Saint Peter's Wife

  • Thread starter Thread starter WJL
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
W

WJL

Guest
Hello,

I’ve heard many protestants ask, “Peter was was married so why are Catholic priests prohibited from being married?” How would you respond to this?

Also, I looked up Luke 4:38 in Haydock’s Commentary, which says. “Ver. 38. It is evident that St. Peter was married; but after his call to the apostleship, he left his wife, as St. Jerome writes, in ep. xliii. Chap. ii. ad Julianum, and lib. i. adv. Jovin. See Matthew xix. 29.”

Is this true? How would this coincide with Genesis 2:24 and Mark 10:7?
 
Because Sacred Scripture says “Simon’s mother-in-law” (Lk 4:38), but never mentions Simon Peters’ wife, why do some people jump to the conclusion that Peter left his wife?

i am a sinner and a fool, but i bet his wife died and he was a widower!

If she lived, Scripture would have surely mentioned how Peter left his wife to follow Jesus.

Since Jesus said “So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let not man put asunder.” (Mt 19:6) Granted, Jesus is God so He could have called Peter to leave his wife, but it surely would have been recorded in Scripture if that were the case.

Sancta Maria, Mater Dei, Ora Pro Nobis Peccatoribus!

mark
 
St. Peter was married. Whoever tried to argue with you that priests should be married because Peter was married are ignorant about that which they argue.
The issue of allowing married men into the Priesthood is about discipline, not Dogma or Doctrine. Therefore the Church can, and has, changed it in the past. It is no more than preference and is in no way related to the Truths of Christ, though choosing certain disiplines can bring us better to Christ. For example, so that Priests could be of better service and, in a sense, married to the Church, the Catholic Church stopped allowing married men to join the Priesthood. In the future they may allow it again. It doesn’t affect the fact that the Church does not change or add Doctrine and that it has the fullness of the Truth.
Hope that helps. Just let me know if I need to clarify anything or if I need to expand upon anything.

P.S. There is a major difference between allowing a married man to become a Priest and allowing a Priest to become married, in the same way that a married man can become a Deacon, but a Deacon cannot become married.
 
It is clear from scripture that the wives traveled with the apostles. 1 Cor 9:5 " Do we not have the right to be accompanied by a wife, as the other apostles and the brothers of the Lord and Cephas?"
This seems to indicated the the wife of Cephas (Peter) traveled with him. The writings of one of the Church Fathers tells us that Peter’s wife was martyred.
 
Third_Day said:
It is clear from scripture that the wives traveled with the apostles. 1 Cor 9:5 " Do we not have the right to be accompanied by a wife, as the other apostles and the brothers of the Lord and Cephas?"
This seems to indicated the the wife of Cephas (Peter) traveled with him. The writings of one of the Church Fathers tells us that Peter’s wife was martyred.
Click to expand...
In fact, I think that it would have been VERY contrary to the message of Christ if Peter has just left his wife.
 
bmadamsberry said:
In fact, I think that it would have been VERY contrary to the message of Christ if Peter has just left his wife.
Click to expand...
I agree with that was well.

I noticed Haydock’s Commentary cited Matthew 19:29 as a source when suggesting Peter left his wife: “And every one that hath left house, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands for my name’s sake, shall receive an hundredfold, and shall possess life everlasting.”
 
WJL said:
I agree with that was well.

I noticed Haydock’s Commentary cited Matthew 19:29 as a source when suggesting Peter left his wife: "And every one that hath left house, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands for my name’s sake, shall receive an hundredfold, and shall possess life everlasting."
Click to expand...
But that could relate to anyone. Peter isn’t even implicitly mentioned in that verse.
Because his wife isn’t mentioned, I think it would be safe to assume that either 1. Peter was a widower, or 2. Peter’s wife went with him, at least nominally.
I don’t see Peter meeting with his mother-in-law had he left his wife (which would have been a big insult to her family).
 
I have encountered references to Peter’s wife dying with him in Rome from time to time, but don’t know if there is any basis for them. They may be just speculation.
 
WJL said:
Hello,

I’ve heard many protestants ask, “Peter was was married so why are Catholic priests prohibited from being married?” How would you respond to this?
Click to expand...
First off protestants and some Catholics fail to realize that there is more to the Catholic Church than just the Latin Rite. It is the Latin Rite that has a prohibition on married men becoming priests. The Eastern rites of the Catholic Church (Byzantine, Maronite, Chaldean, etc.) have no such prohibitions, except that their bishops be unmarried.
 
kalel76 said:
First off protestants and some Catholics fail to realize that there is more to the Catholic Church than just the Latin Rite. It is the Latin Rite that has a prohibition on married men becoming priests. The Eastern rites of the Catholic Church (Byzantine, Maronite, Chaldean, etc.) have no such prohibitions, except that their bishops be unmarried.
Click to expand...
The Eastern churches [Orthodox] choose their bishops differently than do the Western allied churches. In Orhtoidoxy bishops are not chosen from the ranks of priests who are permitted to be married but rather from the ranks of cloistered monks who are forbiddened to be married. Also Orthodox priests are not permitted to be married after they are ordained. They can marry before ordination but not afterwards.

The discipline of a celibate priesthood has served the church well for a millenium. I don’t expect it to change for the foreseeable future but if the need should arise then a change is within the authority of the church to do so.
 
inkaneer said:
The Eastern churches [Orthodox] choose their bishops differently than do the Western allied churches. In Orhtoidoxy bishops are not chosen from the ranks of priests who are permitted to be married but rather from the ranks of cloistered monks who are forbiddened to be married. Also Orthodox priests are not permitted to be married after they are ordained. They can marry before ordination but not afterwards.

The discipline of a celibate priesthood has served the church well for a millenium. I don’t expect it to change for the foreseeable future but if the need should arise then a change is within the authority of the church to do so.
Click to expand...
Inkaner, you’re mistaken.

There is the Eastern Catholic Churches and the Orthodox Church. They are not the same, and yes, the Eastern Catholic Church permits married priests, as long as they are married prior to entering the priesthood.

By the way, I do agree that celibacy is best for priests.
 
querying said:
Inkaner, you’re mistaken.

There is the Eastern Catholic Churches and the Orthodox Church. They are not the same, and yes, the Eastern Catholic Church permits married priests, as long as they are married prior to entering the priesthood.

By the way, I do agree that celibacy is best for priests.
Click to expand...
Is there significant difference in the rules fin this matter between the Eastern Catholic Churches and the Orthodox Churches? It has been my impression that they have the same policies and beliefs in most matters, the papacy being the primary exception.
 
bmadamsberry said:
In fact, I think that it would have been VERY contrary to the message of Christ if Peter has just left his wife.
Click to expand...
One translation of the vulgate

{9:5} Numquid non habemus potestatem mulierem sororem circumducendi sicut et ceteri Apostoli, et fratres Domini, et Cephas?
{9:5} Do we not have the authority to travel around with a woman who is a sister, just as do the other Apostles, and the brothers of the Lord, and Cephas?

The greek asks “Have we not power to lead
about a sister, a wife, as well
as other apostles, and [as] the
brethren of the Lord, and
Cephas?”

It allows for sister or wife. Either way, I am not concerned. It is good that if a man can be celibate that he be so. The Church requires that priests not get married, and I will accept that.

FSC
 
I am asking this because I REALLY do not nor have I ever understood these differences. A man can become a priest even if he is married. However, a man cannot marry if he is a priest.Either way you are dealing with a man and a women.The man is a priest. I must tell you that the priest who married my wife and I had been married prior to becoming a priest. His wife had died. I must say that he brought an entire different and VERY valuable perspective to his work. When people in the church spoke to him about the difficulties of raising a family, the difficulties married life presents at times etc. he REALLY did understand what was being experienced.Why, because he also had had a wife and had children so he knew what it was all about …first hand. This is NOT a criticism of celibate priests but a “plus” for married priests. Our Pastors as you know can marry if they wish and most are.I look forward to hearing what the difference is. NLM
 
querying said:
Inkaner, you’re mistaken.

There is the Eastern Catholic Churches and the Orthodox Church. They are not the same, and yes, the Eastern Catholic Church permits married priests, as long as they are married prior to entering the priesthood.

By the way, I do agree that celibacy is best for priests.
Click to expand...
No, I am not mistaken. I identified the eastern churches by having the word Orthodox in brackets. See my original post or even your reply where you quoted me. I did this because there is more than one Orthodox church. There is Greek, Russian, Serbian, etc. Orthodoxy is divided by etnic groups. True there are Eastern Churches [Rites] in Catholicism but my reference was to those Eastern Churches that were Orthodox.
 
Historical documents as well as traditional writings have it that Saint Peter’s wife traveled with the ministry, and that Peter cried out encouragement to his beloved wife as they were being crucified at the same time for the beliefs they held. Can’t remember the source, but is a beautiful story about love while in service to the greatest of ministries, and the closeness they all had, and the types of characters with whom Jesus surrounded himself.

It may even have been one of the so-called “anti-Catholic” sources, Fox’s Book of Martyrs, perhaps, which quotes many historical documents of the times. Don’t have time to research it for you, it might have been one of the sources, though I remember reading it in others.

:o
 
WJL said:
Hello,

I’ve heard many protestants ask, “Peter was was married so why are Catholic priests prohibited from being married?” How would you respond to this?

Also, I looked up Luke 4:38 in Haydock’s Commentary, which says. “Ver. 38. It is evident that St. Peter was married; but after his call to the apostleship, he left his wife, as St. Jerome writes, in ep. xliii. Chap. ii. ad Julianum, and lib. i. adv. Jovin. See Matthew xix. 29.”

Is this true? How would this coincide with Genesis 2:24 and Mark 10:7?
Click to expand...
Celibacy and the Catholic Priest

Many people believe that the Catholic Church violates the Word of God because it forbids people to marry (cf. 1 Timothy 4:3) or that it is wrong for priests to remain celibate. To get a clearer picture of this issue, let’s examine what the Bible has to say about the subject of celibacy.

Matthew 19:11-12
11Jesus replied, “Not everyone can accept this word, but only those to whom it has been given. 12For some are eunuchs because they were born that way; others were made that way by men; and others have renounced marriage because of the kingdom of heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it.”

Jesus offers the celibate life as a gift and tells us that “The one who can accept this should accept it.”

1 Corinthians 7:1
1Now for the matters you wrote about: It is good for a man not to marry.

1 Corinthians 7:7
7I wish that all men were as I am. But each man has his own gift from God; one has this gift, another has that.

Paul reveals his own celibacy and offers an earnest wish that more people would follow his example.

1 Corinthians 7:8-9
8Now to the unmarried and the widows I say: It is good for them to stay unmarried, as I am. 9But if they cannot control themselves, they should marry, for it is better to marry than to burn with passion.

Paul concedes that getting married is better than struggling with sexual temptation; for those that “cannot control themselves, they should marry.”

Is Paul completely opposed to marriage? Not at all. The book of Hebrews states:

Hebrews 13:4
Marriage should be honored by all, and the marriage bed kept pure, for God will judge the adulterer and all the sexually immoral.

Why then does Paul recommend celibacy?

1 Corinthians 7:32-35
32I would like you to be free from concern. An unmarried man is concerned about the Lord’s affairs—how he can please the Lord. 33But a married man is concerned about the affairs of this world—how he can please his wife— 34and his interests are divided. An unmarried woman or virgin is concerned about the Lord’s affairs: Her aim is to be devoted to the Lord in both body and spirit. But a married woman is concerned about the affairs of this world—how she can please her husband. 35I am saying this for your own good, not to restrict you, but that you may live in a right way in undivided devotion to the Lord.

From this passage, we can see Paul’s primary reason for advocating celibacy: he wants everyone to live in undivided devotion to the Lord, and in all of these verses, the Bible makes it clear that Jesus calls some men to the priesthood and offers them the gift of a celibate life to be lived in undivided devotion to God. Paul understands that not everyone is offered this gift and that not all to whom it is offered can or will accept it.

There are Catholic priests who are married; typically, these are men who were priests in the Anglican, Orthodox or other faith traditions and have converted to the Catholic faith after they were married in those churches. Under special circumstances, they may be ordained to serve as Catholic priests. Men who are already Catholic when they begin to discern their call to the priesthood must remain celibate.

The Catholic Church forbids no man to marry. However, she does desire that those who will represent Christ, who will stand in persona Christi (in the place of Christ) when administering the sacraments as priests, be like their Lord as fully as possible. This means that like Jesus, they are celibate men prepared to sacrifice their own lives in the service of God and others.

The calling and the gift is offered by God; those who choose to accept it do so freely. Here is an article, “Celibacy is a Gift”, that explains this more fully: catholic.com/thisrock/2001/0102fea5.asp
 
Daily Readings for Tuesday August 18, 2009
Daily readings of the Mass.
Gospel, Mt 19:23-30
23 Then Jesus said to his disciples, ‘In truth I tell you, it is hard for someone rich to enter the kingdom of Heaven.
24 Yes, I tell you again, it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for someone rich to enter the kingdom of Heaven.’
25 When the disciples heard this they were astonished. ‘Who can be saved, then?’ they said.
26 Jesus gazed at them. ‘By human resources’, he told them, ‘this is impossible; for God everything is possible.’
27 Then Peter answered and said, ‘Look, we have left everything and followed you. What are we to have, then?’
28 Jesus said to them, 'In truth I tell you, when everything is made new again and the Son of man is seated on his throne of glory, you yourselves will sit on twelve thrones to judge the twelve tribes of Israel.
29 And everyone who has left houses, brothers, sisters, father, mother, children or land for the sake of my name will receive a hundred times as much, and also inherit eternal life.
30 ‘Many who are first will be last, and the last, first.’

If you read the passages just prior to this, Jesus has just told the rich man to sell everything he had, donate it to the poor, and follow Him. The Apostles had all just done the same thing, given up all possessions, or donated them to the community of followers for their immediate needs. The Apostles then expand on what Jesus has just told the man when they get inside the house, out of earshot of everyone else.

Take care to note Jesus does not advocate leaving their spouses in that passage, neither “wives” (nor husbands, i.e. spouses) is cited in the list, preserving the sacredness of the marriage for those already married. They had already made that vow to God, Jesus would never contradict any pre-existing laws or marriage contracts or vows made to God. In encouraging celibate life (even within a marriage, as it was practiced in the times, see Jesus’s and Saint Paul’s teachings on this as well), it was the primary purpose of the ministry that was encouraged. Jesus felt that “no man can serve two masters”, meaning, one or the other would suffer. In the priesthood or other religious service, those choosing those vocations are recognizing their roles in their choice of that lifestyle, and are happy to do it. Else they choose the life of deacon and the family life it provides, (or the many other roles the church provides to service in parishes or other ministries), but this is also a very different role, with different levels of service.

🙂
 
Whose version of Matthew is adulterated?

Interesting. Strangely an earlier posting on this thread included “wives”, of the version of Matthew I quoted. So, I jumped back to today’s emails, coincidentally, of the Daily Readings to which I subscribe from Catholic Online, @ www.catholic.org. Their website for the readings is this, from where I did cut and paste my version. As such, I feel it’s pretty safe. Jump into it yourselves, and you can verify it.

catholic.org/newsletters/content/dailyreadings.php

It begs the question, who is adulterating what, and for what purpose?

I’m pretty comfortable with my understanding, that Jesus would never do anything to contradict or undo any vows that His Apostles would have already made to God, His Father. Remember that not only were they His followers and friends, they were also His family, five of whom were His first and second cousins, and He would only have their best interests (and those of their spouses, traveling in the group, whom He would have known personally), at heart. … As well as for the rest of us, for Time Immemorial, in that we can be happy because we are not stretched “too thin”, doing a good job at pleasing only one master, whichever one we have chosen.

:rolleyes:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top