Posted on 06/11/2015 11:27:59 AM PDT by marshmallow
An Irish bishop said that he will ask his brother bishops to institute a commission to study the possible ordination of married men to the priesthood and women to the diaconate.
“I think the other bishops would be open to the idea of a discussion and we are reaching a situation where we have to look at all the options possible,” Bishop Leo O’Reilly of Kilmore told The Irish Catholic.
Kilmore bishop wants Church to consider married priests
The good bishop needs to consider re-reading the most recent encyclicals on such matters, go to confession, and reflect on what he has said.
For our part, we need to pray for him, and the whole of Ireland.
And while there are married priests, it is not the norm.
With luck I have only another 25 or so years on this little blue ball we float on - I do not even want to think what the USA or the church will be in 50 years.
Does he not know that the are many “churches” out there that he can join, and leave mine alone?
IMO married priests will become the norm within the decade. Once the Church agreed to start accepting married Orthodox and Anglican priests and their families, it became an indefensible position. Right now where I live, due to retirements, aging and deaths, we are looking at a cluster of 5 parishes sharing one Priest. The Church cannot sustain that. At the collection basket nor anyplace else.
Ah, the good bishop needs to join the good German bishops - and they can all join the Episcopal Church, where, these days, you can embrace all these things and more.
There is a strong argument to be made in favor of permitting priests to be married. First of all there is absolutely nothing in the Bible, in either the Old Testament or the New Testament prohibiting priests from being married. In point of fact the New Testament specifically permits clergy members to be married, 1 Timothy 3:2. Priests were married men with families all throughout Bible. Priests were also married men in the first half of Church history for centuries at least. Many of the early popes were married men as were most of the bishops and priests.
Compulsory clerical celibacy was implemented during the Middle Ages and was introduced in the Church canon at the First Lateran Council in 1123. The purpose for the policy had absolutely nothing to do with anything that can be found in the Bible. Rather, the policy was implemented largely to confront rampant corruption in the Church, specifically nepotism and simony.
Of course Church leaders who implemented the policy back in the Middle Ages would have had no way of knowing how the policy would manifest itself many centuries later. Of course no one could credibly argue that celibacy causes homosexuality or pedophile behavior. However what the policy did end up establishing was a homosocial environment within the Church very attractive to individuals with little interest in the opposite sex or little interest marriage or having children. It also provided an escape for such individuals-—and even the perfect cover. Back in the day no one would ever ask a priest, why aren’t you married, and few people would ever suspect a priest of any sexual improprieties. And moreover, you had many bishops willing to cover up for deviant priests and shuffle them around from parish to parish whenever any trouble arose. In addition with altar boys and among parishioners and in Catholic schools and orphanages there was certainly no shortage of victims for priests to prey (no pun intended) upon. Priestly vocations were the perfect cover for homosexuals and child predators with no shortage of potential victims and higher up bishops willing to cover for them.
In contemporary society, with homosexuality glorified and exalted in the media, in the political discourse, and in the entertainment industry and in our schools and universities, there is little need these days for homosexuals to join the priesthood as an escape. However that does not mean that we don’t have the right to question this policy. We have many married priests (mostly converts from the Episcopalian Church) in my own archdiocese and they do just fine. Further, compulsory clerical celibacy is not considered a dogma or a doctrine of the Church. It is considered a discipline at it always subject to change.
Some might argue that only liberals want priests to have the right to be married. Nonsense. Since most priests and bishops and many of the early popes were in fact married men, one could argue that a married priesthood is the more traditional position. The Lord Commands us to be fruitful and multiply. The Lord created Eve because He did not want Adam to be alone. Physical intimacy between a husband and a wife is precious gift from God, not be denied to anyone, certainly not our priests.
This bishop cannot oppose faggotry and will not support his priests should be defrocked.
No Western institution has the spiritual strength necessary to withstand a leftist assault. We will be the only civilization in history to be conquered solely by means of words. That being said the Roman Church will have female priests.
Gee! What an original idea.
Given that the issue of whether Priests can marry is a matter of Catholic tradition, and I am not Catholic, I have no position on it. I can appreciate and respect the arguments for each side of that issue. However, Deacons should be male as a matter of scripture (1 Tim, Titus) and I would certainly hope that my Catholic brethren stick to their guns on that one.
Try about 800 years older than that, Synod of Elvira in Spain around AD 306. The "clerical celibacy was invented in the Middle Ages" stuff is bogus.
Why? The only Church without a married lower clergy is the Latin Church. All the rest of the Churches ordain men who are married prior to ordination.
As for female deacons, to the best of my knowledge, there are no Churches with female deacons, though they certainly existed in the past. Their deaconate was composed of widows and unmarried virgins, mostly elderly widows. Their function was to deal with adult women converts usually at baptism. The order fell into disuse centuries ago, before the Great Schism if I remember correctly. I don’t know if there were ever female deacons in the West.
There were individuals pushing for compulsory clerical celibacy from the beginning. But it was not institutionalized until the Middle Ages. I refer you to Canon 21 instituted at the First Lateran Council in 1123. “We absolutely forbid priests, deacons, subdeacons, and monks to have concubines or to contract marriage.” Of course this canon has since been changed so that deacons are now permitted to be married.
There have been many Church leaders throughout the ages who have clamored for compulsory clerical celibacy. Many of these individuals quite frankly had issues with intimacy-—even that between a husband and a wife-—and some had issues with women. The Orthodox Church in the East would have none of it, and you finally had the Great Schism between the Western (Latin Rite) Church and the Eastern (Orthodox) Church. To this day Orthodox priests are permitted to be married and they have always been permitted to be married. There are even Catholic Churches in Eastern Europe and the Middle East which permit married men to be ordained as priests.
Some early Church leaders had such issues with physical intimacy that they even developed the dogma that Mary herself was always a virgin, even though the Bible only states that Mary was a virgin at the time of her conception of Jesus and goes no further than that and there is the fact that Mary had a husband and Jesus had brothers and sisters specifically mentioned in the Bible. Some of these early Church leaders seemed to think that Mary would have somehow been defiled even by engaging in physical intimacy with her own beloved spouse. A silly idea when you think about it. The Lord commands us to be fruitful and multiply and Mary and Joseph did just that. Sex is not a dirty thing. Holy Matrimony and physical intimacy between husband and wife is God’s plan and is something that would not have been denied to Mary and Joseph and certainly not denied to our priests. There is no requirement for such a draconian policy in the Bible.
-— even though the Bible only states that Mary was a virgin at the time of her conception of Jesus and goes no further than that and there is the fact that Mary had a husband and Jesus had brothers and sisters -—
Mary is ENGAGED to Joseph when Gabriel tells her, “You will bear a child...”
Mary doesn’t reply, “well, I AM getting married, after all.”
No. She asks, “How can this be?”
Interpret this as you like. Luther has given you permission. But Sacred Tradition interprets this as reflecting Mary’s vow of perpetual virginity. I will go with the Teaching of Christ’s Church, “the pillar and foundation of truth.”
“If he will not listen to the church, treat him as a pagan or tax collector.” —Jesus
The word for “brothers and sisters” can also mean cousins.
Jesus and Paul COMMEND celibacy IN THE BIBLE, if that carries any weight with you.
Suggest you read 1 Timothy 3:1-7 for a thorough job description for service in the priesthood coming straight from Paul.
Which was not an innovation, but a reiteration of what was already required. Canon 33 of the Synod of Elvira said much the same thing.
It didn't "develop"; it was always what was believed, and is the only possibility that is consistent with Mary's words to the angel, and Jesus' giving Mary to John on Calvary.
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.