Posted on 08/28/2004 7:57:48 PM PDT by marshmallow
WASHINGTON (CNS) — At least 556 U.S. seminarians have signed a letter to the head of the U.S. bishops’ conference affirming their support for mandatory celibacy in the Catholic priesthood of the Latin rite.
Gary J. Kasel of the Archdiocese of St. Paul-Minneapolis and Franz S. Klein of the Diocese of La Crosse, Wis., initiated the signature project last fall.
They said they did so because they were concerned about the negative impact of a petition last year by a group of Milwaukee priests urging the U.S. bishops to begin admitting married men as candidates for the diocesan priesthood in the Latin rite.
In the letter to Bishop Wilton D. Gregory of Belleville, Ill., president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, the seminarians said, "We are writing today to affirm our support for Holy Mother Church’s teaching on the place of celibacy in the priesthood. ... We, to whom the precious gift of divine grace to live as celibates has been given, yearn with all our hearts to offer this celibacy up to the Lord with undivided hearts, at the service of his Church."
Kasel and Klein were classmates completing philosophy studies last year at St. John Vianney College Seminary in St. Paul, where they initially circulated their letter after getting it cleared with their rector, Father William J. Baer.
Through fellow students at St. John Vianney who knew students in other seminaries around the country, they sent letters to those contacts asking them to circulate the letter and seek signatures in their respective seminaries. They said they only worked through such personal contacts and made no effort to canvass all U.S. seminarians.
Students from 12 other seminaries responded as well. Bishop Gregory received a total of 556 signatures from the 13 institutions.
Father Edward J. Burns, executive director of the U.S. bishops’ Secretariat for Vocations and Priestly Formation, shared information on the letter and petition results with Catholic News Service in August, shortly after The Catholic Times, La Crosse diocesan newspaper, interviewed Klein and Kasel.
"This is indicative of the type of men that are responding to the priesthood today," Father Burns told CNS. "They’re committed, dedicated, faith-filled, prayerful. And really they stand inspired by the teachings of our Holy Father.
"What we're finding is that the Holy Father has impacted vocations around this country and throughout the world in a significant way, and they are committed to the teachings of Pope John Paul II," he added. Pope John Paul has repeatedly reaffirmed the long-standing Roman Catholic discipline requiring celibacy of its priests.
In an Aug. 23 e-mail from Assisi, Italy, where he was studying Italian in preparation for theology studies this fall at the North American College in Rome, Klein told CNS he and Kasel "did not receive a single letter responding negatively" to the contents of their letter, although some said they were not signing for other reasons.
"Several seminarians thanked us for stepping up to the plate and giving us all an opportunity to express our feelings in this matter," he wrote. "Others, however, thought that the Milwaukee priests and those who followed were not right in using a secular means (of signing petitions or position statements) to get their opinion across and did not feel that it was right for us to follow in their footsteps."
In August 2003 more than 160 priests in the Milwaukee Archdiocese wrote to Bishop Gregory asking that the U.S. bishops begin accepting married men as well as single men as candidates for the diocesan priesthood to reverse the growing priest shortage and assure that U.S. Catholics will have access to weekly celebration of the Eucharist in the future.
Subsequently groups of priests from several other dioceses sent similar letters; about 90 priests from the Diocese of Arlington, Va., responded with a letter in support of the Latin-rite discipline of mandatory celibacy.
Bishop Gregory responded to the Milwaukee priests’ petition with a letter to Archbishop Timothy M. Dolan of Milwaukee. In it he reaffirmed the Church’s discipline and the value of celibacy as "a powerful spiritual means to draw closer to Christ." He questioned whether relaxing the discipline of celibacy would lead to an increase in the number of priesthood candidates.
In his e-mail to CNS, Klein said the seminarians’ petition "is not meant to be a shot at the priests who have signed letters for optional celibacy. I know several of these priests personally and know that they are holy priests and very dedicated."
"This letter," he added, "is meant to indicate only exactly what the Holy Father has spoken of as being something of great value to the type of priesthood that the Latin rite needs at this time. This important element is the grace given to those who make a single-hearted sacrifice and choose a life of celibacy."
In addition to St. John Vianney, seminaries from which student signatures came included: Bishop White Seminary in Spokane, Wash.; Cardinal Muench Seminary in Fargo, N.D.; Holy Apostles College and Seminary in Cromwell, Conn.; Holy Cross Seminary House of Formation in La Crosse; Mount St. Mary's of the West Seminary in Cincinnati; and Mount St. Mary’s Seminary in Emmitsburg, Md.
Also among them were: Our Lady of Guadalupe Seminary in Denton, Neb.; Pontifical College Josephinum in Columbus, Ohio; St. Charles Seminary in El Paso, Texas; St. Charles Borromeo Seminary in Wynnewood, Pa.; St. Gregory the Great Seminary in Seward, Neb.; and St. Meinrad School of Theology in St. Meinrad, Ind.
While Kenrick-Glennon Seminary in Shrewsbury was not among those listed as having seminarians signing the letter, two third-year theology students said they would have signed it had it been offered to them. Both Aaron Nord of St. Louis and Ben Bradshaw of Memphis said they agreed in spirit with the letter. "It’s very edifying to see our brother seminarians support the gift of celibacy," Bradshaw said. "I would have liked to have signed it; I’m impressed they had the gumption to start it," Nord said. "Often the dissidents have their say; but this response shows people who are happy with the Church," he added. Some information for this article was provided by Review editor James Rygelski.
1579. "All the ordained ministers of the Latin Church, with the exception of permanent deacons, are normally chosen from among men of faith who live a celibate life and who intend to remain celibate 'for the sake of the kingdom of heaven.' [Mt 19:12 .] Called to consecrate themselves with undivided heart to the Lord and to 'the affairs of the Lord,' [1 Cor 7:32 .] they give themselves entirely to God and to men. celibacy is a sign of this new life to the service of which the Church's minister is consecrated; accepted with a joyous heart celibacy radiantly proclaims the Reign of God. [Cf. PO 16.]"
"His disciples say unto him, If the case of the man be so with [his] wife, it is not good to marry. But he said unto them, All [men] cannot receive this saying, save [they] to whom it is given. For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from [their] mother's womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He that is able to receive [it], let him receive [it]." - Matthew 19:10-12
"But I would have you without carefulness. He that is unmarried careth for the things that belong to the Lord, how he may please the Lord: But he that is married careth for the things that are of the world, how he may please [his] wife. There is difference [also] between a wife and a virgin. The unmarried woman careth for the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body and in spirit: but she that is married careth for the things of the world, how she may please [her] husband. And this I speak for your own profit; not that I may cast a snare upon you, but for that which is comely, and that ye may attend upon the Lord without distraction." - 1 Corinthians 7:32-35
More encouraging news about this Saintly Pope. I consider myself lucky to be alive during his Papacy. He is one of the great Popes of all time.
While I understand the desire to have an unmarried clergy, I wonder how the Catholic church interprets 1 Corinthians 9:5, which seems to imply that Peter, the apostles, and Christ's brothers were married. From the NKJV: "Do we have no right to take along a believing wife, as do also the other apostles, the brothers of the Lord, and Cephas?"
That's your first mistake. Using an abridged, edited, corrupted version of a Catholic document, the Bible, as a reference. St.Paul wrote woman, not wife, in First Corinthians
"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
We know this because St. Paul himself was celibate.
"But I say to the unmarried and to the widows: It is good for them if they so continue, even as I." 1 Corinthians 7:8
You also need to read the following:
"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 home 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
The discipline of celibacy and the priesthood in the Catholic Church has its origin with the Apostles and finds its genesis with Melchisedech in the Levitical priesthood in the Old Testament.
While I understand the desire to have an unmarried clergy,
I'm curious as to just exactly what it is that you "understand".
I wonder what you think of the Anglican dispensation? Or the permanent diaconate?
I missed this! What wonderful news.
Cardinal Arinze - "Youth will embrace religious life with right role models"
Today's seminarians reflect growing trend
Number of Seminarians Increases - Please Decipher This!!!!
In Seminaries, New Ways for a New Generation
Seminary Springtime: Father Darrin Connall s Big Success
EVIDENCE GROWS OF DIRECT DISOBEDIENCE TO VATICAN IN MAJOR AMERICAN SEMINARIES
Pope to Church: Risky Seminarians Must Go
U.S. Priests and seminarians survey: more vocations in orthodox dioceses
Vatican Announces Surge in Seminaries during JPII Pontificate
Seminary Reform Needed in Wake of Sex Abuse Study ["the crisis in the Church is ... homosexuality"]
Homosexuals in seminaries? The latest.....
Bishop urges gay ban in clergy; presses for overhaul in screening priests
What do you mean by that? I say "I understand the desire to have an unmarried clergy" because the unmarried person can focus on serving God (as Paul discusses in 1 Corinthians 7.) However I don't see how forced celibacy of clergy can be reconciled with 1 Timothy 3 or Titus 1, where God, via Paul, explicitly permits several levels of church leadership to be married. Both passages discuss the office of an elder or bishop, who are "the husband of one wife" as the Douay-Rheims expresses it, and who may have children. Sexual purity is clearly an important qualification, but it would seem that it can be purity through celibacy or through right conduct in a married relationship (since the holder of this office may have children). Per 1 Cor. 7:5 it could be said that sexual intercourse within the marital relationship would be permitted to holders of this high office within the church.
"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 home 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
We know Peter was married at some point. Jesus healed his wife's mother in Matt 8:14. Clement of Alexandria, who died in 215 AD or thereabouts, seems to interpret 1 Cor. 9:5 as I do in his Stromata (see sections 52, 53). He even takes it farther than I (I think it's pretty clear scripturally that Paul was, in fact, celibate.) Clement also teaches that Peter's wife was martyred. Also in 1 Cor. 7:10,11 Paul teaches as a command from the Lord that marriages were not to be broken. To dissolve one's marriage to serve Christ would be wrong, wouldn't it?
The discipline of celibacy and the priesthood in the Catholic Church has its origin with the Apostles and finds its genesis with Melchisedech in the Levitical priesthood in the Old Testament.
Were not the priests, even the high priest, permitted to marry (Leviticus 21)?
Sinkspur, I know this is a very hot issue for you, but I would sincerely like to know your sentiments on this subject. I know I've stated my position before that I am glad the majority of our priests are celibate.
There's just so much less for a priest to worry about if he doesn't have a family. And the confession lines are short enough without the priest being another one of the dads in the parish. I don't know too much about this, but in the Eastern churches, doesn't a priest have to be single to be elevated to bishop? So it seems even in that tradition, the ideal there is also celibacy.
However, permanent deacons, in my experience, have been a wonderful addition to the clergy.
I would be curious to hear from priests' wives on the subject, since it would seem to me those wives would have a tremendous burden.
It's an "ideal" if you want to be a bishop.
The Church is bending at the seams for lack of priests. I'm not sure if relaxing the celibacy rules (meaning that married men could be ordained priests) would make much difference, but it would open the priesthood to mature men who could make a big difference in the life of the Church.
The permanent diaconate is the ONLY vocation that has grown dramatically in the last 25 years: an average of 750 deacons ordained per year, versus 400 priests.
Yes, even wives of deacons have to be committed to the ministry. But, there is no lack of commitment on their part, nor on the part of their deacon husbands.
Men who choose to be celibate could embrace the priesthood, and, if so chosen, the episcopacy. And, the Church could benefit from the perspective of married men, as they do now with the 200 Anglican dispensation priests.
Catholics do not believe that clerical celibacy is a divine mandate, but a matter of church discipline and prudential wisdom. Celibacy was not uniformly practiced in the West in the first millenium; there were even a couple of Roman Popes (well after the time of St. Paul) who were married.
Even today, there are married clergy in the Catholic Church. Some of the Eastern Rites ordain married men to the priesthood as customary practice. Western Catholics ordain married men to the diaconate (deacons are technically considered clerics, as well as priests and bishops, and receive the Sacrament of Holy Orders). And some married Protestant ministers who converted to Catholicism have been ordained to the Catholic priesthood.
BTW, it's a matter of some dispute among Scripture scholars whether St. Paul was married. In one place, he seems to say that he wasn't (1 Cor 7:8), and in another place, he appears to address his wife directly. (Philippians 4:3; "true yokefellow" is a Greek idiom for "wife")
There's no conclusive evidence that St. Peter was married after the time he became an Apostle, AFAIK. Scripture mentions his mother-in-law, but not his wife. Tradition mentions his daughter, but, again, I'm unaware that his wife is named. He may have been a widower.
St. Paul makes it very clear in 1 Cor 7 that celibacy is the higher state. Christ was celibate; those who wish to imitate him perfectly should follow his example.
Revelation 14:4 speaks of 144,000 sealed men "who have not defiled themselves with women" for they are "virgins". What significance do you think celibacy has in view of this, St. Paul's praise of celibacy in 1 Cor 7, and Christ's own example?
They were married, but required to live continently when they were actually serving the Temple. Marital intercourse rendered one ritually impure for a day (Lev 15:18) and would therefore have been incompatible with Temple service. See also this interesting article which has some information on celibacy in Jewish tradition.
I believe that I'm also correct in saying that married men may be ordained priests but that once a priest, a single man may not marry.
See, the thing is, wives of priests don't really get a husband. Their husband belongs to the parish.
My own experience is this. I worked a lot of hours and we had a lot of kids. Because I was working a lot, we were able to afford a diaper service (pre- disposable diapers), a dishwasher, and if needed, some household help (cleaning ladies, mother's helpers, etc.) Wives of priests wouldn't get any of those benefits, because no matter how long her husband works, he's never going to earn a lot of money.
The permanent deacons I've met have older children. In truth, their wives have been on board with their vocation, but deacons don't have the same level of commitment to their parishes that priests do.
I really, really would like to hear from some of these wives of priests. I wonder how happily married they'd consider themselves?
About as happy as Protestant ministers' wives, some of whom are happy, and some of whom are not.
About as happy as the wives of dentists, some of whom are happy, and some of whom are not.
Alright. Here's where I show my ignorance. I believe Protestants have a different view of their clergy. They believe in the universal priesthood of all believers. We don't. Our priests are special, annointed leaders in our community. We have a different expectation of our priests. Our expectations, and the priest's execution of his duties would necessarily impinge more on the life of his spouse.
The point I tried to make earlier about my own marriage was that the stresses that occurred because of my career were offset by the extra money. In other words, if a dentist has a bad marriage, it's probably not because he's a dentist. His income should be able to offset the long hours.
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.