Posted on 09/13/2005 5:03:34 PM PDT by NYer
ROME, SEPT. 13, 2005 (Zenit.org).- Answered by Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina Apostolorum Pontifical University.
Q: Why is it that married clergy are still allowed in the Eastern Catholic rites while forbidden in the West? I understand the impracticality of one's obligation to the family, but also to the church-family. But other than that, I'm curious to know what Tradition/canon law/teachings have to say about this matter. -- R.R., Brookfield, Wisconsin
A: I would be very foolhardy to attempt to resolve the extremely complex issue of the origin and development of priestly celibacy in a few lines, especially when there is still much controversy among expert historians and theologians.
The question, however, does afford an opportunity to clarify some aspects of the issue that may be of interest to our readers.
Thus, with no pretensions of being exhaustive, I would first point out that the Eastern Catholic Churches have their own legitimate traditions which deserve equal respect with the traditions of the Roman rite.
The fact that these Churches are in full communion with the Successor of Peter does not require that they abandon any legitimate customs so as to adopt Roman traditions.
These traditions, with their attendant canon law, go beyond the differences in liturgical practices and embrace such themes as Church structure and governance, the process for selecting bishops, sacramental practices, and the possibility of admitting married men to the priesthood.
Therefore it is not a question of priests of such Churches "being allowed" to marry as a kind of concession, but rather of the continuation of a tradition that can boast many centuries of continued practice.
That said, we can also consider that all Eastern Churches, Catholic and non-Catholic, hold clerical celibacy in high esteem. All of them choose bishops exclusively from the ranks of the celibate clergy, and while some of them admit married men to ordination, no priest or deacon marries or remarries once having received ordination.
Of course, having a married clergy will lead to pastoral approaches that differ from those of the Latin Church. This should not be seen in isolation but as being part of a wider context of living the Christian faith built up over many generations.
I would even go further and say that it is not strictly true that Roman-rite priests are "not allowed" to marry, if this is seen as some form of external prohibition. Rather, the Roman tradition sees the gift and charism of celibacy as accompanying the call to the priesthood, though it realizes it is not an intrinsic necessity for a valid ordination.
We could venture to say that just as the whole Eastern tradition has seen celibacy as a necessary quality for a bishop who, in a sense, is espoused to his particular Church, the Latin tradition has developed a vision in which this quality pertains to all priests in virtue of their calling to serve Christ in a total way. The pastoral approaches of the Latin tradition have developed as a consequence of this understanding.
All the same, I am loath to try to defend clerical celibacy from the standpoint of what could be called the "practical argument" of freeing priests from family responsibilities and even less from an economical standpoint by saying that the Latin Church does not have the financial and logistical structures necessary to support a married clergy.
While these factors are certainly real, the sacrifices required in living celibacy, as well as the joys that come from it, are such that they can only be understood theologically. Arguments based on merely human criteria often boomerang and make the Church seem to be an unfeeling institution that lays impossible burdens on its servants for base pecuniary motives.
Priestly celibacy can best be understood as a logical consequence of accepting Christ's invitation to share his mission of saving souls through the priesthood. It is a response of total love to the invitation of him who gave all for us and has loved us even more than we can love ourselves.
Speaking on behalf of the Maronite Catholic Church, this statement is especially true. While the Maronites do allow married men to become priests, the process is quite lengthy and the applicant and his family is subjected to great scrutiny. The first process is to be accepted as a deacon. To become a priest, again requires a lengthy period of investigation.
The Maronites value celibacy and only celibate priests are assigned outside of Lebanon.
I believe that to already be true, at least judging from my own experience with the Maronites. Our pastor is bi-ritual - Maronite and Latin Rites. He throws himself into his work as a priest, ministering to the small Maronite congregation, assisting the Roman Catholic diocese, assisting as Chaplain in a local hospital and serving a shrinking community of Knights. When the parish woman's group meets, he lends his support by attending and tossing out vital suggestions on how to grow the guild. On weekends, one ofen finds him in full clericals, up a ladder repairing the roof of our small church or looking for leaks at the future church. In 4 short years, he has taken a community on the verge of collapse and injected them with renewed faith and fervor. He can be anywhere for anyone because he took a vow of celibacy. May God richly reward and bless this humble servant!
"Accordingly, being equal brethren, the Eastern and Western portions of the Church should respect each others' traditions."
Amen, amen, amen.
I wonder how many schisms within the church would have been prevented or more quickly healed had we simply stuck to that advice.
Thanks for posting this. A very good article and excellent answer to the question posed.
The Byzantine rite churches (Ukranian, Ruthenian, Melkite, Romanian, etc.) all seem to handle the question of celebrate priesthood a bit differently in the U.S. The Melkites have ordained married priests in the U.S. I'm fairly certain that the Romanians do as well. The Ruthenians do not, and I'm not sure about the Ukranian Catholic Church. All the churches have married priests in their countries of origin.
In my personal opinion, the Melkites have been the quickest to return to their traditions in this sense. They've been openly ordaining married priests in the U.S. for I think about 5 years now.
The general Melkite practice in the U.S. is to only ordain celibate clergy; however, some return to the Middle East to be ordained.
I know one ex-deacon at Holy Transfiguration near Washington who returned to Palestine to be ordained as a priest. He now is an associate pastor at the church, while retaining his family.
Yeah, the Melkites have ordained married priests abroad and then brought them to the US.
The change that I read about (wish I could remember where) has been to simply skip the trip abroad.
If the Church were to change it's celibacy rule, how many times should a priest be allowed to divorce? Never? Once? Twice? Three times? Have those who advocate ending celibacy thought about this? If so, what are their thoughts about it? As we all well know, in the US, approx. 50% of all marriages end in divorce.
Sounds like a dedicated man...My dad is a Lutheran minister and what you described could be said of him and (gasp!) he is married...
I think the point that a married man is going to have the pull of little Johnny and the Mrs. preventing him from doing his duty to God is off the mark...There was NEVER a moment of conflict...We understood his role and we lived through the times when we wanted to have him just to us, but he was needed elsewhere to fulfill his responsibilities...It's ludicrous to me to say that a single man will be more devoted that a married man could be...
My dad ran our church, was the district's lead pastor for a while, and also was helping a neighboring town 35 miles away get their congregation going from ground zero...he did confirmation classes at both places and was constantly visiting shut in's, those in the hospital and going to meeting after meeting...
The key to any servant of God is his devotion to God...married or single, if the man has the passion to serve God to his fullest potential, he will do so...I understand the rationale behind the celibate priest, I really do, but I think the RCC is missing out on what could be some incredibly devoted, passionate, talented and loyal priests...just my take...it's your church, y'all have to run it as you see fit...
God's Blessings...
btt
The Latin Church will NEVER change it's celibacy rule! There are married protestant ministers who convert to RC and are occasionally accepted into seminary and the priesthood. They may not remarry if their spouse dies.
Briefly put: the ancient traditions of married clergy to which Fr. McNamara refers stem only from around 700. They are ancient, yes, and deserve respect, yes--that much of McNamara's article is excellent. But that they represent a slight modification of older traditions, both east and west, he leaves out and thereby seriously skews the picture.
The more ancient, pre-700 tradition, both east and west was either to ordain widowed men of a mature age who had not remarried as most men would have if widowed at age 30 or 35 or 40, showing they had learned to control themselves sexually (see Peter Brown's essay on this in the chapter on sexuality in _A History of Private Live_, vol. 1) or married men who had pledged to abstain from marital relations and proven themselves mature or unmarried celibate men (St. Paul describes himself that way and sees it as preferable for an apostle). Initially bishops led the church, assisted by deacons and "elders" (presbyters) as a council of advisors. Over time sacramental and governing functions were delegated to the presbyters and what we know as "priests" emerged.
At the Synod of Trullo (692), attended by eastern bishops only and not ratified by the bishop of Rome, the discipline was relaxed to permit married priests to continue marital relations with their wives. The main support for this change in discipline (a statement purportedly by Bishop Paphnutius at the Council of Nicea) is now known to have been spurious.
All the relevant documents are carefully evaluated in Cochini, _The Apostolic Origins of Priestly Celibacy_, including the evidence that the Paphnutius-Nicea story is spurious.
It is not forced; it is freely chosen by ALL men who approach priesthood in the Latin Church.
Which rejects all men called to the priest hood who are not called to celibacy.
There are some who perceive a call to the Priesthood who in fact are not. That's why the formation process is such a long one. No one has a right to be ordained.
That bit about "respect" is quite funny, and I'm not sure whether Fr. McNamara is intentionally being ironic or not.
NYer: As for the Maronites, you might want to check on how that decision was made, historically.
I'm RC, but I frequently hang out with Ukrainian Catholics, and know that the first Byzantine Catholic priest to enter the USA in the 19th century was a Ukie priest.
He, of course, was married. The American Catholics were scandalized. They had spent a lot of time and money trying to explain to their fellow American Protestants that all Catholic priests were celibate, and now this Ukrainian priest shows up with a wife!!! (I forget whether he had any children or not.)
The American Catholic Bishops met and voted that all Byzantine Catholic priests on U.S. soil must be unmarried. And to my knowledge, that ruling is still in force today. (I say that on the basis of observation. I have never heard of a married Byz. priest at any American parish. I've met married Ukrainian priests in Canada, though. OTOH, my circle of acquaintances is not very wide in these matters.)
So the fact that all the Maronite priests in the USA are unmarried may not really be their own decision.
BTW, if you find anything out, please let me know. Thanks in advance.
If a change in that ruling was made, it was after V-2. So certainly, prior to the 1960s, married Maronite priests would have been forbidden to serve at US parishes by the US bishops.
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.