Transfering Rites to Pursue Vocation as a Married Priest

  • Thread starter Thread starter ausculta
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
bpbasilphx said:
The over 20 sui juris churches (depending on how you count them) are divided among some half-dozen liturgical families or rites:
  1. Latin
  2. Byzantine
  3. West Syrian
  4. East Syrian
  5. Armenian
  6. Alexandrian
Most of the sui juris churches follow some form of the Byzantine liturgy.

By their very nature of being Eastern they wouldnot and could not be “Latin masses.” “Latin” or “Roman” are not synonyms for “Catholic.”

Somehow, I’ve always thought of Eastern Catholic as being similar to Eastern Orthodox, not the other way around.
Click to expand...
Thank you, now I know what a liturgical family is. Would the Roman Rite be it’s own family in the same way SF has it’s own county and is a single city?

I think being similar is a two way street. Unless you mean being contained in, then that would be like a subset. But they are not subsets that I can tell.
 
mlouise007 said:
… For you interest in observing the DL you could observe it equally at an Orthodox or ECC and not know the difference, other than when prayers are offered to the Patriarch and the Bishop in which case obviously the names are different. 🙂
Click to expand...
If they are so similar, does that include prayer responses, blessing, consecration(s)? What about the creed?

And to top it all off, why is there a schism? I mean what is left to be different?
 
StillWondering said:
Thank you, now I know what a liturgical family is. Would the Roman Rite be it’s own family in the same way SF has it’s own county and is a single city?

I think being similar is a two way street. Unless you mean being contained in, then that would be like a subset. But they are not subsets that I can tell.
Click to expand...
Within the Latin Church there are a number of usages: some are geographical (Ambrosian, Mozarabic, Bragan), and some are specifically limited to religious Orders (Dominican, Carmelite, Cistercian, Carthusian). None of those are Churches per-se, but even so all are ancient, unique, and venerable usages of the Western Church. Plus there’s is the relatively recent “Anglican Use” Missal. I suppose one could say they are a “subset” but they do all differ in varying degrees from the “standard” Roman Rite (including the Missal of Pius V).
 
malphono said:
Within the Latin Church there are a number of usages: some are geographical (Ambrosian, Mozarabic, Bragan), and some are specifically limited to religious Orders (Dominican, Carmelite, Cistercian, Carthusian). None of those are Churches per-se, but even so all are ancient, unique, and venerable usages of the Western Church. Plus there’s is the relatively recent “Anglican Use” Missal. I suppose one could say they are a “subset” but they do all differ in varying degrees from the “standard” Roman Rite (including the Missal of Pius V).
Click to expand...
Thanks.
 
What about Latin rite Catholics of the Anglican Use? According to wikipedia.org,

“Anglican Use was created following the Pastoral Provision issued by Pope John Paul II in 1980. In addition to establishing the liturgy and allowing for the parishes, the Pastoral Provision permits the ordination of married men into the priesthood of the Latin Rite of the Catholic Church.”

The Pastoral Provision and the permission to celebrate the Anglican Use are not necessarily linked. Not all former Episcopal clergy have permission to celebrate using Anglican Use."

Can only former Anglican clergymen who are married allowed to retain their marriages? Or can a married man go into the seminary and become a priest of an Anglican Use church?

And can some one tell me if this is true? The reason I was told as to why married men can’t be Latin rite Catholic priests is because in the early church before the East-West Schism, this topic arose. The 4 eastern Patriarchs thought it would be to the peoples benefit in their jurisdictions if married men would continue to be allowed to become priests. And the Pope thought it would be to the benefit of the people in his jurisdiction if priests were celibate. Then at one of the counsels after the split when some Orthodox came into communion with the Pope, they were allowed to retain their usage of married men becoming priests.

This would explain how the difference came about between the eastern and western rites of the Catholic Church and also of the Orthodox Church. In the Orthodox Church, because of our different history and ecclesiastical structure, married men are allowed to be priests in the eastern or western rites.
 
And can some one tell me if this is true? The reason I was told as to why married men can’t be Latin rite Catholic priests is because in the early church before the East-West Schism, this topic arose.
**Not quite true.

Clerical celibacy became the rule in the West ONLY after the Schism.

The further one got from Rome, the longer it took to enforce it.**
 
ausculta said:
To be honest, I’ve only seen an Eastern rite once. I don’t remember which rite (Melkite, Ruthenian, etc) it was, but I remember absolutely loving the reverence and beauty of it all. But I’m not sure if I should change rites based on this past experience alone. The honest reason for why I posted the OP is (after reading this bit of history from the biography) because I think it’s completely silly that I should have to change rites to answer a call to the priesthood simply because I’m married.

My original answer to this conundrum is that it must be God’s will that the discipline of celibacy is in place. And thus a married latin-rite catholic man cannot have a valid vocation to the priesthood. But to have it in place in one sector of the Church and not in another – is this sane??? Can God say yes AND no on a question? If you have a married man (latin-rite) and a married-man (melkite-rite), both with what they believe (after discernment) to be a call to the priesthood, then is it correct to say that only the melkite has the real vocation?!? Based on that superfluous distinction? Are we all Catholics or not?

I apologize for the rant. I’ve been in vocation limbo for so long it’s become hard to make sense of things. If this is disruptive, please feel free to end the thread. I just wanted to vent.

A
Click to expand...
Which Particular Eastern and Oriental Church in union w/Rome are you referring to when you say “Eastern Rite Church”???

U-C
 
Priests can be married in the Roman Catholic Church if they were first ordained outside of the church, and they have to have attended seminary. One of the priests in my parish (St. Aloysious in Pee Wee Valley, KY) is a converted Baptist. Part of their vow says that they won’t remarry if their wife dies. Of course it took him a long time to be ordained. He was first a parishoner and then a deacon for many years before finally being ordained. He was the only convert ordained in the United States last year.
 
machine86 said:
Priests can be married in the Roman Catholic Church if they were first ordained outside of the church, and they have to have attended seminary. One of the priests in my parish (St. Aloysious in Pee Wee Valley, KY) is a converted Baptist. Part of their vow says that they won’t remarry if their wife dies. Of course it took him a long time to be ordained. He was first a parishoner and then a deacon for many years before finally being ordained. He was the only convert ordained in the United States last year.
Click to expand...
This is true but most, if not all, of the converts that are married priests in the Latin Catholic Church were born into the denomination they came from. The Church would not look kindly upon a man who left the Catholic Church to be a married minister in a protestant denomination and who then tried to return to the Catholic Church to be ordained as a married priest.

The same way that the Church will not consider a transfer to a Byzantine Church for the sole purpose of being ordained as a married man.
 
ByzCath said:
This is true but most, if not all, of the converts that are married priests in the Latin Catholic Church were born into the denomination they came from. The Church would not look kindly upon a man who left the Catholic Church to be a married minister in a protestant denomination and who then tried to return to the Catholic Church to be ordained as a married priest.

The same way that the Church will not consider a transfer to a Byzantine Church for the sole purpose of being ordained as a married man.
Click to expand...
That was hardly what I was suggesting. I was merely bringing it up since most people are unaware that under this special circumstance, some priests are allowed to be married.
 
machine86 said:
That was hardly what I was suggesting. I was merely bringing it up since most people are unaware that under this special circumstance, some priests are allowed to be married.
Click to expand...
I did not think you were doing so, I was just heading off the inevitable question that would come up. After all, this thread asks the question if one can work around the discipline in the Latin Church by changing ritual Churches, the next question would be this one.
 
Given the deplorable state of the of the celebate Roman Catholic Priesthood, it should proove that a celebate life is IMPOSSIBLE. The Eastern Church is correct, Married Priests are the ONLY WAY TO GO.
 
Robertwilliam said:
Given the deplorable state of the of the celebate Roman Catholic Priesthood, it should proove that a celebate life is IMPOSSIBLE. The Eastern Church is correct, Married Priests are the ONLY WAY TO GO.
Click to expand...
Please explain what you mean by the “deplorable state”.

You are aware that the only married priests are the secular priests. That religious priests, or in the East more properly called, monk priests, are celibate.
 
Homosexuality is rampant in the Roman Catholic Priesthood, child molesters,etc. after all the things that came out, whenever I see a Roman Catholic Priest, I wonder, IS HE…?
 
Robertwilliam said:
Homosexuality is rampant in the Roman Catholic Priesthood, child molesters,etc. after all the things that came out, whenever I see a Roman Catholic Priest, I wonder, IS HE…?
Click to expand...
So what do you do with several million Catholic religious men (East and West) who are bound to celibacy by virtue of the nature of religious life, which cannot be changed, even by the Church?

Do you assume that all of us are . . .

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
Robertwilliam said:
Homosexuality is rampant in the Roman Catholic Priesthood, child molesters,etc. after all the things that came out, whenever I see a Roman Catholic Priest, I wonder, IS HE…?
Click to expand...
This is far from proven.

While some men may answer surveys that they have homosexual tendencies I do not think that there are any credible studies that show priests are actively engaging in sexual behavior, which no matter what kind would be wrong.

Also, the rate of child molestation within the Church is no greater than the rate of child molestation within any other community, that of families or done by coaches or other adults that are not family members.

It is important that you get your facts correct before making such statements.
 
We also have to remember that Catholics are not the only ones who have celibate men. The Orthodox do too. All monks are celibate.

The Buddhists do too. All monks are celibate.

There are even celibate Anglican and Lutheran monks. Anyone ever heard of the Monks of Taize?

Are you going to go on a witch hunt? Take out all the celibate men because we believe they are active homosexuals or peodophiles? That’s a little extreme and over generalized.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
JReducation said:
We also have to remember that Catholics are not the only ones who have celibate men. The Orthodox do too. All monks are celibate.

The Buddhists do too. All monks are celibate.

There are even celibate Anglican and Lutheran monks. Anyone ever heard of the Monks of Taize?

Are you going to go on a witch hunt? Take out all the celibate men because we believe they are active homosexuals or peodophiles? That’s a little extreme and over generalized.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
Click to expand...
What you say MAY be true, but I trust a Roman Catholic Priest about as far as I could throw one
 
Robertwilliam said:
What you say MAY be true, but I trust a Roman Catholic Priest about as far as I could throw one
Click to expand...
Well that is your personal problem to deal with.

Again, learn the facts rather then listen to the hype.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top