Wow..... I can only hope this isn’t true

[Crusader13]

don’t think anyone truly worries about girls helping out at the altar or recieving communion in the hand. There must be something in the back of peoples mind that triggers them. Some endgame vision they feel is materializing.

I appreciate the respect and genuineness of your question.

My concern isn’t with the idea of women or the laity helping out at their parish nor fulfilling some kind of role.

However, I don’t understand the need for the changes which have occurred thus far. For example, you framed your question around the idea that there is nothing inherently wrong with girls serving at the altar.

Yet, the issue didn’t just arise in the 20th century with no precedent before it. Women serving at the altar and even the laity entering the sanctuary or handing out communion was always prohibited based in no small part on theological and biblical grounds.

Nothing, with regards to those truths which were once given for the prohibition have changed. What was once true back then is still true today. And yet within the last three decades the prohibitions have been lifted. Why? Nothing has been proven untrue about the past documents that prohibited it, but they still found a way, whether through indults or modern documents, to change these teachings.

 

[Zaccheus]

Zaccheus:

We contend with fallen angels. Immortal horribly evil creatures determined to bring down the Church and drag as many souls as possible to perdition.
Thing like communion in the hand, having other people distribute the Eucharist instead of the priest, ………… To introduce corruption by little and little.

Wait, so you are claiming that practices allowed by the Pope are introducing corruption? Are introducing evil into the church? That the Pope and the bishops are in effect, doing the work of ‘fallen angels immortal horribly evil creatures’?

No. I am saying that the enemies of the Church sometimes try to corrupt us one step at a time.

Therefore misrepresentation of the words of the Holy Father is a thing to be concerned about.

If people can be convinced the Pope favors dropping priestly celibacy, that’s a step toward getting support from believers for an end to priestly celibacy.

 

[ioannes_pius]

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

 

[ioannes_pius]

On a more seriousness note,

Celibacy is not absolutely necessary for effective fulfillment of the priestly ministry, as stated by Pope St. Paul VI in Sacerdotalis Caelibatus, and as demonstrated by the constant custom of the Eastern Churches.

That being said, there is immense value to mandated priestly celibacy and, in my opinion, it would not be a good idea to get rid of it. In a certain sense, the celibate priest is more Christlike than a married priest (again, see Sacerdotalis Caelibatus for an explanation of this).

Now, I realize that what LifeSiteNews is saying here is not quite accurate; Pope Francis is not opening to the door to an abolition of priestly celibacy in the Latin Church. If they are correct, and the paragraph from the Synod document was simply inserted verbatim into the Apostolic Exhortation, then only married permanent deacons who have had a fruitful ministry in the areas of the Amazonian region with legitimate necessity for it will permitted to be ordained to the priesthood. That’s it.

Even if the Pope were to no longer require priestly celibacy in the Latin Church, I would submit to it and follow him. Likewise, if he were to require priestly celibacy in the Eastern Churches, I would submit to it and follow him. As much as I didn’t like it or thought it was a bad idea, I would still follow it.

 

[jack63]

Pope Francis’ exact words on abolishing celibacy were…

I would rather give my life than change the law on celibacy.

Yes Pope Francis is proposing more exceptions to the celibacy requirement in limited circumstances, but this talk about abolishing priestly celibacy is deeply unproductive.

 

[godisgood77]

As usual, Lifesite proves that they are not interested in doing anything constructive… at all

 

[C.Ray]

Once a man is ordained celibate, he cannot marry.

Are there any priests in the Catholic Church, Latin and otherwise, who are permitted to marry after ordination? If there are (and I don’t know), then could ordination itself be changed in the Latin church so that the prohibition on marriage after ordination does not apply to future ordinations?

If not, could the general practice of “normally” ordaining single men be phased out? Could married men being admitted to priestly orders in the future become the norm?

I’m not advocating anything one way or the other. Just asking questions.

 

[Gorgias]

Are there any priests in the Catholic Church, Latin and otherwise, who are permitted to marry after ordination?

No.

Neither are deacons, although if a married deacon becomes a widower, he might be given permission to marry again, if there would be hardship to his family if he did not.

 

[Crusader13]

No of course not. But the question still remains, if the day comes when we are faced with changing the practice of priestly celibacy, should we not ask why?

If the church does allow for married priests, in unique circumstances, then why is there a need for this practice to be implemented Church wide?

The argument isn’t that the Church can’t change the practice; but who is pushing for the change and for what reason? That is what is at the heart of the matter.

 

[IanM]

Quite simply we are witnessing Schism under this pontificate as this tweet today from Edward Pentin containing the translation of a statement from Cardinal Woelki makes clear.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

 

[HomeschoolDad]

That being said, there is immense value to mandated priestly celibacy and, in my opinion, it would not be a good idea to get rid of it. In a certain sense , the celibate priest is more Christlike than a married priest (again, see Sacerdotalis Caelibatus for an explanation of this).

My thoughts exactly. Celibacy, while not absolutely essential to the priesthood (many uninformed Catholics would be stunned to hear this, I managed to scandalize a supposedly Catholic-educated young woman about this once), is a rich, valuable gift, enables a man to serve God and His people with an undivided heart ad mind, and ensures that the potential priest “have skin in the game” and “put his money where his mouth is”. In short, it’s an indication of sincerity like none other. (And please don’t anyone say that I suggested married clergymen are insincere, because I suggested no such thing.)

NO. Once a man is ordained celibate, he cannot marry. This is the constant Tradition of both East and West. What the Eastern Catholic Churches allow is for a man who is already married to become a priest . If a man is ordained celibate, he must remain celibate.

Just out of curiosity, is this doctrine, or just the perennial practice of the Church?

I knew of one case where a priest left the Byzantine Rite for Orthodoxy, and was allowed to marry. Just guessing, I would assume that in the eyes of the Orthodox, he had been unjustly forced to remain celibate by the RCC, and that allowing him to marry was an act of economia. Any Eastern Church experts here, is that a fair bet?

This priest said otherwise:

Public Lecture by Fr. Hans Zollner, SJ – Ukrainian Catholic Archeparchy of Philadelphia

The video of the lecture isn’t up yet but he said that there were less abusers in celibate priests. However, as the deacon from the USCCB said, even one case of abuse is one too many.

I just wanted to comment on that. My experience in Reformed church circles, unfortunately, is that neither married men on the clergy, neither (since Reformed churches allow it) married women on the clergy are a protection against abuse. I can even think of cases where it had exactly the opposite effect, because people wanted to protect the innocent family of the guilty minister. And then you have the just as complex situations where abuse is committed by the close family member of a minister (son, wife…).

I am very interested to know this, and I think comments and anecdotal evidence, such as are offered here, are very helpful in understanding the abuse crisis, and to what extent celibacy does — or does not — contribute to it. Clearly secretive environments, and a culture that “covers up”, can exist even where people are married.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

I have wondered if the whole pastoral, clergy-and-laity thing — Catholic and otherwise — sometimes creates conditions for abuse. Here you have people, in sensitive, vulnerable, and possibly hurtful circumstances, seeking help for life’s most intimate and deeply-felt problems — not always sexual or even marital — and bonds can develop with those who are supposed to be caring for them and shepherding them through the crises. Emotions get very raw. People, including their counselors, are only human. The helpers themselves may develop feelings they didn’t know they had. One thing leads to another. And this transcends any particular religion.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

We have always had married Latin Rite Diocesean priests in our parish, so, we are used to it.

Where do you get so many? I have read that it is not uncommon for a diocese to have only one, or none, and I do not meet them very often at all in the diocese as opposed to in the Ordinariate.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

I knew of one case where a priest left the Byzantine Rite for Orthodoxy, and was allowed to marry. Just guessing, I would assume that in the eyes of the Orthodox, he had been unjustly forced to remain celibate by the RCC, and that allowing him to marry was an act of economia .

I’ve read that the Orthodox would sometimes allow a widowed priest to re-marry if he had young children and presumably they needed a mother.

 

[Emeraldlady]

The argument isn’t that the Church can’t change the practice; but who is pushing for the change and for what reason? That is what is at the heart of the matter.

It’s the Church herself recognising the dire lack of Priests and Sacraments in remote communities in Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, Ecuador, French Guiana, Guyana, Peru, Suriname and Venezuela to name the specific areas.

 

[OddBird]

I think this is probably true - and that predators, at any rate, could well be drawn to churches because of the wealth of vulnerable targets they offer and the shelter of a privileged status. And predators can be heterosexual predators, often married and apparently respectable. They simply prey mostly on teenage girls instead of teenage boys.

 

[Emeraldlady]

I have wondered if the whole pastoral, clergy-and-laity thing — Catholic and otherwise — sometimes creates conditions for abuse. Here you have people, in sensitive, vulnerable, and possibly hurtful circumstances, seeking help for life’s most intimate and deeply-felt problems — not always sexual or even marital — and bonds can develop with those who are supposed to be caring for them and shepherding them through the crises. Emotions get very raw. People, including their counselors, are only human. The helpers themselves may develop feelings they didn’t know they had. One thing leads to another. And this transcends any particular religion.

And that is why now seminarians undergo psychological testing with a strong emphasis on affective maturity. The Church envisions that only older and recognizably wise married men would be suitable for ordination in the Amazon.

 

[Elf01]

I’ve read that the Orthodox would sometimes allow a widowed priest to re-marry if he had young children and presumably they needed a mother.

I wonder how the women feel about that? If it was me I think I’d feel I was being persued as a potential mother and not a partner, and that would turn me off.

 

[AlNg]

they still found a way, whether through indults or modern documents, to change these teachings.

True…

 

[Tis_Bearself]

I think the idea dates back to a more traditional time when people had more practical and less romantic ideas about marriage. Also, the priest was educated and highly respected in the community, and might have been seen as a good catch.