Posted on 11/19/2004 11:24:44 AM PST by NYer
Mother Church knows best.
I read somewhere that the more Eucharist Adoration happens the more vocations occur in that area.
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).
The celibacy of the priesthood should not be seen as a burden that impedes vocations, but as a living witness to the world that serving Christ is worth sacrificing even the greatest joys of human life-a wife and family. "Greater love has no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends" (John 15:13).
Source: This Rock 2001
The Church is not set up to profit a family for a priest and it would bring the church lawsuits as they deal with lawsuits from divorces and wives attempting to sue for Church assets.
The wife after divorce would look for church assets always claiming she was an un-paid employee working with her husband.
In addition, these women would expect the church to pay support over numerous situations.
They have enough problems getting rid of the homosexual predators that have lied in their oaths to become priests and are now costing the Church billions.
There is enough problems without married priests.
Excellent thread for all Catholics to read. Article has interesting,factual info and the comments do too.
Ping!
I am confused. Were you alluding that I disagreed with the article?
If so, and I say it respectfully and charitably, I totally agree with the article AND your post.
Peace to you.
If I misunderstood you, I apologize.
Dear NYer,
Although I prefer a celibate priesthood for the Latin Rite, this article is junk, at least in our archdiocese.
Even "moderately large" parishes often don't have three priests nowadays.
1. "First, there would have to be many more priests at the parish."
Baloney.
We have had as many as 1300 families in our parish (an above average number in our diocese), and we have never had more than two priests, and at times have had only one priest. Right now, we have two. Both are older men. Our pastor, though not retired, is nonetheless on in years, and likely does not work any more hours then most professional men I know.
Our second priest is actually semi-retired, and doesn't put in anything near a full workweek.
So, effectively, we have 1 1/2 priests. For over a thousand families.
We also have two hard-working married deacons without whom the parish would come to a standstill. But they're already married!
One receives no pay at all, and the other receives a small stipend because he functions to a large degree as a parish administrator.
If our priests were married, we'd do fine with one full-time man working around 50 hours per week and another part-time priest.
2. "But that's only the beginning. The stipend of a priest is nowhere near enough to support a family; it's not even half enough. The salary of a married priest would have to be about three times the current stipend in order to keep a priest's family above the federal poverty line."
"And, of course, those six families can't all live in that rectory, and the parish offices can't be in the home of just one of them. So we now need six houses, and extra space somewhere else, to replace the one rectory. If the priests are expected to furnish their own housing, their salary will have to be increased even more."
No, my BS detector is going off with this one.
Part of the reason why a priest's salary is so low is that he gets free housing. If a married priest could live in our rectory with his family, it would be unnecessary to increase his salary three-fold. It might not be necessary to increase his salary to even double.
Since we get by on 1 1/2 priests, the pastor and his family could live in our (5000 sq ft with four bedrooms and 3 1/2 bathrooms, plus private offices and a partially-finished basement) rectory, and pay the other priest a part-time salary equivalent to what we pay our current "associate pastor." The second priest would still be able to hold a full-time job otherwise. In fact, the second priest, though he'd be a might busy fellow, would financially do rather well.
Now, if you did have more than one full-time priest, certainly sharing the rectory would be out of the question. But if a parish paid the second priest three times the salary of what a priest in our archdiocese now receives, he would need no housing allowance at all. His income would be about the same as many of the members of our parish.
"Does any parish consider itself that affluent?"
Certainly, our costs would go up if we had a married priesthood.
But frankly, our parish takes in the better part of a million dollars per year. If we were paying out an extra $60K - $80K in priestly salaries, we'd cope.
3. "Every married pastor faces, throughout his career, the tension between the needs of the church and the needs of his family."
Yet, somehow, folks in the Eastern Rites manage. This is a red herring.
4. "One pastor said he expected his tombstone to read 'Daddy's Gone to Another Meeting.' Another came home from a trip to find that his young son didn't even know he had been away - he was home so rarely anyway. Many a pastor's wife considers herself the next thing to a single parent."
This doesn't happen to married men who are not priests?
5. "A priest or minister is seldom off duty. Any family activity is likely to be interrupted, often for the most trivial of reasons. A vacation at home is impossible for a clergyman's family..."
No married men who are not priests have this problem? I go to church with lots of guys, do stuff with them evenings and weekends, and have often seen them interrupted by phone calls from work. Not so uncommon in the real world.
* * *
There are good reasons to retain a celibate priesthood in the Latin Rite.
Too bad this author couldn't mention some of them.
sitetest
I know you agree, but I was pointing out the "main" parts that would bankrupt the Church if they did marry priest.
There would be lawsuits everywhere and a bunch of judicial activist judges and Catholic hating juries that would gladly award all Church assets to former wives IMO.
We best never go there for sure.
Matthew 19:12 "For there are eunuchs who were born that way from their mother's womb; and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men; and there are also eunuchs who made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. He who is able to accept this, let him accept it."
Matthew 6:24 "No one can serve two masters; for either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to one and despise the other."
You're right to say this happens all the time. My daughter never tells her children when my son-in-law has to (very rarely) go out of town. It's too upsetting to them. But since he works such long hours anyway, the kids don't notice it if she doesn't mention it. When they want to call Daddy at work, she'll say, "Make sure you call him on his cell phone," which they sometimes have to do even when he's in town and believe it or not, they don't even question it. Her oldest is in third grade.
I will say however, that I think many men (my son-in-law included) who work these backbreaking hours have the benefit of making an excellent living. So the single mother aspect can be alleviated somewhat. My daughter has a cleaning lady who comes once a week, she can afford to have her grocery order delivered to her house, she sends her husbands shirts out to the laundry etc. I'm thinking priests' wives don't have those same luxuries.
Peter, the first pope, and the apostles that Jesus chose were, for the most part, married men. The New Testament implies that women presided at eucharistic meals in the early church.
Popes who were married
St. Peter, Apostle
St. Felix III 483-492 (2 children)
St. Hormidas 514-523 (1 son)
St. Silverus (Antonia) 536-537
Hadrian II 867-872 (1 daughter)
Clement IV 1265-1268 (2 daughters)
Felix V 1439-1449 (1 son)
Popes who were the sons of other popes, other clergy
Name of Pope Papacy Son of
St. Damascus I 366-348 St. Lorenzo, priest
St. Innocent I 401-417 Anastasius I
Boniface 418-422 son of a priest
St. Felix 483-492 son of a priest
Anastasius II 496-498 son of a priest
St. Agapitus I 535-536
Gordiaous, priest
St. Silverus 536-537 St. Homidas, pope
Deusdedit 882-884 son of a priest
Boniface VI 896-896 Hadrian, bishop
John XI 931-935 Pope Sergius III
John XV 989-996 Leo, priest
Popes who had illegitimate children after 1139
Innocent VIII 1484-1492 several children
Alexander VI 1492-1503 several children
Julius 1503-1513 3 daughters
Paul III 1534-1549 3 sons, 1 daughter
Pius IV 1559-1565 3 sons
Gregory XIII 1572-1585 1 son
The only thing you are going to come up with will show you and anyone else that Peter was definitely married,at one time. We know this beause Jesus healed his mother-in-law. Since I was widowed at 27,it is not hard for me to understand that the mother-in-saw probably out lived her daughter,just as my mother-in -law outlived her son,my husband by about 25 years.
When you come back with anything different I will read what you wrote but you will not bcause it is not there.
I don't know whether the apostles were married or not. We know that at one time Peter certainly was. I don't think anyone here is arguing that there isn't precedent for a married priesthood. For me (and I believe most Roman Catholics who favor a celibate priesthood)I think the reasons are practical ones. I for one would much rather have a married priest than a practicing homosexual, but I really don't want a married priest at all. I like that the priest is a special, annointed figure in our community. I would be uncomfortable confessing sins to a married man.
But you were certainly correct in pointing out that very few dioceses these days have the luxury of three ptiests. The only one I know positively that has three priests in sesidence is the Jesuit run parish. All of them are under sixty five but I don't know the size of the parish,it is not the largest around but it's large.
Isn't that why the church imposed the discipline in the first place? Not divorce back then, but inheritance of Church properties was a big deal.
You are correct. My error in a hasty copy and paste job. However, how did all those in the list I posted possibly manage?
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.