Posted on 11/19/2004 11:24:44 AM PST by NYer
Would the Church be better served if priests were married? Those who propose lifting the celibacy requirement claim that this change would bring about a great increase in vocations, would provide parishes with priests who better understand the problems of family life, would make the priests themselves happier, and would generally improve the Church all around. It sounds lovely. But the advocates of a married clergy need to give a little more thought to the real consequences of their blithe slogans. Perhaps they will listen to a wife who has been there.
Let us consider a typical, moderately large parish in an affluent American community, in which three priests live in a rectory that also houses the parish office. What changes would have to be made if the priests of this parish were married?
First, there would have to be many more priests at the parish. A celibate man can give all his time to the parish; a married man must give priority to his family. So these three priests must become five or six, leaving the "priest shortage" right where it was, even if the removal of the celibacy rule doubles the number of priests in America.
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. (Would young men flock to the priesthood so they can support their families in near-poverty?) If the parish does not want the priest and his family to be the poorest family in the neighborhood, probably unable to afford even to send their children to the parish school, the salary would have to be higher still. Now figure in health insurance premiums for a wife and several children per priest.
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.
Thus, supporting married priests will cost that three-priest parish more than six times what it now spends to support its priests. Does any parish consider itself that affluent? Is the average parishioner willing to multiply his offering by six? In all likelihood, the priests will have to work outside the priesthood to bring in income. Of course, their time for the parish and parishioners will decrease. So the parishioners, even if they could somehow support their six priests, would still find themselves short of priestly attention.
The financial burden is one thing, but there is also a very heavy emotional burden to be borne by priests - and their families. One hears the argument that "Protestant ministers can marry, and it works well for them," but the fact is that it doesn't work well. How many of the advocates of a married priesthood are truly aware of the struggles of a Protestant clergyman's family?
Every married pastor faces, throughout his career, the tension between the needs of the church and the needs of his family. Some find ways to resolve it to their satisfaction; most do not. Both church and family require more than half of a man's time and energy. Both can be demanding; and churches, which generally have no interest in a pastor's emotional health, are particularly demanding. The effects of this tension show up in families in various ways. Some wives - and many children - of pastors blame the church for depriving them of husband or father and leave the church, and even Christianity, altogether. 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.
On top of this, a pastor's wife and children are themselves without pastoral care. No man, however talented or dedicated, can be pastor and husband or father to the same people. The objectivity required of the pastoral role is missing. But the minister's family cannot seek spiritual direction and sustenance elsewhere; loyalty and the need to avoid the appearance of a split in the family require that they remain at his church. When the father's career and the family's spiritual life are one and the same, the spiritual life suffers badly.
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; if he's around, he's assumed to be available to his flock. The bum-out rate among Protestant pastors is very high. If relaxing the celibacy rule increases the number of priests, it will have to increase it enough to make up for the large number who will leave the priesthood when they, like so many of their Protestant colleagues, find the toll it takes on the families impossible to accept.
Or if a priest's wife leaves him, and the priest wants to continue functioning as a priest, what is the bishop supposed to do? Pretend everything is fine? What sort of message would that send? Would many parishioners be scandalized? Would others feel they now have permission to dump their spouses? And how well would any of them be pastored by the priest going through this private anguish? Or should the bishop quietly and quickly ship the priest (and his children?) off to a remote outpost in the diocese, hoping no one will be the wiser? This tactic has not won the hearts of Catholics where the problem has been pedophilia or some other violation of the vow of celibacy.
Or should the priest be laicized? Many would see this as the only solution that fully honors the sacrament of Holy Matrimony. Could the institution of marriage, already stretched to the breaking point and denigrated to the point of virtual irrelevance, survive the spectacle of separating and divorcing priests who are allowed to continue functioning as priests? But others would feel that automatic laicization would punish the priest for transgressions that were, in most cases, not entirely his own or for a tragedy that was not entirely his fault. And is any of us ready to hear this announcement from the pulpit: The special third collection today will be for our Alimony Fund?
It is a fact that most Christians see their clergy as men set apart, not quite "real people," regardless of the steps the minister or priest takes to counteract that view. This impression, strong in Protestant churches, is even stronger among Catholics, because Catholic priests are set apart by their ordination in a way Protestant ministers are not. This sense of separateness extends to the pastor's family. A minister's wife who is pregnant may find that church members are uncomfortable with her as a living symbol of the pastor's active sexuality; a minister's children often find the expectation that they will be models of good behavior, piety, and academic achievement a crushing burden. Close friendships within the church can prove impossible to establish, depriving the pastor's family of the bonds with other Christians so important to spiritual growth. The difference between the Protestant and Catholic understandings of ordination means that a priest's family would suffer this isolation to an even greater degree than a Protestant minister's family does.
In discussing the need for more vocations, it is easy to offer facile solutions, to say that many more young men would become priests if priests could be married. There is little evidence to support this contention; but even if it were true, the cure would be worse than the disease
The unmarried man cares for the Lord's business; his aim is to please the Lord. But the married man cares for worldly things; his aim is to please his wife; and he has a divided mind. 1 Corinthians 7-32-33, NEB
We have one part time priest in our parish.
Can we have one of yours?
I was just kidding around. I agree with you (I think) that confessing to a married priest is inconsequential
This is perfectly in line with the teachings of +Paul. The Orthodox Church, always applied oikonomia even in this instance -- for practical reasons lower clergy (caretakers of churches) who are really bishops' assistants, are allowed to marry prior to taking Holy Orders. Once ordained, should they become widowed, they can not marry as long as they are ordained priests.
Also, deacons can be married in the Church of the East and the West. I wish the Catholic Church would use some flexibility, as it does for priests who came from Protestant ministries who were already married. Such priests are allowed to remain married. Also the Eastern-rite Catholic priests are allowed to be married (I believe the bishops are not, but I am not sure). Flexibility would go a long way. It is not without a precedent, and it may help specific parishes.
You are right, this is not our issue to get involved in. I just wanted to clerify some of the potential misunderstandings, since Orthodoxy was brought up.
Yes, a celibate clergyman is preferable. But then who is without sin?
Is an ad hominem attack the best defense you can make?
Well, there are married clergy in ever Rite of the Catholic Church. Married priests in Eastern and Latin Rites, and married deacons (the only vocation in the Western Rite experiencing an increase).
All the arguments against optional celibacy are purely logistical and most are made by non-clergy.
Odd comment.
Is marriage for clergy somehow sinful? That's a rather archaic and very Augustinian notion.
The priest's wife would work outside the home just as about 80% of minister's wives presently do. What planet do you people live on? Minister's wives will be the ones sitting nearest the throne of Jesus in heaven. They not only are wives, mothers, and supplement the low salaries paid their husbands by working outside the home, but they are involved in practically every activity in the congregation as well. Actually, you Catholics are not getting your money's worth with an unmarried clergy. You could be getting "two for the price of one", in Billy Jeff's immortal words.
Actually, they follow the same dictates as their Orthodox brethren .... exactly! Those who wish to serve in eparchies outside of their home, must be celibate, in deference to their Latin Rite brothers. The Melkite and Ukrainian Catholic Churches have tested the waters though, when each one assigned a married priest to a US parish. So far, no comment from the Vatican. Will this 'trend' catch on? Only time will tell.
Then again, the Eastern Catholic Churches do not have the volume of congregants of the Roman churches. IMHO, it is impractical for the Latin Church to financially accomodate a married priesthood, optional or otherwise.
Are you a catholic? If so, then you know from looking at the church bulletin each week, why the RC Church can't possibly support a married priesthood.
Bump to my #69. I take it you are not a catholic; hence, you can't possibly relate to this topic.
Dear NYer,
"The Melkite and Ukrainian Catholic Churches have tested the waters though, when each one assigned a married priest to a US parish. So far, no comment from the Vatican. Will this 'trend' catch on? Only time will tell."
The last I'd read, Pope John Paul II had devolved limited authority to approve the ordination of married men to a senior Eastern Rite bishop in the United States. Cases are evaluated individually.
sitetest
Dear NYer,
Many parishes in our archdiocese could readily support married priests.
It is not a question of money.
It is a question of a worthwhile practice.
If celibacy is made entirely optional in the Latin Rite, it is likely to become rare. And the Latin Rite will have lost another treasure.
sitetest
"Those who wish to serve in eparchies outside of their home, must be celibate, in deference to their Latin Rite brothers."
Well this sort of begs the question of whether the Eastern Rite Catholics are really Churches in their own right, doesn't it, unless of course this rule is there only to keep Latin Rite priests from being envious of their Eastern brethren.
"Then again, the Eastern Catholic Churches do not have the volume of congregants of the Roman churches. IMHO, it is impractical for the Latin Church to financially accomodate a married priesthood, optional or otherwise."
As you know, I've spent a fair amount of time in both Latin Rite Europe and Orthodox Europe. The churches in the Latin Rite areas of Europe are empty, in the East, full, so your comment doesn't hold true everywhere though it may here. In any event, financial considerations should not be the determining factor in whether or not the Roman Church has married priests. Celibacy is a crowning virtue and vocation. That should be the reason to encourage it, as the Church always has, not that you can save money if you don't have to support a presbytera and children.
With 24 hours in a day, what married man can devote eight days to nothing but prayer unless he is celibate? What married man can stay focused on God and take care of his family?
What married man can stay focused on your issues if he has issues with his wife and children? Yet I have known many an Orthodox priest who would be my first choice. I don't know how they do it and how their family makes it possible, but they did.
Because it has worked in the East, and because it is not without precedent in the Catholic West, I would think married priests in certain parishes would be beneficial.
I agree. And, I think the Church should set 35 as the minimum age for ordination for married men who present themselves for ordination, with 25 the minimum age for celibates.
We've had a good experience with married deacons, but they are all over 35 when ordained.
Silverius, Saint
(slvr´s) (KEY) , d. 537, pope (536–37), an Italian; successor of St. Agapetus I. The son of Pope Hormisdas, who had been married before taking orders, St. Silverius was elected pope at the instance of the Ostrogothic king, Theodahad, although Vigilius, as Agapetus’ deacon, was the logical candidate. Failing to win Silverius over to Monophysitism, Empress Theodora intrigued to make Vigilius pope. On a trumped-up charge of treason, Pope Silverius was sent into exile; Vigilius was declared pope, and Silverius died shortly afterward. He is believed to have been murdered. Feast: June 20.
http://www.bartleby.com/65/si/Silveriu.html
I don't see a reference to St. Silverius' wife.
You are absolutely right. The New Advent Encyclopedia has the same sentence as Bartleby, which I misread. Many websites list Antonia as the wife of St. Silverius, but the more reliable sources do not mention anything about this marriage. I wonder what the source of the Antonia information is...
Very interesting. Thank you.
Do the married deacons reside at the rectory with their families or do they own their own homes? If the latter, how do they pay for them? Are they independently employed outside the diocese or do they rely on a church stipend to finance their family arrangements? How would they fund their living arrangements if they were allowed to be ordained? Would they continue to work outside the church? How would they ration their time between church requirements and those of the family?
Christ, who initiated the Sacrament of Holy Orders on His disciples, led a celibate life, as did His forerunner, St. John the Baptist. He set the example. Why should this example be broken other than to fulfill personal gratification? If the Catholic Church were to allow a married clergy, would married clergy be eligible to accept the role of a bishop?
Curious minds want to know.
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.