Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: sinkspur
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

It is not mine to accept or rejct this. I am an outsider and I was merely pointing to the fact that it is not without a precedent to have married clergy in the West. However, I do believe that, as with many other things, the Church made mandatory celibacy for all Latin clergy a matter of irrevocable doctrine and changing it would be seen as an admission of error.

83 posted on 11/20/2004 6:12:22 PM PST by kosta50 (Eastern Orthodoxy is pure Christianity)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies ]


To: kosta50

Dear kosta50,

"However, I do believe that, as with many other things, the Church made mandatory celibacy for all Latin clergy a matter of irrevocable doctrine and changing it would be seen as an admission of error."

Well, not quite. Actually, not at all.

Even though celibacy is as highly valued in the Church in communion Rome as much as the Church in communion with Constantinople, the Church of Rome has not ever claimed that celibacy is a matter of doctrine. At all. Highly prized, yes. Matter of doctrine, no.

The fact is that the Catholic Church accepts married men into the priesthood as a matter of course in the Eastern Rites (except in the US, where the practice was suppressed for, I guess, about 100 years, and where it is being slowly and carefully re-introduced).

Even in the Latin Rite, the Catholic Church makes exceptions for married men who come over from other Christian ecclesial communities, or the occasional married Orthodox priest who might choose communion with Rome.

But celibacy has been the custom and tradition of the Latin Rite for a very, very long time. Many have criticized the Church for doing away with many small "t" (not of divine origin) traditions and customs over the past half-century. Although I don't agree with all of the criticisms, I think a good point is made that just because something is old doesn't mean it's bad.

I think it is wise for right now, at least, that the Latin Rite of the Catholic Church preserve this small "t" tradition as the general rule of our Rite. I think there is much to commend the general rule of celibacy in the current era, and much to recommend against further change of centuries-old traditions.


sitetest


86 posted on 11/20/2004 7:01:03 PM PST by sitetest (If Roe is not overturned, no unborn child will ever be protected in law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies ]

To: kosta50
However, I do believe that, as with many other things, the Church made mandatory celibacy for all Latin clergy a matter of irrevocable doctrine and changing it would be seen as an admission of error.

Celibacy is not, nor has it ever been, doctrine. It is a discipline, and has already been compromised by allowing Anglican and Lutheran married ministers to peition for ordination to the priesthood after conversion.

Celibacy should be at the service of the priesthood, not the other way around.

90 posted on 11/20/2004 7:10:40 PM PST by sinkspur ("It is a great day to be alive. I appreciate your gratitude." God Himself.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson