Posted on 05/25/2005 10:35:49 PM PDT by sinkspur
THE leader of Scotland's Catholics has risked reigniting a row over married priests by predicting the Vatican will eventually relent and allow the practice.
Cardinal Keith O'Brien, the Archbishop of St Andrews and Edinburgh, said the success of married deacons in the church means the change is likely.
The church leader has upset traditional Catholics in the past with his views on celibacy, homosexuality and the priesthood.
His latest comments were made in an interview with the Catholic Times, which will be published on Sunday,
Asked if he believed married priests will become a reality, he said: "Having seen something of the apostolate of married deacons, I can foresee the day when there will be married priests."
The Cardinal has angered conservative Catholics in the past with his acceptance of gay priests, as long as they remained celibate.
However, since being elevated to the College of Cardinals he has espoused views more in line with Vatican teachings. Cardinal O'Brien's latest comments drew criticism from the right-wing Catholic Truth movement.
A spokesman for the group said: "He is trying to say that he is not necessarily personally in favour of this but we can debate it. It's a sleekit way of trying to have his cake and eat it."
However, a poll of 80 Catholic priests in Scotland conducted only last month suggested 40 per cent believed they should be allowed to marry, but the issue remains thorny to many conservative Catholics.
Cardinal O'Brien gained a reputation as a liberal after he said in 2002, before he became a cardinal, that he saw no end to theological argument against celibacy within the priesthood.
A day later he issued a joint statement with Mario Conti, the archbishop of Glasgow, in which the pair said: "While no-one would suggest clerical celibacy is an unchangeable discipline, we believe it has an enormous value."
The following year he risked angering conservatives again when he broached the subject of married priests.
He said in a thanksgiving mass that the church should have "at every level" a discussion about clerical celibacy.
He said the argument for married priests was supported by the case of married Anglican priests who have converted to Catholicism and been allowed to continue their ministries.
However, at the ecclesiastical senate in Rome in October 2003, he made a statement at the end of the Nicene Creed in which he affirmed support of the church's teachings on celibacy, contraception and homosexuality.
It was claimed at the time, but denied, that the added words were said under pressure from the Vatican.
Since then the Cardinal has been careful not to speak out on any of the issues that caused so much controversy.
A spokesman for the Church said today that the Cardinal's comments were not incompatible with his profession of faith in 2003.
He said: "It is a neutral comment on the issue, it is neither a ringing endorsement of the concept, neither is it an outright denunciation."
One thing is certain: the Church demands a celibate priesthood, basing her demand on the unqualified devotion of a priest ought to give to the service of God and of souls.
And in this demand the Church is guided by the Holy Ghost.
Even the Apostle of the Gentiles appealed to the Spirit of God in speaking of celibacy. "I think that I also have the spirit of God" (1 Cor. 7, 40).
Following him the Church declared at Trent:
"If any man says that marriage is preferred to the state of virginity or celibacy, and that it is not better and more pleasing to God to abide in viginity or celibacy than to be joined in marriage, let him be anathema."
+++++++++
Further questions?
you're twisting his words.
I believe I gave a tangential answer in #154 where I made reference to the indirect scriptural foundation of priestly celibacy. This question of yours, -- not Why celibacy?, but Why priests? -- is larger in scope and not really on topic. But this is an outline.
A priest is one who offers sacrifice to God. The separate caste of priests that succeed one another in history is, of course, plain Old Testament. Christ made the perfect sacrifice of Himself and thus fulfilled the task of Old Testament priests once and for all.
His will was, however, that His sacrifice be perpetuated in time through the sacrifice of the Eucharist. The bread and the wine become again and again His body and blood. He told us to do so in memory of Him. He also ordained that the Eucharist is His body and blood "indeed" (John 6). Therefore, the Eucharist is sacrifice indeed. A sacrifice requires a priest. So we have priests.
The sacrifice of Calvary was offered by Jesus himself. The sacrifice of the Eucharist is offered by a priest. So, if the Eucharist is Christ's body, then the priest offering the sarifice is doing so in the stead of Christ Himself. Form here we can proceed to the teaching of priest being the bridegroom of the Church, and therefore owing fidelity to the Church, but I already covered that ground.
At the time of Christ's ministry on earth the world contained four groups of people: Christ Himself; the Tweleve Apostles; the other disciples; the Christian believers; and unbelievers. We know that the discipleship was fluid; many, for example, apostasized refusing to accept the mystery of the Eucharist (John 6 again). But the corps of the apostles was fixed, despite their temptations and weaknesses of faith. They received the Holy Ghost from Christ at Pentecost. When Judas apostasized, the eleven elected Mathias to replace him. In Acts and in 2 Timpthy we read of the laying of hands that was a ritual transferring priestly power. This is the sacrament of Ordination. Those ordained receive priesthood directly from the bishop, who is a successor of the Apostles.
This system: bishops succeeding the Apostles and ordaining priests, -- was not seriously challenged until Reformation. Note that in this case we are talking not simply of some orally transmitted theology, but of the very fabric of the early Church. If Christ really taught priesthood of all believers and not a distinct caste of priests, such usurpation of power would have been challenged in the 1st century rather than in the 16 century.
I am sure you can look up the requisite verses yourself.
I am not inclined to morph the thread about priestly celibacy into a general discussion of the scriptural and historical foundation of Christian priesthood, so my future responses to this will be limited. Feel free to bring this up again though, when the topic matches the issue better.
If that topic isn't in any way relevant, which it isn't, why did you bring it up on this thread?
It is relevant, but it is likely to start a long discussion on priests in general and dilute the focus of this thread. I don't mind answering Biblewonk's questions as long as both the questions and the answers don't become disruptive tot he main topic.
Relevant to what? Why we need priests (at all), or why priests should be celibate? The mere question and topic you raised is diversionary.
Maybe so, but it is Biblewonk who started the diversion and I don' tlike running away from questions, no matter what motivated the querier.
Show me where the bible recommends that a Christian Priest should be celebate? Remember that I was accused of not knowing the bible and now that I'm asking for chapter and verse everyone is backing away from the bible, again.
Well I appreciate your taking the time to explain why you think there is a priesthood of any sort that pertains to Christianity. But you did not show me where the bible says there should be such a thing. Each verse you mention seems to lack any mention of sacrifice or eucharist or priest. So I'm still hoping to hear some scripture that establishes a priesthood for Christians and a sacrifice. In the breaking of bread you mention it says "do this in rememberance of me" and "as often as you do this you proclaim". But we don't even see the word sacrifice and we certainly are not given a priesthood.
I was using the expression in the same sense that Fr. Martin used it.
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.