Posted on 03/12/2009 6:09:59 AM PDT by NYer
ALBANY, N.Y. (CNS) | The possibility the Catholic Church will allow married priests shouldn’t be dismissed, New York Cardinal Edward M. Egan said March 10 during a radio interview.
“It’s a perfectly legitimate discussion,” he said during a talk radio program in Albany hosted by Fred Dicker. “I think it has to be looked at.”
Cardinal Egan was in the state capital as part of a legislative lobbying visit. He also discussed various New York legislative issues as well as the broader picture of the church’s public policy on topics such as same–sex marriage and access to abortion for minors.
Cardinal Egan’s resignation as head of the New York Archdiocese was accepted by the pope Feb. 23. He will serve as apostolic administrator of the archdiocese until April 15 when Archbishop Timothy M. Dolan of Milwaukee will be installed as his successor.
In the radio show’s final minutes, when asked about priestly celibacy by Dicker, who also is state editor of the New York Post newspaper, Cardinal Egan said he thought the subject would be coming up for discussion by the church’s hierarchy.
“I’m not so sure it wouldn’t be a good idea to decide (whether priests can be married) on the basis of geography and culture, not to make an across–the–board determination,” the cardinal said. He noted that priests in the Eastern Catholic churches –– such as the Romanian, Maronite or Melkite churches –– are allowed to be married with “no problem at all.”
The Eastern Catholic churches often admit married men to the priesthood in their regions of origin but do not permit marriage after ordination. Outside their regions of origin, the Eastern churches may not admit married men to ordained ministry without a dispensation from the Vatican.
Some married clergymen from other Christian faiths who have joined the Catholic Church have later been ordained as Catholic priests.
In 1980 the Vatican approved special provisions under which former Episcopal priests who had become Catholics could apply for ordination in the Catholic priesthood. Since then several dozen married former Episcopal priests have become Catholic priests. In addition, a few married former Methodist and Lutheran ministers have been ordained Catholic priests.
Frederick J. Luhmann, an author and researcher who has kept track of the ordinations of married men for more than a decade, told Catholic News Service March 11 he counted 93 former Episcopal, Lutheran, Presbyterian, Methodist and Baptist clergymen among U.S. Catholic priests currently serving the church.
In 2002 Luhmann wrote a book titled “Call and Response: Ordaining Married Men as Catholic Priests.”
In a 2006 interview with the Brazilian newspaper O Estado de Sao Paolo, Brazilian Cardinal Claudio Hummes, who had just been named head of the Vatican’s Congregation for Clergy, said that “even though celibacy is part of Catholic history and culture, the church could review this question, because celibacy is not a dogma but a disciplinary question.”
The newspaper went on to quote Cardinal Hummes as saying the shortage of priests in some areas of the world was a challenge, and the church was not “immobile” but “changes when it should change.”
However, a couple of days later he issued a statement to clarify his remarks, saying priestly celibacy was not currently up for discussion by church authorities. He emphasized it was a long and valuable tradition in the Latin–rite church, based on strong theological and pastoral arguments.
Egan needs to be quiet and fade away.
In 1980 the Vatican approved special provisions under which former Episcopal priests who had become Catholics could apply for ordination in the Catholic priesthood. Since then several dozen married former Episcopal priests have become Catholic priests. In addition, a few married former Methodist and Lutheran ministers have been ordained Catholic priests.
Frederick J. Luhmann, an author and researcher who has kept track of the ordinations of married men for more than a decade, told Catholic News Service March 11 he counted 93 former Episcopal, Lutheran, Presbyterian, Methodist and Baptist clergymen among U.S. Catholic priests currently serving the church.
Catholic Caucus?
Good point. One might also expect fewer divorces absolutely, vs. a random group of first-marriages, in a population where remarriage is not option. Most people don’t seem to get divorced just in order to live alone the rest of their lives!
Look at some of the other reports, such as the one below on Austria, and the almost daily news items about priests stealing money to support their girlfriends and lavish lifestyles.
Most priests today probably oppose marriage, unless Gay marriages were allowed, then there would be great support, though allowing heterosexual married priests in some rectories would stop some activity.
Were not the priests who choose marriage and left the more honest ones. These were the committed, and no one ever asked why they choose to leave - it was not always marriage, I think, but when they did get married they were honest about it. Had they been allowed to continue in some capacity things might have been quite different. We probably would not have half the problems we have today. There is something to be said for honesty.
Wilkerson is a false prophet. IMO. Do we give him a year? Two?
Hit the road.
Another one who’s been a great disappointment. Can’t retire fast enough.
Cardinal Egan has the eyes and smile of a wolf in shepherd’s clothing.
It appears to be merely a statement of historical fact. If you see a discussion of the beliefs of others, or a comparison - let me know.
In your response:
Some married clergymen from other Christian faiths who have joined the Catholic Church have later been ordained as Catholic priests.
you highlighted the wrong words. That's better.
The Council of Elvira in Spain (310) dealt with priestly chastity (canon 33), and presented perfect continence as a norm that must be maintained and observed and not as an innovation. The lack of any revolt or surprise attested to its widespread practice.
At the Council of the Church of Africa (390) and above all at the Council of Carthage, (419), which St. Augustine attended, similar norms were adopted. These councils recalled the ecclesiastical praxis of the obligation of perfect chastity, affirming that such praxis is of apostolic tradition.
What St. Gregory VII, and later the Second Lateran Council (1139) did was not to “introduce” the law of celibacy but simply confirm that it was in force and issue regulations for its observance. Since most recruiting for the priesthood was already among the unmarried, the Second Lateran Council forbade priestly marriage, declaring it null and void in the case of priests, deacons or anyone with a solemn vow of religion. Source.
Celibacy is not Cannon from the lips of Christ and can be changed.
You are correct. It is a discipline, not a doctrine. Jesus Christ did not marry. The Catholic priest models his life on that of Christ.
accepting married priest might bring more priests into the fold and more mentally stable priests at that.
There are actually plenty of vocations today in faithful dioceses: Denver, Northern Virginia, and Lincoln, Nebraska, have great numbers of men entering the priesthood. If other dioceses, such as Milwaukee or Albany, want to answer the question of why they have so few vocations, the answer is simple: Challenge young men to a religious life that is demanding, countercultural, sacrificial, and loyal to the Holy Father and Catholic teaching. This is the surest way to guarantee a greater number of vocations.
Divorce is rare in the East. In the Maronite (and I presume this is true in other churches) Church, when a married man applies for ordination, he and his family undergo an exhaustive investigation. Their marriage is scrutinized to be certain it can withstand the rigors of parish life. Only then does the candidate begin his studies for the deaconate.
90% of the priests around here (NY Metro area) are imported from 3rd world nations....you just don't see many priests from the area.
When I was a kid in Catholic grade school, our parish had a large number of priests and nuns, all American or western European born. My HS was manned by Marist Brothers...all American or European. I just don't see this anymore, at least around here.
Clerical celibacy is not a doctrine. It is not a divinely revealed Truth. Rather, it is a policy of the Roman Church. If it were a doctrine, then how could Rome consider itself in Communion with churches that allow married men to become priests?
Because clerical celibacy is not a doctrine, but rather a policy, it is subject to modification should the circumstances require it. Whether or not those circumstances are present today is another question.
Vocations are blossoming in those dioceses where solid, orthodox catholicism is taught. Archbishop Burke had a waiting list for his seminary. Here in New York State, when is the last time you heard a bishop preach on the perils of sin? Albany and Rochester are counting down the remaining years until their 'progressive' bishops retire. It is like a wasteland up here. The good news in NY is the new bishop for the Diocese of Rockville Centre. It is a slow process but he is turning things around down there. Long Island was my home up until 16 years ago. Perhaps under Archbishop Dolan, you will see a change in NYC.
You have to understand the difference between a job and a vocation.
Marriage is a vocation-it is who we are. A job or career is what we do.
Becoming a priest is a vocation. It is not possible to have 2 vocations. Celibacy in the priesthood is necessary because of this.
While many people do not believe this way, that is their perogative, and they are free to belong to a church that teaches otherwise. If marriage was a part of the example that Jesus gave us as the head of the church, I am pretty sure he would have married, since it was an extremely common practice for Jews to marry very young (under 18 yrs old). Seeing as he did not begin his ministry until the age of 30, he had more than ample time to do so prior to his ministry beginning. He did not, even though that would mean he would remain celibate and never experience the most initmate form of the human condition- sexuality. If it had been imperative or even necessary to his ministry, I doubt he would have chosen this path.
Also, it is true that some of his apostles were married. This was also addressed in scripture by the exhortation that it would be better to remain single if possible, and the discourse about some being made Eunics for the kingdom by choice (not in the literal sense, but by remaining celibate). The married apostles were converted after their marriage, and none of them married after becoming apostles.
While I hope that sheds some light on the catholic position, it oftentimes causes arguments even within the church, such as abortion and gay marriage does. Just because some folks want it, doesn’t make it ok or subject to change.
The last thing I will say on this is that there is a difference between a disipline and a dogma of faith. Dogmas are non negotiable. They are the absolutes. Disciplines are a way of helping us more fully practice the faith. Priestly celibacy is a discipline. There have been, and will be exceptions, just as Jesus made to apostles who had married prior to his ministry. Celibacy has served the church well these many millenia, and it is not going anywhere anytime soon; however, should a need arise or some grave situation that makes it necessary to allow priests to marry (which I cannot forsee but life is crazy so you never know) it will not negate the priesthood or the church as it will be only that a discipline has changed.
The church DOES allow married priests, it just does not allow priests to marry. There is a difference, it is just hard to see for someone without the proper understanding (not to impune you, just trying to fully answer a question, and yours was not taken with any malice at all) I welcome the chance to answer others when they pose a question. Thank you for yours :)
Vocation v. career— Interesting, insightful and informative. I hadn’t considered it in that context. I now understand the perspective. (”Ya wanna join? Here are the rules”)
Dogma v discipline; Ditto. Unfortunately, it appears that others have the two confused as they see a change in the “discipline” as an heretical end to their religion (and civilization as we know it).
As for me (thinking of Hawkey’s response to Fr. Mulcahy about becoming a priest): “I like my weekends free.”
Thanks.
No problem. I have a bit more insight than many, my son is going to seminary next year :)
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.