Should priests be allowed to marry?

  • Thread starter Thread starter hitherwood1
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
H

hitherwood1

Guest
The BBC in the UK will be running a TV debate this coming Sunday on whether priests should be allowed to marry. John (webmaster) of a teen vocation site
www, catholicpriest.me.uk
has been invited to participate.
We have already published some celibacy stories at
catholicpriest.me.uk/celibacy.html

Please view these impressive testimonials of teens who gladly embrace celibacy and then add your own reflections - these may be published on the same site unless you wish to opt out.
Email to info@catholicpriest.me.uk

Blessings
 
There have always been married Eastern Catholic priests, as well as Orthodox priests. I know several in my own city.

There are even married Latin rite priests.

This is NOT the same as allowing priests to marry.

They must be married before the diaconate.

My own opinion is that the Church needs both married and celibate priests. They have different and complementary gifts.
 
Opinions may be fine but neither you nor anyone else has the authority to change the Church—not even the Pope.
 
Opinions may be fine but neither you nor anyone else has the authority to change the Church—not even the Pope.
Yes, I know that. I am not seeking to change anything - just to represent as many insights as I can in a public forum.
 
Opinions may be fine but neither you nor anyone else has the authority to change the Church—not even the Pope.
Actually the celibate clergy in the Latin Church can and has changed. It is only a matter of discipline.

The Eastern Catholic Church has always allowed married men to be ordained into the priesthood. The Latin Church today dispenses married converts and allows them to be ordained to the priesthood although they are married.

What can not change is allowing those already ordained to get married.
 
Call me dumb. But I can’t, for the life of me, understand what fascination the laity has with celibacy in the Latin Rite.

First of all, it only applies to those who are thinking about becoming secular clerics. That takes out almost half of the men who would want to be priests, since they usually feel a call to religious life too. Celibacy is essential to religious life. There is no such thing as religious life without it.

Second, clerics in any rite cannot marry. You must marry before ordination. There has never been a practice of clerics marrying in any of the Catholic Rites or the Orthodox Rites. Why would we want to start that now?

Third, how many people asking the question are going to be secular clerics?

I don’t mean to offend, but it seems that the question has almost become fashionable these days. To believe that you can increase the number of priests by allowing married men to be ordained priests is not a real correlation. The Eastern Churches also have a shortage of deacons and priests.

In fact, the fastest growing number of vocations these days seems to be among women religious. There are several new communities of women religious born every year. Right after them are communities of brothers, especially in mission countries. Neither the sisters, nuns, brothers, friars or monks can be exempt from celibacy. It’s not a discipline for them, but a way of life.

I guess I’m not really sure what the purpose of raising this question in every other vocation thread is about. I’m confused. :confused:

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
Merely my opinion, but I think priests should have the option to marry. As bpbasilphx said, both celibate and married priests would bring different and complementary gifts.
 
Priests are married to the church. They give up everything, family, wealth all to do Gods work, who are we to question that?

HickmanJosh
 
Priests are married to the church. They give up everything, family, wealth all to do Gods work, who are we to question that?

HickmanJosh
Actually, there is a little difference between priests and religious. What you’re describing is a religious brother, not a priest.

A priest is not married to the Church. He does not give up family or material property. Religious do, because they make vows of poverty, chastity and obedience.

A secular priest does not make vows. Therefore, he can own as much property and have as much money as he can make or inherit from parents, etc. They also get paid a salary for their work. A priest may own his own home, car, retirement home, vacation home, have retirement inssurance and even a second job, if time allows it.

He is not married to the Church, because he does not make a vow of chasity. Therefore, he does not live in a community of brothers with whom he must pray, eat, recreate, go on retreat. He does not have to do house chores as does a religious or spend quality time with his community, because he has none. He can come and go without permission and have money in his pocket. He does not have to ask for permission to travel, purchase expensive items such as a TV. He lives in a rectory, which is actually a boarding house. Every priest has his own TV, telephone, and schedule. Religious do not have their own TVS, telephones, or personal cars. Some don’t have computers or internet. Some share the computer, like a married man in a family. They may not travel without permission. Secular priests do not need such permission. They just need to schedule it with the pastor, like you would wiht a boss at work. A secular priest makes a PROMISE OF CELIBACY, which is a promise to remain single. It does not require that he be part of a spiritual family.

Seclar priests make a PROMISE OF OBEDIENCE TO THE BISHOP. A religious makes a vow of obedience to the founder of the community, to the rule and constitutions, to the superior and to his brothers. While a secular priest answers to his bishop for certain things, he does not answer to the bishop in personal matters such as who his friends are, how he uses his money, whee he goes in his spare time, when he goes visit his fammily and friends, how he dresses (though a bishop may require his priests to wear a clerical shirt or cassock on duty). He does not have to get permission to come home late or leave early. He prays alone, unlike religious brothers who must pray in community. He follows his own spirituality, unlike religious who promise to live according to the spirituality of the founder or the tradition of the order, such as the Carmelites who do not have a founder.

All that being said, a secular priest is a man who is committed to serving the Church by the Sacrament of Holy Orders in all things that are proper for the clerical state. Notice that the Church refers to the priesthood as a state, not a way of life. There are many ways in which priests can live the Christian life.

The bond between a priest, God and the Church is a bond to serve God’s people through a life of priestly service. The bond between the religious, God and the Church is to live a life closely consecrated to God by being a person of prayer, penance, silence, solitude, faithful to his brothers and caring for them, doing what ever it takes to find Christ in the spirit of the founder. The apostolate of the religioius flows from his life in the community, according to the needs of the community and the Church around the community. Some religious do not have an apostolate outside of the religous house. They live completely hidden from the world, just for God. Therefore, a religious is married to the Church and to God and lives in intimate communion with God.

A priest is ordained to serve the people of God by growing into Christ’s priestly ministry through an on-going life of personal prayer, fidelitiy to the Church, and being a sacramental presence to God’s people.

Some men are called to be both: priests and religious. We call them religious priests. They are always religioius first. This means that their duties and allegience to the community is always first. They serve as priests where the community chooses, when community chooses, and if the community chooses.

A good example of a religious priest is a Carthusian monk. The Carthusian monk may never say mass where the faithful can participate. He may never hear confessions, baptize, witness marriages, bury the dead or preach a sermon. The mass is for the good of the Church, because it is a public event. but it is celebrated behind walls and away from the eyes of the laity to avoid contamination from the laity. This allows this particular religious to focus entirely on Christ’s presence and to continue living his monastic vocation to solitude by being alone with Christ on the altar.

The priests that belong to a diocese do not have these privileges. Because they are not married to the Church or consecrated to the perfection of charity.

Like the rest of us, they share in the universal call to holiness, but are nto consecrated men. There is the difference between priest and religious.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
Well then you learn something new every day, Thanks:)

HickmanJosh
 
I recently had a talk with a friend in the seminary. This topic came up.

He mentioned a reason that I liked why priest that could not marry, not the doctrine teaching but this could be used to help some people understand. There are several others this is just one.

Everyone had their vocation it could be single, some people may be homosexual(single), and some people spouse may be unable to having sex. The church calls for all to be celibate. The priest can look them all in the eye and say not matter how hard this can be it can be possible.
 
I recently had a talk with a friend in the seminary. This topic came up.

He mentioned a reason that I liked why priest that could not marry, not the doctrine teaching but this could be used to help some people understand. There are several others this is just one.

Everyone had their vocation it could be single, some people may be homosexual(single), and some people spouse may be unable to having sex. The church calls for all to be celibate. The priest can look them all in the eye and say not matter how hard this can be it can be possible.
It is possible when there is a strong enough love. I know somone whose spouse had a stroke and they have lived as brother and sister for 20+ years.

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
I think they should be allowed to marry if that’s what they want to do.
 
“Should priests be allowed to marry?”

No. Jesus didn’t marry; neither should they. Also, married priests wouldn’t be able to fully answer their calling and lead their flock. The old arguments for a non-married clergy remain cogent.
 
Opinions may be fine but neither you nor anyone else has the authority to change the Church—not even the Pope.
I agree that we have to understand where our opinions are appropriate and changing Church teaching it not that place. 😉

But, I think it is healthy to encourage discussion in areas where change is possible. Otherwise, Catholics foster a reputation of being closed-minded.

Priests can’t marry. In most cases, not even Deacons can marry. That’s a closed matter.

On the other hand, married men can become priests. They do in the Eastern Catholic Churches. And married men from other denominations have been admitted to the RC priesthood in some cases.

It would be more productive to focus the discusssion on whether the practice of ordaining married men to the priesthood should be expanded. The Anglican priests who have become Catholic is a starting point in the discussion. But that’s a very small sample size and they are men with extraordinary committment. They and thier wives left their Church “home,” their livelihood, and risked it all. It may be that the Church decides to try married clergy in some other situations.

For example, I would love to see more discussion in the Church about married deacons becoming priests. It could happen. Should it? Subject for a new thread?
 
In the early church, priests (presbyters) were married but not bishops. Is this correct? Peter was married. We know that because Jesus healed his mother-in-law.

I believe the decision for all priests (especially bishops) to remain single came about because of land issues at a bishop’s death (who owned the land, the bishop’s family or the church?). I recently had a few classes in church history and this is what the deacon who gave the class said.
 
Of course preists ought to be able to marry. The notion that they should not is one the ‘doctines which demons teach’ that Sha’ul ( Paul ) warned us about. The RC church has consistantly misinterpreted scripture on this issue. Yes, Simon Peter was married. So, if RCs claim that he was the first pope, why not follow his example ? There are plenty of folks who think that Yahshua was married to Mary M. I’m not quite sure why some folks have a problem with that idea. It wouldn’t detract from what Yahweh had him do. And for a Jewish man his age in the 2nd temple period NOT to have been married would indeed have been scandolous. The RC’s celibacy rule can and SHOULD change. But it would seem up to the laity to explain to Mr Ratzinger that he is just an ordinary fellow, and has no special insight that any of the rest of us don’t have. Most of the folks within the RC have been decieved and abused by RC doctrine. Just leave, if you’ll read the book of revelation, you’ll find that believers are called to leave babylon…‘come out of her, my people’ Something to think about. LSG
 
Of course preists ought to be able to marry. The notion that they should not is one the ‘doctines which demons teach’ that Sha’ul ( Paul ) warned us about. The RC church has consistantly misinterpreted scripture on this issue. Yes, Simon Peter was married.
What do you know about Paul’s marital status? and John’s? 🙂
 
“Should priests be allowed to marry?”

No. Jesus didn’t marry; neither should they. Also, married priests wouldn’t be able to fully answer their calling and lead their flock. The old arguments for a non-married clergy remain cogent.
Yes, it does.

I’m sure some people would also love for the Church to embrace abortion, artificial contraception, and homosexual ‘marriage.’ Ain’t gonna happen either.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top