Posted on 12/16/2006 1:07:45 PM PST by Zemo
Wednesday, December 06, 2006
Should Catholic priests have the right to marry?
A Protestant friend who saw the video of Father Plushy giving his Barney blessing -- and truly, I don't know what is more irritating, the priest or the full house of ninnies who sat there singing and clapping -- writes this morning to say:
That video you just posted is the best single argument I have ever seen for ending the celibacy of the priesthood.
Well, maybe. One is entitled to wonder how seriously Father Plushy takes his vow of celibacy, or anything about the dignity and responsibilities of the priesthood. Still, even if priests were allowed to marry, why would that necessarily prevent future Father Plushies from entering the priesthood? On paper, it wouldn't, but if it made the priesthood open to men who would consider it if they could also fulfill vocations as husbands and fathers, it seems to me that you'd stand a greater chance of creating a more healthy manly culture within the ranks of clergy.
Priestly celibacy is not a dogmatic teaching, but rather a discipline of the Catholic Church. The Pope could not overturn the Church's teaching on (say) abortion, but he could theoretically change the celibacy discipline with a stroke of his pen. But should he?
Mandatory clerical celibacy is a discipline that was imposed on Catholic clergy in the Middle Ages. In the Orthodox churches, priests are still permitted to marry, as was the ancient practice. There are limitations on this -- you have to marry before your ordination, and the bishops are drawn from the monastic ranks, which means they must be celibates. But parish priests can and do have families. I've been going to an Orthodox church for a year or so now, though only in full communion for a few months, and I see that the two priests at my parish -- both of whom are married, and have children -- are really wonderful. I find it hard to understand why the Catholic Church insists on clerical celibacy.
Well, let me take that back: for many conservative Catholics, the celibacy requirement is seen as a valuable sign of contradiction to our oversexed age. That resonates with me. I think, though, that it's also the case that many orthodox Catholics resist thinking about ending the celibacy discipline because it's something that progressive Catholics have been pushing for, and to do so would appear to be a major concession to their agenda. But I tell you, after the Scandal revealed how the Catholic priesthood has become heavily gay, and at least some of the gays in the priesthood in positions of power were shown to be systematically using their power to discourage straight men considered a threat to them from continuing in the priesthood -- the "Goodbye, Good Men" thesis, and believe me, I have heard directly from seminarians and priests in the trenches how this works -- more than a few orthodox Catholics (including at least one deeply conservative priest) have said to me that it's time to consider ending mandatory celibacy. Before I even considered becoming Orthodox, I had spoken to Catholic friends about my own doubts on the wisdom of maintaining an exclusively celibate clergy (the distinction being that there will always be men and women called formally to the celibate state, and they must be honored and provided for, as they always have been in the Christian church.)
I think they're right. I mean, look, by year's end we will have seen ordained to the Catholic priesthood of two former Episcopal priests, Al Kimel and Dwight Longenecker, who converted to Catholicism. I have every expectation that they'll be wonderful, faithful, orthodox Catholic priests. And they are also married men. If they are to be welcomed and affirmed as Catholic priests, why not others? To be sure, these men are not campaigning for the end of the celibacy discipline, and as the Longenecker article I linked to in this sentence brings out, a married clergy poses special problems of its own.
Still, I think it's worth talking about, especially because to open up the Catholic priesthood to married men requires no change in the Church's doctrinal teaching. Would bringing married men into the priesthood cause a culture change within the priesthood that would discourage the Father Plushies from celebrating their diversity? I don't know. But I'd sure like to hear what orthodox Catholics and others have to say about it.
Of course they should, as long as they are no longer Catholic Priest.
To each other? In some of the CommiecRAT States they can.
If they vowed they would not marry, then they shouldn't marry.
If the Pope mandates they, as priests, cannot marry, then it should be followed, as well.
Eastern Rite Catholics have married clergy along the lines of Orthodox Greek Rite practice and yet they are fully Catholic (the so called Uniates) and I also think this is allowed among the Coptic Rite Catholics and other Eastern Rite Catholics.
So to be correct, Latin Rite Catholic clergy are the only Catholic clergy forbidden to marry.
You are correct sir.
So to be correct, Latin Rite Catholic clergy are the only Catholic clergy forbidden to marry though this is in violation of the rulings of the Ecumenical Council on married clergy (though I forget which one).
So if someone is Irish and wants to be a married Catholic priest he has to move to the Western Ukraine and join the Greek Catholic Church?
Why is an Orthodox Christian butting in where his opinion is unwanted?
However, I'll note that in neither any Rite of the Catholic Church nor in any Orthodox Church do "priests have a right to marry."
Rather, married men are permitted to become priests. And even in Orthodoxy, only married men who will be parish priests, as opposed to monks, and who will not be bishops, may be ordained to the priesthood.
The Church IS NOT a democracy, this matter has been settled and reaffirmed by successive Popes for centuries. Any priest who cannot remain celibate will have no problem being released from his vows. Nothing else needs to be said on the subject.
You want in the club, play by the rules. If not, go play golf in Augusta.
The Orthodox consider the Catholics to be a fellow Apostolic church that has fallen into heresy and schism and thus their business - especially since the Pope has made a reconciliation with the Orthodox his mission. So that makes what the Catholics do, Orthodox business.
I have a problem with a universal church not having universal rules. The ecumenical councils are clear on this.
***************
LOL!
The Church is in fact a republic. If is not, then why did the Apostolic bishops go to ecumenical councils and base their decisions on the vote of the majority?
Even the Pope is bound by the decisions of the Ecumenical Councils - arrived at by ballot.
Dear Zemo,
Mr. Dreher is not a Catholic. In fact, it is my understanding that in order to be received into the Orthodox Church, he was obligated to formally and publicly renounce the "errors" of the Catholic Church.
Thus, unlike the vast majority of Orthodox Christians, Mr. Dreher is an apostate from the Catholic Faith.
Catholics really aren't interested in the inaccurate, bumbling ramblings of apostates.
"The Orthodox consider the Catholics to be a fellow Apostolic church that has fallen into heresy and schism and thus their business - especially since the Pope has made a reconciliation with the Orthodox his mission. So that makes what the Catholics do, Orthodox business."
That's nice. The Catholic Church consider the Orthodox to be an Aposotlic Church that has fallen into schism and heresy, as well. Nonetheless, even though we hope and pray for reunification with the Orthodox, we try to avoid the hubris of telling the Orthodox how to do things.
We acknowledge that even should we ever find a way to reunion (and I believe that reunion will not happen before the Second Coming of Jesus Christ), we will still have somewhat different customs, traditions and practices, and it would be better for a peaceful reunion if we didn't try to tell each other how to run each other's Churches.
sitetest
Yes, but laymen have no ability to force any ecumenical council.
Is that not what happened? The Club violated its own rules and membership splintered?
Dear Zemo,
"The Church is in fact a republic. If is not, then why did the Apostolic bishops go to ecumenical councils and base their decisions on the vote of the majority?
"Even the Pope is bound by the decisions of the Ecumenical Councils - arrived at by ballot."
That may be the Orthodox view (and even there, I'm not sure I've ever run into any Orthodox who said the Church is a "republic"), but it is not the Catholic view.
In that Mr. Dreher is commenting on the CATHOLIC Church, and not Orthodoxy, it seems irrelevant what Orthodox think the Church is.
sitetest
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.