why can't priests marry?

[thomasf]

Whether you say “must be celibate” or not, I still reject your particular argument for the celibacy of priests in the Roman Rite, because invariably, that particular argument leads to Roman Catholics (who vastly outnumber us and have a history of attempting- oftensuccessfully-to suppress our traditions) viewing our priesthood as inferior to their own. The celibate priesthood is a matter of discipline, not doctrine, period.

And that’s what I’ve been writing, over and over again. Whether you reject the reason I wrote for celibacy of priests is irrelevant, it’s one that’s used and one that I’ve heard numerous times, including from Fr Corapi. It does not make Eastern Rite priests inferior. As long as a priest is properly ordained by someone with the legitimacy to do so, and meets the requirements for that rite, he’s a priest.

Imo you’re reading into what I write and putting your own biases into it. You’re the only one who has inferred that married priests of other rites are somehow inferior.

 

[guanophore]

thank you, I was given wrong info
so if i were a priest, there would be no problem with me falling in love and eventually being wed in the Catholic chuch anywhere, and still maintaining my current position at my parish, is that correct?

Priests do fall in love, but they have already accepted a full time vocation. I think you are misunderstanding the nature of the priesthood. Becoming and serving as a priest is not a “job” or a “position” from a secular point of view. Catholics believe that ministry is a divine calling from God. It exists whether the individual is serving in a parish, or any other “position”. It is not like employment where one seeks a career goal or position.

once a priest, wedlock is no longer possible if one wants to maintain his position in the catholic church…correct?

Catholics believe Holy ORders (consecration to the priesthood) is a permanent mark and change upon the person. This condition remains, whether the priest has a “position” or not.

thank you Irish Polock for the scripture refererence

As for priests getting married,

it would appear celebacy is being taught by …as you said…“Christ and St. Paul”

However let’s look at verse …

1Cor 7:25 …

It is clear this is NOT a commandment from Jesus but rather an opinion given by Paul.
I agree it may be advantageous for a priest not to be married so he can focus totally on his priestly duties within the church. However I fail to see a law which prevents priests from marrying.

As for 1Cor 7:1 Men are encouraged not to be immoral and touch a woman as a prostitute
made referenced to in the previous chapter 1Cor 6:16-17

1Cor 7:2-3 goes on to say

In 1Tim 4:3-4 Paul even tells us that God created foods …

back to my original question…why can’t a priest marry in the Catholic church?

I fail to see where God commands priests not to marry but only an opinion which the church clings to…

correct me if I am wrong

Thank You

Matt 19:10-12

10 The disciples said to him, “If such is the case of a man with his wife, it is not expedient to marry.” 11 But he said to them, “Not all men can receive this saying, but only those to whom it is given. 12 For there are eunuchs who have been so from birth, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by men, and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. He who is able to receive this, let him receive it.”

Jesus teaches that celibacy is a gift that is not given to everyone. He further commands that those to whom the gift is given should receive it. Candidates for ordination have many years of preparation, so they can come to discern if they have been given this gift, and if they are able to receive it.

The priesthood is not a “right” or a career choice, but a calling and a privilege. The Latin Rite prefers to choose for priests from among those who have been given the gift of celibacy. There are many reasons for this, but one of them is that the Latin Rite desperately needs ministry by those whose interests are not divided.

Another aspect of celibacy that is sought by the Latin Rite is that of spiritual procreation. Those who receive the gift of celibacy procreate in the spiritual realm, and this is the need of the Church at the present time.

 

[achristiantoo]

It took Jesus 3 years to teach His apostles, the early Catholic Church taught catechumens for 3 years before being baptized, while many refused baptism until their deathbed.

In Christianity it is a given that God calls sinners to repentance, Jesus called Peter a fisherman, Jesus himself was a carpenter and saved the many.

Peter called forth the first council to appoint Judas replacement, and these to select from had to meet their apostolic requirement in order to walk the walk and talk the talk.

Thus instruction to the priesthood is vital to this ministry of reconciliation. God can call anyone, but from His calling, God trained 12 men for 3 years to baptize all Nations to Himself.

Peace be with you

Good point, Like i said education is a wonderful thing

but y does it have to be a college institution?

if I wanted to be a priest but could not pay for college …

why couldn’t I be trained by the best the Catholic church has to offer?

then after four, six, or ten years of training under Father “Jones” and “Smith” I can be ordained into priesthood with Father Jones’ and Smiths’ blessing.

 

[RyanBlack]

And that’s what I’ve been writing, over and over again. Whether you reject the reason I wrote for celibacy of priests is irrelevant, it’s one that’s used and one that I’ve heard numerous times, including from Fr Corapi. It does not make Eastern Rite priests inferior. As long as a priest is properly ordained by someone with the legitimacy to do so, and meets the requirements for that rite, he’s a priest.

Imo you’re reading into what I write and putting your own biases into it. You’re the only one who has inferred that married priests of other rites are somehow inferior.

I’ve made no such inference, and I’ll take you at your word that you mean no such implication. However, I assure you, the doctrinal/theological arguments you’re using for what even you agree is a matter of discipline and not doctrine/theology have indeed been used to suggest that the married priesthood of the Eastern Churches is inferior to the celibate priesthood of the Roman Church. Just because you’re not doing it doesn’t mean that it has not and does not still happen. If you haven’t already done so, you might investigate the history of the treatment of Eastern Catholics in the U.S. vis-a-vis the married priesthood. It’s quite an ugly history in which Eastern Catholics have been treated terribly, and it supports my contention that the argument you’re using is indeed used to suggest that a married priesthood is intrinsically inferior to a celibate one.

By the way, are your fee of your own biases? Is Fr. Corapi? Of course not. No one is.

 

[achristiantoo]

I’m kinda puzzled why people who are either not part of the church, or under a different rite, really have a problem with the disciplines of the roman/latin rite churches. Nobody is twisting anyone’s arms to become priests or forcing people at gunpoint.

Thomas, I do not have a problem with it. I wanted to comfirm what a Catholic told me and from this forum, he is correct…

If I am a single man who desires to be a priest or pastor of a church, AND keeping my options open to being married …

I would not be able to be a priest in a Roman/Latin rite Catholic church…right?

reason being I would be required to take an oath of celibacy … right?

No oath, I can not be ordained … correct?

Why would you want to become a latin/roman rite priest if you wanted to get married?

because there are many great leaders of the church who are and/or were married whom I may desire to follow in their footsteps…
Peter for one
Rev Billy Graham
Dr. David Jeremiah

Do you believe Peter would in his heart declare…
“To follow me, single priests should never be married ”?

yes Jesus was single, but again Jesus never said … “all priests must never be married”

 

[achristiantoo]

Priests do fall in love, but they have already accepted a full time vocation. I think you are misunderstanding the nature of the priesthood. Becoming and serving as a priest is not a “job” or a “position” from a secular point of view. Catholics believe that ministry is a divine calling from God. It exists whether the individual is serving in a parish, or any other “position”. It is not like employment where one seeks a career goal or position.

Catholics believe Holy ORders (consecration to the priesthood) is a permanent mark and change upon the person. This condition remains, whether the priest has a “position” or not.

Matt 19:10-12

10 The disciples said to him, “If such is the case of a man with his wife, it is not expedient to marry.” 11 But he said to them, “Not all men can receive this saying, but only those to whom it is given. 12 For there are eunuchs who have been so from birth, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by men, and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. He who is able to receive this, let him receive it.”

Jesus teaches that celibacy is a gift that is not given to everyone. He further commands that those to whom the gift is given should receive it. Candidates for ordination have many years of preparation, so they can come to discern if they have been given this gift, and if they are able to receive it.

The priesthood is not a “right” or a career choice, but a calling and a privilege. The Latin Rite prefers to choose for priests from among those who have been given the gift of celibacy. There are many reasons for this, but one of them is that the Latin Rite desperately needs ministry by those whose interests are not divided.

Another aspect of celibacy that is sought by the Latin Rite is that of spiritual procreation. Those who receive the gift of celibacy procreate in the spiritual realm, and this is the need of the Church at the present time.

well then, if one has the gift of celibacy, there would be no need for an oath.

 

[achristiantoo]

Wait, so you think the protestant church leaders in the 19th century were denying God’s command by insisting on married men for the missions?

You think that they had no ‘right’ to make a pastoral decision over what they thought most appropriate?

You think that God’s ‘command’ is utterly inclusive?

Well, then, what think you of laws (state laws) that limit the age of marriage, or say that people within a certain ‘degree’ cannot marry? Those laws are not ‘God’s command’, are they - but I don’t believe that you would say that a state has ‘no right’ to establish a law that is not God’s command ‘as you understand it’.

So perhaps you are in a good old god fearing church and up come a 13 year old boy and girl who want to get married. By ‘God’s command’ there is no ‘law’ to say that they cannot … but by state law in your state, they cannot.

Does your pastor go ahead and marry the two? If not. . .why not, when it would not break "God’s command’. . .what ‘right’ has he to ‘deny God’s command?’

my answer has nothing to do with the OP

start a new thread and i will gladly answer

 

[achristiantoo]

Thomas, I do not have a problem with it. I wanted to comfirm what a Catholic told me and from this forum, he is correct…

If I am a single man who desires to be a priest or pastor of a church, AND keeping my options open to being married …

I would not be able to be a priest in a Roman/Latin rite Catholic church…right?

reason being I would be required to take an oath of celibacy … right?

No oath, I can not be ordained … correct?

because there are many great leaders of the church who are and/or were married whom I may desire to follow in their footsteps…
Peter for one
Rev Billy Graham
Dr. David Jeremiah

Do you believe Peter would in his heart declare…
“To follow me, single priests should never be married ”?

yes Jesus was single, but again Jesus never said … “all priests must never be married”

please respond to all my questions with a yes or no without an explanation.

thank you

 

[vsedriver]

Really, to my way of thinking, these sort of arguments amount to attempting to provide theological explanations for a practice that arose in response to practical reasons (the passing of Church property from priests to their heirs, who did not always themselves become priests, so the Church was losing property).

Is it true that only unmarried priests can be made bishops in the Eastern Orthodox? and if it is true why do they have that discipline? And can a married priest rise to bishop in the Easter Catholic rites?

 

[guanophore]

Good point, Like i said education is a wonderful thing

but y does it have to be a college institution?

if I wanted to be a priest but could not pay for college …

why couldn’t I be trained by the best the Catholic church has to offer?

Of course you can. Seminarians rarely pay for their own education. The congregation pays.

then after four, six, or ten years of training under Father “Jones” and “Smith” I can be ordained into priesthood with Father Jones’ and Smiths’ blessing.

You may have no understanding of formal education. On the job training is important, but one cannot substitute if for formal education. Both are necessary.

The Latin rite prefers to choose from among those who are called to celibacy,and seek a formal education. It is believed that these persons will be of best service to the flock.

 

[pablope]

Good point, Like i said education is a wonderful thing

but y does it have to be a college institution?

if I wanted to be a priest but could not pay for college …

why couldn’t I be trained by the best the Catholic church has to offer?

then after four, six, or ten years of training under Father “Jones” and “Smith” I can be ordained into priesthood with Father Jones’ and Smiths’ blessing.

No, not Fr. Jones or Fr. Smith. Only a bishop can confer Holy Orders. Before ordination, there has to be the final comfirmation and approval of a bishop, and then the ordinaition by laying of hands on the head.

This ensures apostolic succession.

 

[guanophore]

If I am a single man who desires to be a priest or pastor of a church, AND keeping my options open to being married …

You are looking at this from a human point of view. The priesthood is not just a carreer or job choice that a person gets because they “desire” it.

Yes, desire is important, as no one should be pressed into ministry unless they have a conviction they are called to it. But a priest keeps no “options” open for himself. He submits his life entirely to God, and is taken up into the cross and priesthood of Christ. His life is no longer his to live, but he dies, and his life is hidden with Christ in God. He takes up his cross, and turns his back on every “option” he might have held open for himself.

I would not be able to be a priest in a Roman/Latin rite Catholic church…right?

I would not rule out that God is calling you to it, and that ulitmately He might lead you in this direction, but at this point, it does not sound like you are even Catholic, so that would be the place to start.

reason being I would be required to take an oath of celibacy … right?

And that you are not Catholic - that is required even to enter into the discernment process for becoming a priest.

No oath, I can not be ordained … correct?

Married persons can be ordained as deacons, and there are many pastoral services and leadership positions that are occupied by laypersons, both married and unmarried.

because there are many great leaders of the church who are and/or were married whom I may desire to follow in their footsteps…
Peter for one

Peter was Catholic.

Rev Billy Graham

Billy Graham had formal education.

Do you believe Peter would in his heart declare…
“To follow me, single priests should never be married ”?

Whatever Peter bound on earth was bound in heaven. So, too, has this discipline been made binding in the Latin Rite. If you are unwilling to embrace the discipline, then you are not being called to it. It is that simple. God knows the Latin Rite desires to choose from among those called to celibacy. If you are being called, He will give you the gift.

yes Jesus was single, but again Jesus never said … “all priests must never be married”

You are getting your cart before your horse. Let us know when you have finished RCIA and entered the Church, then we can have this discussion again.

Go register for some classes at your local community college.

 

[guanophore]

well then, if one has the gift of celibacy, there would be no need for an oath.

When you contact the community college near you, see if they have a class in ethics, philosophy, or logic. Your reasoning needs some work.

According to your reasoning, if a person is called to marriage, then there is no need for a wedding vow, so why bother to have weddings or make promises?

please respond to all my questions with a yes or no without an explanation.

thank you

LOL!

Sorry, but you are asking them based upon flawed premises, so that is not a good idea.

 

[vsedriver]

Thomas, I do not have a problem with it. I wanted to comfirm what a Catholic told me and from this forum, he is correct…

If I am a single man who desires to be a priest or pastor of a church, AND keeping my options open to being married …

 

[vsedriver]

[QU

None of these gentlemen are ordained priests of the Latin Rite of the Catholic Church. They lack apostolic succession.

Please note I forgot to delete Peter’s name from the list. He was of course ordained by Christ and is a Catholic.
[/quote]

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

RyanBlack;7796244]Peace be with you also.

Of course I can’t proved that the married apostles did not take vows of chastity with the consent of their wives… I would add that a couple of writing from St. Jerome and Tertullian do not prove universal practice.

RyanBlack, you have introduced “universal practice”, you have changed the subject matter being emphasized here.

Do you deny that the Eastern Monastic “Orthodox” Priests left Constantinople to live celibate lives away from the influences of the, now reigning Emperors beginning with “Constantine”, when the former resisted any political influences on the Church?

It appears you have forgotten the great mystics and Monastic life from the Eastern Fathers, living celibate lives.

Although the practice was never universal, one cannot deny the ancient practice of celibacy in the Catholic Church.

I believe “Origen” left himself, to be made a eunuch by “castration”, to prove his allegiance to Jesus to live as a virgin, permanently celibate, again proving the faith of celibacy was in practice.

Also, history clearly shows that your claim of unchanged practice of celibacy in the West is false. Priestly celibacy was not universally enforced in the West until about the 11th century, and that was done in response to problems of Church property passing to the children of married priests.

Again you are mistaken, the practice of “celibacy” is not enforced, and it is not universal. The practice of “celibacy” in the Catholic Church began with Jesus Christ and the apostles, and continued down to today in the Catholic Church, “this is unchanged”. This does not mean celibacy was or is practiced by all Catholic clergy both in East and West. For in the West, Permanent Deacons are allowed to be married one time, and married priest who convert to Catholicism remain married, I am not sure if all these married priest with their wives take a vow of chastity or not today, as was the practice in times past.

Thank you for your Eastern clarification.

 

[achristiantoo]

No, not Fr. Jones or Fr. Smith. Only a bishop can confer Holy Orders. Before ordination, there has to be the final comfirmation and approval of a bishop, and then the ordinaition by laying of hands on the head.

This ensures apostolic succession.

ok thank you

 

[achristiantoo]

Right, you could not be an ordained priest in the Catholic Latin Rite.

 

[LDNCatholic]

This is a reason why I am not catholic today.

A shame, but the Church is not supposed to bow to the whims of people.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

vsedriver;7798148:

thank you for comfirming what I thaught was true in regards to celibacy in the catholic church.

This is a reason why I am not catholic today.

Funny, it’s one of the reasons why I AM Catholic.

Of course, being a woman I can’t be a priest (which is fine with me) anyway.