Patriarch of Venice deemphasizes ordination of married men to the priesthood

Vivificat! - A Catholic Blog of Commentary and Opinion ^ | 8 October 2005 | Teófilo

[Teófilo]

News Analysis.

Folks, another thing I'm watching very closely is the Synod of Bishops, currently being held in Rome, with the attendance of 250 from around the globe. The theme of the Synod is the Holy Eucharist, but apparently, some of the debates are taking an interesting bend.

It seems that the issue of mandatory priestly celibacy for diocesan priests in the Latin Rite received some attention. Cardinal Angelo Scola, patriarch of Venice, wrote a "report before the discussion, entitled, On Eucharistic Amazement, among other deep things, had this to say:

Viri probati

To overcome the lack of priests, some, guided by the principle of salus animarum suprema lex, advance the request for the ordination of married faithful, of proven faith and virtue, the so called viri probati. The request is often accompanied by the positive recognition of the validity of age-old discipline of presbyteral celibacy. However, this law should not, they affirm, impede that the Church be equipped with an adequate number of ordained ministers, when the scarcity of candidates to celibate priesthood is assuming extremely grave proportions. It is superfluous to reiterate, in this context, the profound theological motives which have lead the Latin Church to unite the conferring of Ministerial Priesthood to the Charism of celibacy. Rather, the question imposes itself: is this choice and this praxis pastorally valid, even in extreme cases such as those mentioned above? It seems reasonable to answer positively. Being intimately tied to the Eucharist, ordained priesthood participates in its nature of a gift and cannot be the object of a right. If it is a gift, ordained priesthood asks to be constantly requested for. It has become very difficult to ascertain the ideal number of priests in the Church, from the moment in which this is not a business" which should be equipped with a determined quota of team managers.

In practical terms, the urgency, which cannot be postponed, of the salus animarum urges us to reiterate with strength, especially in this See the responsibility each particular Church has with regard to the Universal Church, and for that reason also to the other particular Churches. Therefore, the proposals made in this Synodal Assembly to identify the criteria for an adequate distribution of clergy in the world, will be very useful. In this area the path to be walked seems as yet very long. Perhaps it is a good idea to remember that all during history, Providence has sustained the prophetic and educational value of celibacy, asking also for a special availability for the ministry of priesthood to the realities of consecrated life, maintaining the respect for their charism and history. One can quote here the praxis of the ordination of monks in the Oriental Church and within the Benedictine Tradition.

The Patriarch's comments should be taken as "cold shower" for those who advocate making celibacy optional for diocesan priests of the Latin Rite. The Patriarch hints that discussion on "distribution of priests" in the world should is of more importance than discussing the highly hypothetical notion of ordaining "viri probati."

One thing grates me a little bit, is where he says: Providence has sustained the prophetic and educational value of celibacy, asking also for a special availability for the ministry of priesthood to the realities of consecrated life, maintaining the respect for their charism and history. One can quote here the praxis of the ordination of monks in the Oriental Church and within the Benedictine Tradition. I fail to understand why the Patriarch quotes the value of celibacy in the praxis of monks in the Oriental Church, but fails to mention how the charism of chastity is lived out in the married priests of the Oriental Church. I think this omission is illogical, considering that the Eastern Churches maintain a dual discipline of both celibate and married clergy, which is exactly the point he wishes to temper down.

It seems to me that the issue is not that monastic or other regular clergy should remain celibate; everyone agrees they should. The issue is, should diocesan priests be celibate? The Patriarch simply sidestepped this issue.

I don't presume to lecture bishops of whatever rank, but speaking strictly from an analysis of the text, I think this paragraph was the weakest in an otherwise excellent meditation. I humbly submit this was not a serious effort to deal with the issue in light of the entire Tradition of the Church, and not solely that of the Latin Church.

[Kolokotronis]

"Father reviews the budget with ALL the parishioners twice each year; unfortunately, even in the Eastern Churches, some people believe they don't need to go to church and that places an additional strain on those of us who pitch in to keep the parish up and running."

Unfortunately, NYer, that's human nature and being Eastern Christians doesn't protect us from that! Its fine that your priest reviews the budget with the people 2x a year. But don't the people set it in the first place?

"God bless this holy man who has to rent a room in the rectory of another parish."

Unless your parish is extremely poor, this is a scandal and I am surprised that Lebanese Christians would allow their priest to live as a pauper. Years ago we did effectively speaking the same thing. On account of illness, our priest had to retire and it fell to me as parish council president to work with the Metropolitan to get a new one. The first thing the Met. told me was that we would have to at least double the pay package for any new priest. I protested long and hard about that but His Eminence stood firm. We all took a collective deep breath, crossed ourselves three times and agreed. Everything was fine from day 1. All it took was a little more and smarter work, a little better management of our funds, a real push about increasing the pledges and some Faith.

"If ordaining married men to the priesthood resolves the priestly shortage, it also accrues other issues. A married priest's first priority is to his first vow - marriage."

True. Our Metropolitans tell their priests just that.

"A bishop also has more difficulty in relocating a married priest than an unmarried one."

I don't buy that, as I've said.

"But how do you conserve it in an atmosphere full of eroticism: newspapers, Internet, advertising posters, shows, all shameless and always wounding the virtue of chastity,”

Monastics/Celibates should live in monasteries where these are not such an issue. Your Patriarch knows that. That's what is done in Lebanon. I must say that +Sfeir seems to have one standard for America, where big brother Rome is looking over his shoulder and another for Lebanon where in this day and age Rome wouldn't dare.

You may remember that a few years ago there was a big dust up here in the States when one of the Eastern European "Greek Catholic" Churches wanted to start ordaining married men for service here. Rome protested loudly and vigorously, with one of its reasons being, I've been told by a Roman Hierarch "in the know", that it would cause problems with the Latin Rite Clergy here who to all reports are solidly behind a married priesthood. With all due respect to +Sfeir, I suspect his comments are directed towards keeping the Latin Rite hierarchs here happy more than anything else, which is unfortunate since its his eparchy and he shouldn't give a fig what they think or want.

[Tantumergo]

"New Testaments Priests offer the Sacrifice daily, ergo, perpetual continence/celibacy."

I think this is the biggest single factor in the different traditions that developed in East and West. The Sacrifice wasn't normally offered daily in the East with the result that priests only had to observe continence in the three days leading up to Sunday.

With the development of Mass being offered on a daily basis in the West, the issue of a celibate or perpetually continent priesthood took on much greater urgency.

"It is my opinion all the inertia is in the direction of maintaining the Ancient Discipline of Continence/Celibacy which is of Apostolic Origins (SeeThe Apostolic Origins of Priestly Celibacy by Christian Cochini).

Is it possible a Melkite Patriarch is more influential than a know-it-all layman?"

While you may be correct that this view is strengthening in those parts of the Catholic Church that could be considered either conservative or traditional, I am not so sure that this equates to "all the inertia".

In the rarified environments of FR and other conservative internet fora, its easy to assume that the good guys are gaining the upper hand and are far more significant in numbers than is really the case. I'm afraid the reality remains that most bishops:

a) haven't read a theology manual since they left seminary

b) haven't heard of Christian Cochini

c) if they had, would assume that he was a conservative Vatican "stooge" and dismiss him faster than they could drop their undergarments in a public convenience.

"Is it possible a Melkite Patriarch is more influential than a know-it-all layman?"

Well, as it was his predecessor who extracted the Latin Permanent Diaconate out of Paul VI, I would say that Gregory III, at least, certainly thinks so.

[Tantumergo]

"This super-subjective origin of phronema is expressed in the New Testament with the well-known term 'mind of Christ', which is almost synonymous with phronema.

Before I continue, are we all agreed on this definition?"

No - and you continued anyway, before we had chance to agree on the definition !!! ;)

As Kolo suggested in his later post, I was using the more prosaic and mundane idea of the term which I have found both Orthodox and Greek Catholics to commonly use i.e. a way of thinking, a mindset, a spirituality - although all these English terms are probably insufficient to accurately describe it.

I was merely making the observation that you still think like a "Latin" rather than a "Greek" or a "Western" Christian rather than an "Eastern" one. I was hardly levelling some kind of insult or accusation against you considering that I am a Latin myself and quite happy to be one.

I simply find it odd that you should have found haven in an Eastern Church on the one hand, and yet you are so quick to dismiss their tradition as a topic which will "shrivel and die on the vine" on the other.

I don't know if you are aware, but your comments do not reflect the complete statement of Cardinal Sfeir. He went on to say that despite the difficulties which are attendant with married priests, his Church:

"would never have survived without them."

[Tantumergo]

"I understand that that is the position, as a matter of discpline, of the Maronite Church. It is not the position of other Eastern Rite Churches in communion with Rome."

Correct - both Melkites and Ukrainians are now ordaining married men in North America and consider it their right to do so by virtue of restoring their own tradition. They are starting to throw off the shackles of Uniatism and Rome will be quite impotent to do anything about it in this post-Conciliar climate of ecumenism.

"it lead to massive schism and the departure of tens of thousands of Ruthenian Greek Catholics into Orthodoxy. The descendants of these people are now in the OCA and the GOA."

This has been a running sore between the Eastern Catholics and Rome for the last 100 years. Although the Pope at the time was in favour of them maintaining their own tradition, he caved in to the demands of the U.S. bishops and imposed the Latin tradition on them. This is one reason why Patriarch Gregory wants to see the Latin Church adopt the Eastern practice vis a vis celibacy - if he can secure this then he can be certain that the eastern traditions will never be vulnerable to Roman policy again.

[RKBA Democrat]

"Doubtful. Aren't they required to comply with the regulations of the predominant Latin Church in this country? Not sure what the proper term is but someone pointed this out to me yesterday after Divine Liturgy."

Each church operates under eastern canon law and in accordance with it's own set of procedures. The Melkites have already ordained married men in the U.S., without sending them abroad to do so. I think the Romanians have done so as well.

The genie is already out of the bottle. It's an open question as to whether some of the other eastern Catholic churches will follow in the Melkites footsteps. I doubt the Maronites will. But I think the Ruthenians and Ukranians will eventually do so. The synod might provide the nudge.

[bornacatholic]

I think this is the biggest single factor in the different traditions that developed in East and West. The Sacrifice wasn't normally offered daily in the East with the result that priests only had to observe continence in the three days leading up to Sunday.

* If our Bishops knew one-half of what you do we'd be a real church ....