Angelo Roncalli (Pope John XXIII) and Priestly Celibacy

Insight Scoop ^ | June 11, 2008 | Carl Olson

[NYer]

And your scripture quotation appears not to be MANDATING celibacy but merely allowing it as an option.

Those who "renounce marriage for the sake of the kingdom of heaven" (Matt. 19:12 NAB) do so not because marriage is bad, but precisely because its goodness makes its renunciation a valuable and generous gift to offer to God. After all, the goodness of a gift determines the value of the sacrifice. This is why the Israelites offered God their first-fruits, not their leftovers.

The decision to remain celibate is freely chosen by seminarians, and it is not the Church that is forbidding them to marry. They may choose married or celibate life according to where the Lord is calling them. Making such a pledge of celibacy is not foreign to the New Testament. In fact, one chapter after Paul denounces those who forbid marriage, he mentions Christian widows who make a pledge of celibacy-and how they will incur condemnation if their sensuality estranges them from Christ by enticing them to marry. By reading Paul's words on marriage and celibacy in context, it becomes clear that forbidding marriage is one thing and freely making a vow of virginity is another.

The Eastern Catholic Churches allow for married priests. However, as one Eastern Cardinal recently pointed out, assigning married priests to a parish poses problems. The parish must support the priest and his family. Priests take a vow of obedience to their bishop. Hence, re-assigning a married priest to a different parish entails great expense by comparison to a celibate priest. In the Eastern Churches, celibacy is still preferred over marriage by many priests. My pastor chose the celibate priesthood even though his great grandfather was a married priest.

[dcwusmc]

Thank you. That is the information I was looking for!

[nickcarraway]

Catholic men are not mandated to become celibate. It’s completely a choice.

[the invisib1e hand]

I am not a Catholic, so I don’t have that same feeling that the RC church is infallible. If someone states something as the Word of God but cannot cite the appropriate passage that backs him up and if I cannot find it myself, then I tend to look askance at that person AND his claims. Sorry.

Well, that's an interesting declaration, because you ascribe infallibility to a book that was basically assembled by a committee of Catholics.

Of course, we haven't touched upon the fallibility of those who might read the book (wrongly thinking that, because the book is infallible, their interpretation of it must be as well). We also glossed over what you meant when you said, "God gave scripture." We have a couple thousand years of Jewish tradition that says so. So which is infallible: the book or the tradition that declares it infallible?