Posted on 02/10/2006 3:55:07 PM PST by LouAvul
SAN BERNARDINO, Calif. (AP) - A former Episcopalian priest who converted to Catholicism became the first married cleric ordained in the Diocese of San Bernardino under an unusual provision.
As his wife and two children looked on at Our Lady of the Rosary Cathedral, Gregory Elder was ordained into the Roman Catholic clergy Friday through a rarely invoked exemption to Canon Law called the Pastoral Provision.
"I'm humbled, it's an honor, and only God could have made this happen," Elder told The Associated Press. "I didn't leave the Episcopal Church because I was mad at them. I wanted to join the church of history. I love my Episcopal friends."
Since 1983, about 80 former Episcopal priests in the United States have been ordained as Catholic priests through the provision, said the Rev. William Stetson, director of the Catholic Information Center in Washington, D.C.
About 43,400 Catholic priests reside in the United States, according to the center.
"The provision is very unusual, because priests are asked to be celibate, are asked not the marry. This is definitely the exception to the rule, because with the Pastoral Provision, you get to stay married," said the Rev. Paul Granillo, spokesman for the San Bernardino diocese.
Approved by the late Pope John Paul II, the provision requires eligible Episcopalian candidates to convert to Catholicism and find a bishop to sponsor them.
(Excerpt) Read more at modbee.com ...
How are we to reconcile this?
The Latin Rite of the Catholic Church chooses to follow the example set by Christ and St. Paul and the Apostles to forsake all for the kingdom of God. The question you should be asking is why so few clergy, particularly those that claim to be "Bible believers" fail to follow these examples.
"But I would have you to be without solicitude. He that is without a wife, is solicitous for the things that belong to the Lord, how he may please God. But he that is with a wife, is solicitous for the things of the world, how he may please his wife: and he is divided." 1 Corinthians 7:32-33
How do you reconcile that?
That doesn't occur. One doesn't walk into the chancery, say ordain me and then get fitted for vestments. The process is a lengthy, comprehensive one and isn't automatic.
Scripture makes no mention of any of the other eleven being married. Scripture does mention that all of the Apostles gave up everything, including a wife if they happened to be married, in order to follow Christ.
Actually St. Paul mentions Apostles (in the plural) being married including Peter (and the Corinthian letters were not written really early).
"Do we not have the right to take along a believing wife, as do the other apostles and the brothers of the Lord and Cephas?" 1 Corinthians 9:5
Paul was talking about his sacrifice of being unmarried and celibate. (why would he mention this if all or even most of the Apostles were also unmarried and celibate?)
Also there is no mention that any Apostle abandoned his wife to follow Christ...to do so would contradict his marriage vows, and also contradict pretty extensive instructions on marriage written by the Apostles themselves in the New Testament.
There is a verse where Paul says:
"This is what I mean, brothers: the appointed time has grown very short. From now on, let those who have wives live as though they had none," 1 Corinthians 7:29, but note the "as though" ... probably an instruction using exageration warning of pending persecution. St. Paul was definitely not calling anyone to abandon his wife and family responsibilities for the Church.
Jesus Himself directly condemned religious works done at the expense of family, especially religious traditions of doing so:
"For God said, 'Honor your father and mother' and 'Anyone who curses his father or mother must be put to death.'But you say that if a man says to his father or mother, 'Whatever help you might otherwise have received from me is a gift devoted to God,' he is not to 'honor his father' with it. Thus you nullify the word of God for the sake of your tradition."(Matt 15:4))
As to the "Levitical priesthood of Melchisedech," the Old Testament has only one priest of that line...with the name Melchizedek--he mysteriously gives Abraham bread and wine....and recieves a tithe from Abraham then disappears, and this is 3 generations before Levi (son of Jacob son of Isaac son of Abraham) the ancester of the Levitical priesthood line was born. The New Testament book of Hebrews mentions Jesus Christ as in the line of Melchizedek, no one else.
A specious, at best, argument. The ability to marry hasn't stopped these protestants, has it.
The disputation of the perpetual virginity of the Blessed Virgin Mary is a relatively recent phenomenon, inthe history of Christendom, amongst protestants.
(nowhere supported in scripture),
Incorrect. Scripture supports the perpetual virginity of the Blessed Mother. What Scripture doesn't support is the notion that she gave birth to other children. An ignorance of Scripture is what supports that false claim.
I don't think it was "God's Word" that said Catholic priests couldn't be married....well after Christ died, priests were married, and that only changed many centuries later.....IIRC.......then again, I could be remembering wrong.....
And his wife's name was ?
So were ya gonna keep it a secret forever ?.......:o)
You are ignorant of the history of the discipline.
Hmmm. Sounds like a double standard.
Maybe His first act of healing?
As will be demonstrated in this reply, you are sadly mistaken.
"Do we not have the right to take along a believing wife, as do the other apostles and the brothers of the Lord and Cephas?" 1 Corinthians 9:5
Quoting a corrupted text yields a corrupted argument.
The correct wording:
"Have we not power to carry about a woman, a sister, as well as the rest of the apostles, and the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas?" 1 Corinthians 9:5
Also there is no mention that any Apostle abandoned his wife to follow Christ...
I didn't say abandon and your implication that Christ would have allowed the abandonment of a spouse by one of the Apostles is absurd. Your ignorance of Scripture is quite telling.
"Then Peter answering, said to him: Behold we have left all things, and have followed thee: what therefore shall we have? And Jesus said to them: Amen, I say to you, that you, who have followed me, in the regeneration, when the Son of man shall sit on the seat of his majesty, you also shall sit on twelve seats judging the twelve tribes of Israel. And every one that hath left house, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands for my name's sake, shall receive an hundredfold, and shall possess life everlasting. And many that are first, shall be last: and the last shall be first." Matthew 19:27-30
"Then Peter said: Behold, we have left all things, and have followed thee. Who said to them: Amen, I say to you, there is no man that hath left house, or parents, or brethren, or wife, or children, for the kingdom of God's sake, Who shall not receive much more in this present time, and in the world to come life everlasting." Luke 18:28-30
(emphasis added to both verses for your much needed edification)
Jesus Himself directly condemned religious works done at the expense of family, especially religious traditions of doing so:
Christ was condemning the Pharisees for abandoning the care of their parents, the poor and infirm, a result of following the Korban rule.
As to the "Levitical priesthood of Melchisedech," the Old Testament has only one priest of that line
"But Melchisedech the king of Salem, bringing forth bread and wine, for he was the priest of the most high God," Genesis 14:18
"The Lord hath sworn, and he will not repent: Thou art a priest for ever according to the order of Melchisedech." Psalm 109:4
"As he saith also in another place: Thou art a priest for ever, according to the order of Melchisedech." Hebrews 5:6
"Called by God a high priest according to the order of Melchisedech." Hebrews 5:10
"Where the forerunner Jesus is entered for us, made a high priest for ever according to the order of Melchisedech." Hebrews 6:20
"For this Melchisedech was king of Salem, priest of the most high God, who met Abraham returning from the slaughter of the kings, and blessed him: To whom also Abraham divided the tithes of all: who first indeed by interpretation, is king of justice: and then also king of Salem, that is, king of peace: Without father, without mother, without genealogy, having neither beginning of days nor end of life, but likened unto the Son of God, continueth a priest for ever." Hebrews 7:1-3
"If then perfection was by the Levitical priesthood, (for under it the people received the law,) what further need was there that another priest should rise according to the order of Melchisedech, and not be called according to the order of Aaron?" Hebrews 7:11
"And it is yet far more evident: if according to the similitude of Melchisedech there ariseth another priest, Who is made not according to the law of a carnal commandment, but according to the power of an indissoluble life: For he testifieth: Thou art a priest for ever, according to the order of Melchisedech." Hebrews 7:15-17
You contradict yourself. Legends are to be believed but the disputation of your argument utilizing the writings of St. Clement are not.
We're supposed to take him at his word?
We're supposed to take you at yours? Sorry to disappoint you but I'll take the word of a Father of the Church and head of the catechetical school of Alexandria over your unsourced legend any day of the week.
It's also not historically believable that they left their wives to follow Christ, as this would have contravened Christ's own teachings.
Scripture proves you are quite mistaken.
but I do know a thing or two about Catholic history.
Your displayed ignorance confirms your many deficiencies in the knowledge of the history of Catholicism.
Don't make me laugh. When the Vatican repeals the asinine rule that has allowed Faggots to take over the priesthood, then you folks will be left holding an empty bag.
Nor is there any evidence that they were married. To go by Jewish tradition would suggest that Jesus must also have been married.
The book is obviously well read by the leadership of the church as 1 Timothy 2 is commonly cited as the reason why women cannot become priests.
The simple reason why women cannot be priests is that Jesus chose only men. The Catechism of the Catholic Church sets it out clearly, quoting the decree Inter insigniores:
"Only a baptized man (vir) receives sacred ordination. The Lord Jesus chose men (viri) to form the college of the twelve apostles, and the apostles did the same when they chose collaborators to succeed them in their ministry. The college of bishops, with whom the priests are united in the priesthood, makes the college of the twelve an ever-present and ever-active reality until Christ’s return. The Church recognizes herself to be bound by this choice made by the Lord Himself. For this reason the ordination of women is not possible. "
1 Timothy, Chapter 3 - 1 This saying is trustworthy: 2 whoever aspires to the office of bishop desires a noble task. 2 Therefore, a bishop must be irreproachable, married only once ...
The point of Paul's teaching is not that a man must be married in order to be a bishop, but that a bishop may not be married more than once. If this passage meant that a bishop had to be married, Paul would have been in violation of his own rule (1 Cor. 7:7-8, 9:5). A rule forbidding a man to have more than one wife does not order him to have at least one. A man who never marries does not violate the rule. Also, Paul, being a bishop who ordained other men to be bishops (cf. 1 Tim. 1:6), would have been a hypocrite if he enjoined such a rule ("to be a bishop you must be married") and then, by his own admission (1 Cor. 7:8-9) ignored his own rule.
Biblical evidence for the discipline of celibacy can be found in both the Old and the New Testaments. In the Old, Jeremiah was forbidden by God to take a wife in order to enable him to fulfill his ministry better. "The word of the Lord came to me: 'You shall not take a wife, nor shall you have sons or daughters in this place'" (Jer. 16:1-2).
Also in the Old Testament, God asked even married couples to practice celibacy on certain occasions. For example, Moses asked the Israelites to abstain from marital intimacy while he ascended Mount Sinai (Ex. 20:15), and Jewish tradition attests that he remained celibate for life following the command of Exodus 9:15 and Deuteronomy 5:28. The Lord also asked that the priests refrain from sexual relations with their wives during their time of service in the temple. In yet another example, the priests ordered King David and his people to abstain from marital relations on the occasion of eating the holy bread (1 Sam. 21:4).
In all these instances, there is a theme of abstaining from marital relations due to the presence of something very holy. It is not that the marital act is sinful, but that when one is in such proximity to God, it is right to offer him an undivided mind, heart, and body. If it was fitting under the Old Covenant to serve the temple, to approach God, and receive the holy bread with a consecrated body, it is no surprise that permanent celibacy is fitting for a Roman Catholic priest, since his priestly service is continual.
In the Gospel of Matthew, Jesus states, "Some are incapable of marriage because they were born so; some, because they were made so by others; some because they have renounced marriage for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. Whoever can accept this ought to accept it" (19:12 NAB). This is an invitation from Christ to live as he did, and there can be nothing unacceptable in that.
Paul recognized the wisdom in this, and encouraged celibacy in order to free a man to be anxious about the things of the Lord and to serve him undividedly (1 Cor 7:8,32-35). In his words, "To the unmarried and the widows I say that it is well for them to remain single as I do. . . . I want you to be free from anxieties. The unmarried man is anxious about the affairs of the Lord, how to please the Lord; but the married man is anxious about worldly affairs, how to please his wife, and his interests are divided. And the unmarried woman or girl is anxious about the affairs of the Lord, how to be holy in body and spirit; but the married woman is anxious about worldly affairs, how to please her husband. I say this for your own benefit, not to lay any restraint upon you, but to promote good order and to secure your undivided devotion to the Lord. . . . he who marries his betrothed does well; and he who refrains from marriage will do better" (1 Cor. 7:8, 32-35, 38).
Priestly Celibacy
There are many Godly men and women who have served the Lord faithfully all the while being married and raising children.
You are absolutely correct. Celibacy is a discipline in the Latin Church, not dogma. As mentioned above, the Eastern Catholic and Orthodox Churches admit married men to the priesthood. However, in the East, married priests may not serve as bishops.
Not important enough for St. Luke to write down, but you can read all about it in Luke 4.
"Where's the so-called principles of the Catholic Church? This is an outrage. Either let priests be married or don't, but don't play games here with Gods' word."
Huh? How is allowing a married man to be a priest (or not) playing with God's word? And how are the internal policies of the Catholic churches an outrage?
Infanticide is an outrage. Murdering Christians because of their faith is an outrage. The only individuals who are personally affected by whether they may be both married and ordained are priests and would-be priests themselves.
There is no consensus of opinion on whether priests should or should not be married, even amongst the Catholic churches. The western Catholic church (Roman Catholic church) in general does not allow married men to be priests. However, there are exceptions such as this one where former episcopal priests who happen to be married are allowed to be come Catholic priests.
In the eastern Catholic churches, married priests are the norm, not the exception.
"Shocking though it may be to you, there are many of us conservative Catholics. The ratios simply depend on where you live."
But what about the conservative eastern Catholics?
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.