Who would decide if priests could marry?

[Br.Rich_SFO]

Feanaro's Wife:

Thank you! I think I finally understand. If the discipline were going to be changed, it would be up to the Pope.

Even if the entire Catholic population (clergy and laypersons) opposed it, he would have the ultimate decision.

Likewise, if the entire Catholic population wanted it but the Pope didn’t, it wouldn’t happen.

If I do not have this right, please tell me. If I do, I am going to use this to explain to a non-Catholic how the discipline could change.

Malia

That is correct.

This is confusing because the original question was about “priests being allowed to marry” instead of married men being Ordained to the priesthood.

The Pope does not normally operate without consulting and listening to others. He does not have to however.

 

[tuopaolo]

FCEGM:

Just to clarify: no permission will ever be given for men who are priests to marry; what could be changed is the discipline of allowing married men to become priests.

Both things could change. Whether they will or are likely to is another story.

Deacons already are sometimes permitted by way of permission to remarry after already having been ordained. If priests were admitted from married ranks, it is quite likely that widowed priests would also at least sometimes be given permission to remarry.

Just because something is a discipline does not mean it is unrelated to doctrine. Disciplines reflect and express doctrines and are a living out of the doctrines. A proposed change in discipline can be as bad as a false doctrine is bad for a discipline can be “false” too in that it is not a true expression of a true doctrine.

 

[Forest-Pine]

To make matters more confusing here, someone said by pope or by ecumenical council (which the pope would obviously be part of). If canon law can be changed by ecumenical council, then could it be by majority vote?

Also, you might be interested in the current discussions in Australia, posted in the thread Eastern Catholics & The Synod:

prodromos:

From Australia…

Priests Council’s Synod call for married clergyThe number of Australian Catholic priests needs to increase more than 20-fold by reopening the priesthood to married men and possibly women, according to the National Council of Priests.

Media Release on Submission from the Executive of the National Council of Priests of Australia to the World Synod of Bishops XI Ordinary General Assembly (National Council of Priests of Australia)In regard to achieving this dramatic increase in the numbers of ordained Catholic Priests we believe that there are at least 6 strategies which should be explored thoroughly, through honest and open discussion, and supported and encouraged by a world wide exercise of prayerful discernment.

Vocation is very much about God calling. The discernment about WHOM God is calling to Priesthood at this time is possible only if the whole Church is speaking to God and listening to God.

We would like the Church, locally and across the world to explore these six strategies, mindful all the time that God is the One who ultimately calls people.

1. We need to promote the vocation to Priesthood, including some clarification about what Priesthood involves.
2. Single and widowed men of good character and standing in their community could be appropriately trained to lead the celebration of Eucharist within their community.
3. We ask the Church to seriously consider extending the invitation to Priesthood to married men.
4. We would welcome serious consideration of the re-instatement as Priests-in-ministry of Priests who have resigned from the Priesthood in order to marry.
5. Should not consideration also be given to allowing already ordained Priests who seek to marry, permission to do so and continue in ministry?
6. Finally, there is abundant material across the world which explores the history and questions why all Catholic Priests have to be male. Is this really by Divine direction? Is it fair and just that open and honest debate about the history and theology of women in Priesthood is restricted so heavily?

Everything mentioned in the working document is very important as we continue to draw the people of the world into the Mystery of Jesus through Eucharist.

But most critical of all issues is the truth that many thousands of Catholic communities around the world are losing their identity because they are unable to celebrate Eucharist regularly, reverently and relevantly.

I notice that is appears to descend in orders of importance. It starts off with “need” then “could” then “seriously consider” then “would welcome” then “Should not…?” then “Is it fair?” My guess is that the women part was thrown in so that they could discuss it and “officially” reach the same conclusion as before, but be able to say they actually discussed it. However, married men becoming priests and priests being able to marry and retain their status both seem to be legitimate requests.

 

[tuopaolo]

Any decree of an ecumenical council has to be approved by the pope for it to have ecumenical authority – if the approval does not happen at the time the decree is made, it must be made after the fact “retroactively” if you will.

If a decree is not that unanimous it would have not as much ecumenical authority but if it were given approval by the pope, it would retain whatever authority the pope invests in it.

An ecumenical council is more of a special case or special instrument or way of utilization the general authority of the pope and bishops. It’s kind of like how an Apostolic Constitution is a special case or instrument or way of utilization of the general authority of the pope.

At least this is my opinion

 

[Vatican_II]

tuopaolo:

Any decree of an ecumenical council has to be approved by the pope for it to have ecumenical authority – if the approval does not happen at the time the decree is made, it must be made after the fact “retroactively” if you will.

If a decree is not that unanimous it would have not as much ecumenical authority but if it were given approval by the pope, it would retain whatever authority the pope invests in it.

An ecumenical council is more of a special case or special instrument or way of utilization the general authority of the pope and bishops. It’s kind of like how an Apostolic Constitution is a special case or instrument or way of utilization of the general authority of the pope.

At least this is my opinion

Your opinion is correct in the fact that an ecumenical council draws its authority to promulgate doctrine through its communion with the Pope. Should the Pope not approve of all or any part of the recommendations of the ecumenical council such parts are null and void. There has been debated in the past that where in the selection of a new Pope, more than one candidate claims the chair of Peter, that the recommendation of the general council would be greater than the “Pope”. This of course has not happened in recent history where the papal electors were restricted to the cardinals, but had occurred I believe twice before. However in both cases the elected Pope while accepting the election by the general council did not formally approve of this doctrine