Posted on 07/13/2017 11:02:45 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
That would help me understand the idea of seeing your priest for advice when your marriage is in trouble.
Absolutely. Unless they are bishops
There are very good reasons why priests should not marry.
There is no way they can satisfy the needs of the Church and her people and tend to a family as well.
A priest gets called to service at any hour of the day, and any day of the week. And he must be available - in body, mind and spirit.
If it’s that important to marry while serving the Church, he can become a Deacon.
“Also called the Second Vatican Council, this council occurred in the 1960s where the Roman Church adopted notable changes in the way ministry is conducted. Vatican II invited lay people to minister more actively in the liturgy, and masses were increasingly celebrated in native languages of people, not just Latin.”
If you accept Vatican 2,
you think your church is alive.
If you reject Vatican 2,
you admit your church is dead.
Exceptions are admitted and there are over 200 married Catholic priests who converted from the Anglican Communion and Protestant faiths. In most Orthodox traditions and in some Eastern Catholic Churches men who are already married may be ordained priests, but priests may not marry after ordination.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clerical_celibacy
Concerned?! I think having these kinds of priests is good news!
I agree that celibate clergy has its benefits; the martyrs of Bolshevism and Communism would be fewer and farther between if those priests had been married. In Spain’s Civil War, more than six thousand priests, a dozen bishops, and hundreds of nuns were murdered by Communists - and many were offered their lives if they would denounce the faith. I suspect if they had families some would have.
One of the issues with this question is the fact that most Eastern Rites of the Catholic Church DO have married priests...
Who would they marry? Other priests or little boys?
Better married than homo.
[ Also called the Second Vatican Council, this council occurred in the 1960s where the Roman Church adopted notable changes in the way ministry is conducted. Vatican II invited lay people to minister more actively in the liturgy, and masses were increasingly celebrated in native languages of people, not just Latin.
If you accept Vatican 2,
you think your church is alive.
If you reject Vatican 2,
you admit your church is dead. ]
Dead as a doornail!
Our church closed our local catholic high school because they didn’t have enough money to “keep it open” despite a local captain of industry offering a blank check to keep it open. A few years later they built a multi-million dollar “community center” where they could make the old geezers comfortable while they slowly leeched out their social security checks via daily Bingo sessions, then a few years later they completely renovated and rebuild the church from a somber place of worship into a gleaming sparking monstrosity....
Oh and all the school property the church owned, they sold it for pennies on the dollar to the local skrool system.
It’s DEAD JIM!
Would anyone be surprised?
Hi MichaelCorleone. Noting that overseer in 1 Timothy 3:1-5 is a translation of Greek word for bishop, your statement doesnt necessarily compliment that passage, particularly verse 5. Please comment.
I am in the Charlotte Diocese and very active within it. It is thriving because the Bishop and core leaders are more traditional. Vocations in Charlotte are strong. One need only look to the macro trends (Mass attendance, confession, apostasy, support for abortion) since VII to recognize its impact.
Now, whether I’m in favor of this or not... (I am, but that’s neither here nor there at the moment.)
Throw out the sodomites and pedos first. The Catholic hierarchy needs a serious sandblasting lately.
Actually, it works just fine for doctors, firefighters, EMT’s, and the EO. There are plenty of occupations which require people to be on call at all hours of the day or night.
And if they allowed married priests, there would be lots more and they would be able to sharer the burden and it would be less pressure on the few they have.
Your argument fails on so many points.
Wrong.
Those with those types of occupations only get called in when they are ‘on call’. A priest is always on call - 24/7.
Apples and oranges and all that.
The priest is married to the church. As I mentioned, if a man is already married or needs to marry, he can become a Deacon. There is nothing to prevent a married man from serving the Church.
The ‘there would therefore be more priests available’ argument is faulty reasoning.
He’s not the first to hold this opinion. The ordination of married men is possible, and sometimes happens. The theological and practical arguments for and against have been hashed to death, so I don’t see Msgr. McSweeney’s point in bringing it up again.
But anyway, I wish him the best in his new role with the Missionaries of the Poor. He’s been a big influence in the order’s expansion into the United States and the participation of American volunteers in the missions in Jamaica, Haiti, and elsewhere. My 17-year-old daughter is with a group at the Jamaican missions this week.
Do you mean this - “For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?”
KJV
Sure. Why not? The Church is already well on the road to hell itself.
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.