the concern over the possible scandal there? Why permit the chrismation and communing of our infants (in my experience, that’s more likely to cause scandal than married priests)? Furthermore, where is the concern for how we Eastern Catholics have been and are being scandalized?
 
RyanBlack, this provides some insight.

Sacerdotalis Caelibatus,
Encyclical Of Pope Paul VI
On The Celibacy Of The Priest, June 24, 1967

The Tradition of the Western Church
  1. In any case, the Church of the West cannot weaken her faithful observance of her own tradition. Nor can she be regarded as having followed for centuries a path which instead of favoring the spiritual richness of individual souls and of the People of God, has in some way compromised it, or of having stifled, with arbitrary juridical prescriptions, the free expansion of the most profound realities of nature and of grace.
Particular Cases
  1. In virtue of the fundamental norm of the government of the Catholic Church, to which We alluded above, (82) while on the one hand, the law requiring a freely chosen and perpetual celibacy of those who are admitted to Holy Orders remains unchanged, on the other hand, a study may be allowed of the particular circumstances of married sacred ministers of Churches or other Christian communities separated from the Catholic communion, and of the possibility of admitting to priestly functions those who desire to adhere to the fullness of this communion and to continue to exercise the sacred ministry. The circumstances must be such, however, as not to prejudice the existing discipline regarding celibacy.
And that the authority of the Church does not hesitate to exercise her power in this matter can be seen from the recent Ecumenical Council, which foresaw the possibility of conferring the holy diaconate on men of mature age who are already married. (83)
  1. All this, however, does not signify a relaxation of the existing law, and must not be interpreted as a prelude to its abolition. There are better things to do than to promote this hypothesis, which tears down that vigor and love in which celibacy finds security and happiness, and which obscures the true doctrine that justifies its existence and exalts its splendor. It would be much better to promote serious studies in defense of the spiritual meaning and moral value of virginity and celibacy. (84)
    vatican.va/holy_father/paul_vi/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-vi_enc_24061967_sacerdotalis_en.html
 
twf said:
(As an aside, it would seem to me that American and Canadian Latin bishops have no issue with married clergy - there are, after all, dozens of married Anglican/Latin Catholic priests in North America).
Click to expand...
I don’t think we can say that they have no issue with married clergy.

Even with respect to your example, it’s restricted to Anglican (and sometimes Lutheran) clergy who are becoming Catholic for the first time.
 
Over time people have migrated from those geographical areas that are seen as the traditional areas of the Eastern and Oriental Catholic churches. Many of these people have migrated to areas such as Western Europe, Australasia, and North America. I think that it is right and proper that they should bring with them their faith. They should be provided with hierarchs and priests of their own particular churches to provide for their pastoral care. They should be able to bring with them the full patrimony and heritage of their own churches. If this includes a married priesthood then married priests should be permitted in these areas. How uncharitable it is to say we Latins are scandalised by the patrimony of our Eastern brethren. What should scandalise us is the lack of knoweldge and understanding we have of our sister churches in the Catholic Church.
 
Matthew_Holford said:
Over time people have migrated from those geographical areas that are seen as the traditional areas of the Eastern and Oriental Catholic churches. Many of these people have migrated to areas such as Western Europe, Australasia, and North America. I think that it is right and proper that they should bring with them their faith. They should be provided with hierarchs and priests of their own particular churches to provide for their pastoral care. They should be able to bring with them the full patrimony and heritage of their own churches. If this includes a married priesthood then married priests should be permitted in these areas. How uncharitable it is to say we Latins are scandalised by the patrimony of our Eastern brethren. What should scandalise us is the lack of knoweldge and understanding we have of our sister churches in the Catholic Church.
Click to expand...
👍👍👍
 
I hope that we see a softening of the policy… especially since the Anglican Use allows for married priests as long as the ordinariate system persists.

Married Clerics are part of every patriarchate’s Traditions - even Rome’s, if one goes back 800 years - and Rome has acknowledged this with the return to married men being ordained deacons.

Of late, Rome has had no visible issue with married deacons in the Eastern churches. Only married priests.
 
Aramis said:
I hope that we see a softening of the policy… especially since the Anglican Use allows for married priests as long as the ordinariate system persists.

Married Clerics are part of every patriarchate’s Traditions - even Rome’s, if one goes back 800 years - and Rome has acknowledged this with the return to married men being ordained deacons.

Of late, Rome has had no visible issue with married deacons in the Eastern churches. Only married priests.
Click to expand...
Correct me if I am wrong, but the Anglican Ordinariate does not allow for new ordinations of married men. Only those who serve as priests already in the Anglican Church will be ordained in the Catholic Church.
 
ConstantineTG said:
Correct me if I am wrong, but the Anglican Ordinariate does not allow for new ordinations of married men. Only those who serve as priests already in the Anglican Church will be ordained in the Catholic Church.
Click to expand...
It allows for married men of the ordinariate to be ordained… on a case by case basis.

[Anglicanorum Coetibus, VI] § 2. The Ordinary, in full observance of the discipline of celibate clergy in the Latin Church, as a rule (pro regula) will admit only celibate men to the order of presbyter. He may also petition the Roman Pontiff, as a derogation from can. 277, §1, for the admission of married men to the order of presbyter on a case by case basis, according to objective criteria approved by the Holy See.

And

[Complementary Norms to Anglicanorum Coetibus]
Article 6

§1. In order to admit candidates to Holy Orders the Ordinary must obtain the consent of the Governing Council. In consideration of Anglican ecclesial tradition and practice, the Ordinary may present to the Holy Father a request for the admission of married men to the presbyterate in the Ordinariate, after a process of discernment based on objective criteria and the needs of the Ordinariate. These objective criteria are determined by the Ordinary in consultation with the local Episcopal Conference and must be approved by the Holy See.

Note that the objective criteria have not yet been made public, if they’ve been developed at all.

vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/apost_constitutions/documents/hf_ben-xvi_apc_20091104_anglicanorum-coetibus_en.html

vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20091104_norme-anglicanorum-coetibus_en.html
 
Aramis said:
It allows for married men of the ordinariate to be ordained… on a case by case basis.
[Anglicanorum Coetibus, VI] § 2. The Ordinary, in full observance of the discipline of celibate clergy in the Latin Church, as a rule (pro regula) will admit only celibate men to the order of presbyter. He may also petition the Roman Pontiff, as a derogation from can. 277, §1, for the admission of married men to the order of presbyter on a case by case basis, according to objective criteria approved by the Holy See.And
[Complementary Norms to Anglicanorum Coetibus]
Article 6

§1. In order to admit candidates to Holy Orders the Ordinary must obtain the consent of the Governing Council. In consideration of Anglican ecclesial tradition and practice, the Ordinary may present to the Holy Father a request for the admission of married men to the presbyterate in the Ordinariate, after a process of discernment based on objective criteria and the needs of the Ordinariate. These objective criteria are determined by the Ordinary in consultation with the local Episcopal Conference and must be approved by the Holy See.
Note that the objective criteria have not yet been made public, if they’ve been developed at all.

vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/apost_constitutions/documents/hf_ben-xvi_apc_20091104_anglicanorum-coetibus_en.html

vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20091104_norme-anglicanorum-coetibus_en.html
Click to expand...
Interesting. So if I’m understanding this correctly, they need the pope’s approval every time they ordain a married man (even for Anglican clergy converting to Catholicism)?
 
Peter_J said:
Interesting. So if I’m understanding this correctly, they need the pope’s approval every time they ordain a married man
Click to expand...
No. According to the text brother Aramis provided, it is the criteria that needs to be approved, which is only proper (according to the secular and canonical use of the word) because the bishop of Rome is the head bishop of the Latins, and the Latin Church needs the consent of their head bishop on any great matter beyond the boundaries of any single diocese.
(even for Anglican clergy converting to Catholicism)?
Click to expand...
That’s a separate issue. I think the norms have already been approved, so the local episcopal conference applies the law, not the bishop of Rome directly.

Blessings,
Marduk
 
From Anglicanorum Coetibus (emphasis added)
VI § 2. The Ordinary, in full observance of the discipline of celibate clergy in the Latin Church, as a rule (pro regula) will admit only celibate men to the order of presbyter. He may also petition the Roman Pontiff, as a derogation from can. 277, §1, for the admission of married men to the order of presbyter on a case by case basis, according to objective criteria approved by the Holy See.
Click to expand...
mardukm said:
Peter J;9918850:
Interesting. So if I’m understanding this correctly, they need the pope’s approval every time they ordain a married man
Click to expand...
No. According to the text brother Aramis provided, it is the criteria that needs to be approved, which is only proper (according to the secular and canonical use of the word) because the bishop of Rome is the head bishop of the Latins, and the Latin Church needs the consent of their head bishop on any great matter beyond the boundaries of any single diocese.
Click to expand...
Of course this has little to do with anything Eastern or Oriental, but in reading the quote from Anglicanorum Coetibus, particularly the bolded portion, it seems to me that Peter is correct. Yes, the criteria need to be “approved” as a whole, but the document very clearly says that each case in fact will be handled on an individual basis. Could be I missed it (I don’t think so, but maybe), but I see nothing there that grants a blanket or wholesale permission (or dispensation or derogation from law or whatever what wants to call it), irrespective the approval of any norms or criteria.
 
mardukm said:
No. According to the text brother Aramis provided, it is the criteria that needs to be approved, which is only proper (according to the secular and canonical use of the word) because the bishop of Rome is the head bishop of the Latins, and the Latin Church needs the consent of their head bishop on any great matter beyond the boundaries of any single diocese.

That’s a separate issue. I think the norms have already been approved, so the local episcopal conference applies the law, not the bishop of Rome directly.

Blessings,
Marduk
Click to expand...
Ah yes, I see what you’re saying. (It would have been rather surprising if it had been what I thought those quotations were saying.)
 
malphono said:
Of course this has little to do with anything Eastern or Oriental, but in reading the quote from Anglicanorum Coetibus, particularly the bolded portion, it seems to me that Peter is correct. Yes, the criteria need to be “approved” as a whole, but the document very clearly says that each case in fact will be handled on an individual basis.
Click to expand...
Yes, but I guess that mardukm’s point was that the pope’s permission won’t be needed on each individual case.
 
It’s also worth noting that Anglicanorum Coetibus VI§1 deals with former Anglican ministers already, and the complementary norms have a whole separate section on former Anglican ministers.

It shows that HH Benedict XVI isn’t nearly as uptight about married clerics in the West as some would have us believe. But he’s also not opening the floodgates, either.
 
We do have the expression of Pope John Paul VI, from the document previously posted, commenting on topics of patristic abstinence, celibacy, and number of vocations:6. The close relationship that the Fathers of the Church and ecclesiastical writers established over the centuries between the ministering priesthood and celibacy has its origin partly in a mentality and partly in historical circumstances far different from ours. In patristic texts we more frequently find exhortations to the clergy to abstain from marital relations rather than to observe celibacy; and the reasons justifying the perfect chastity of the Church’s ministers seem often to be based on an overly pessimistic view of man’s earthly condition or on a certain notion of the purity necessary for contact with sacred things. In addition, it is said that the old arguments no longer are in harmony with the different social and cultural milieus in which the Church today, through her priests, is called upon to work.
…
8. It is asserted, moreover, that the maintaining of priestly celibacy in the Church does great harm in those regions where the shortage of the clergy—a fact recognized with sadness and deplored by the same Council (4)—gives rise to critical situations: that it prevents the full realization of the divine plan of salvation and at times jeopardizes the very possibility of the initial proclamation of the Gospel. Thus the disquieting decline in the ranks of the clergy is attributed by some to the heavy burden of the obligation of celibacy.
…
49. We are not easily led to believe that the abolition of ecclesiastical celibacy would considerably increase the number of priestly vocations: the contemporary experience of those Churches and ecclesial communities which allow their ministers to marry seems to prove the contrary. The causes of the decrease in vocations to the priesthood are to be found elsewhere—for example, in the fact that individuals and families have lost their sense of God and of all that is holy, their esteem for the Church as the institution of salvation through faith and the sacraments. The problem must be examined at its real source.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top