Skip to comments.
Vatican Synod Proposes Married Priests For The Amazon
Hotair ^
| 10/28/2019
| Ed Morrissey
Posted on 10/28/2019 8:21:10 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Will the Catholic Church dispense with celibacy in order to deal with a critical shortage of priests? In a synod addressing the crisis of access in the Amazon, bishops recommended ordaining married deacons as priests — in that region only, for now. Critics worry that this will lead to an end of a thousand-year practice of priestly celibacy in the Latin Rite:
Roman Catholic bishops from across the Amazon recommended Saturday to allow married deacons to become priests a proposal intended to address a severe shortage in the region, but also one that breaks from centuries of church tradition.
The document by the Vatican gathering which needs to be affirmed by Pope Francis offers a significant shift in church views and could potentially signal a new strategy to modernize key tenets of Catholic tradition, such as priestly celibacy, as the church faces a worldwide decline in vocations.
“Modernize” is a curious word in this case. It’s true that priestly celibacy has been a discipline in the Latin Rite for a thousand years, but this “modernization” would actually revert the church back to a more ancient practice, albeit one that was not necessarily universal even in its time. It’s also a curious word to use in an era that has tried to redefine and even discount marriage, when the news is instead filled with news of “throuples” and polyamory.
At any rate, the document may not have been as broad as the Washington Post believes. Crux’s Inés St. Martín and Christopher White report that the recommendation was narrow, specific to the Amazon, and not necessarily a full endorsement of a change in discipline:
Catholic communities in the Amazon might be able to ordain married men to the priesthood under limited circumstances, based on the outcome of a meeting of bishops in Rome that issued its final report Saturday – although the document stopped short of a full-throated endorsement for the ordination of either married men or women deacons.
The Vaticans Synod of Bishops on the Amazon neared its conclusion on Saturday evening, with a majority of the 184 bishops and other clergy voting to approve each paragraph of the final 30-page document, Amazonia: New Ways for the Church and for an Integral Ecology, which offers a narrow opening to ordain married men in remote areas of the 9-country region, although the proposed language limits the ordination to men who are already deacons.
It’s a long way from that narrow opening to ending the celibacy discipline for all priests in the Latin Rite — at least for now. The Amazon has become an area of intense focus for the Vatican, as the Post does do a pretty good of reporting, because of a vortex of trends that threaten the Catholic Church’s standing in South America and this region in particular. A lack of vocational recruitment has left the church with a profound shortage of priests, such that many communities might only see a priest once a year. That leaves a critical gap for access to the Eucharist and reconciliation, two sacraments which deacons cannot minister. At the same time, the Catholic Church is losing ground in South America to evangelicals for a number of reasons, with the priest shortage among them but not necessarily the predominant issue.
Critics contend that these same circumstances can be found in many places, with perhaps only Africa producing a surplus of priests. What constitutes a crisis severe enough to dispense with a discipline, especially of priestly celibacy? One priest visit in a year? In six months? In a month? The latter might apply to places in the US at times, as well as other Western countries.
Bear in mind that priestly celibacy is not a doctrinal point in the Catholic Church, but is only a discipline or practice. It can be changed by the pope and bishops, and has been, although the last time it was changed was a millennium ago. Such a change would still have a massive impact on the Catholic Church, and not all of it “modernizing.” One practical consideration is the difficulty in supporting a family life, as priests typically work 60-80 hours a week or more. Another would be the potential for undermining the morale of the priests now ordained under celibacy, who committed to the position and surrendered family life as a sacrifice.
That may be why the proposal was among the least popular in the synod document among the bishops. The Wall Street Journal’s Francis X. Rocca reports that the celibacy waiver and a proposal to study the ordination of women as deacons passed, but with lower vote counts on other practical solutions for issues in the Amazon:
The question of married priests was the most controversial on the agenda of the three-week synod. Critics of the proposal argued that it would undermine the distinctive character of the priesthood and that such a large change shouldnt be decided at an assembly for a single region, since it would potentially affect the whole church. Bishops in Germany are already planning to discuss celibacy at a series of meetings with lay Catholics beginning in January.
The proposals on celibacy and women deacons were the least popular with the assembly of the 120 recommendations presented to the pope, including many on the Amazons environmental problems and the challenges of ministering there. But both proposals passed the voting threshold of two-thirds of the 181 members eligible to vote. One hundred and twenty eight members voted for married priests, with 41 opposed. One hundred and thirty seven voted for the study of women deacons, with 30 opposed. …
The final decision on the proposal lies with the pope, who told bishops on Saturday evening that he hoped to respond to the synods reactions in a papal teaching document by the end of the year. He didnt specifically refer to the proposal for married priests. In the past, he has said that he is open to the possibility in areas such as the Amazon or remote Pacific islands.
It’s certainly possible to limit the loosening of this discipline to those areas, but for how long? And for what purpose? As recruitment for vocations continues to struggle, that precedent will wear on other bishop’s conferences and put pressure on them to ask for their own exceptions. The existence and success of married Anglican-convert priests has already put this practice under question. This will eventually lead to a more basic question as to whether celibacy delivers enough value to priests to outweigh the lack of candidates who are willing to sacrifice a family life for the priesthood, countered by the financial and pastoral impacts of having married priests as a norm will create.
If nothing else, it’s certainly a change of pace to see the world so enamored of traditional marriage. Maybe we should have these synods every year.
TOPICS: Catholic; Religion & Culture
KEYWORDS: amazon; celibacy; priests
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-36 last
To: rbmillerjr
“Its simply the tradition of the Latin Rite to be celibate and is looked upon as an honor to Jesus Christ”
If this proposal goes through celibacy will eventually be seen as an oddity even for unmarried priests. Satan wins again.
Accept only the pre- Vatican II Church — anything else is an inferior imitation.
21
posted on
10/28/2019 12:13:15 PM PDT
by
steve86
(Prophecies of Maelmhaedhoc O'Morgair (Latin form: Malachy))
To: Mrs. Don-o
A Protestant minister cannot celebrate the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. Period.Yes, and I was surprised by what he told me. And, yes, maybe I misunderstood what he said.
However, I know for sure he said he was raised Catholic and later converted to Protestant - I can't remember which denomination.
To: Mrs. Don-o
A Protestant minister cannot celebrate the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. Period. Nor would a Christian want to celebrate the non-biblical "Mass."
Period.
To: Mrs. Don-o
It seems the Apostles had all forsaken ("we have forsaken") the ordinary rights and joys and obligations of marriage and family life, and were willing to sacrifice everything in order to follow Jesus. It appears you are confusing what Peter said with what Christ said.
To: SeekAndFind
Married priests?
Surprise, most sexual abuse takes place in families. Not a wise move at all.
25
posted on
10/28/2019 4:16:27 PM PDT
by
Salvation
("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
To: aMorePerfectUnion
I don't think so. Here is the whole thing in context:
King James Version (KJV)
Matthew 19:27-29 27Then answered Peter and said unto him, Behold, we have forsaken all, and followed thee; what shall we have therefore?
28And Jesus said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That ye which have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.
29And every one that hath forsaken houses, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my name's sake, shall receive an hundredfold, and shall inherit everlasting life.
This is a declaration that Peter and the Apostles had forsaken the ordinary life of home-wife-family-kids in order to follow Jesus.
26
posted on
10/28/2019 5:47:07 PM PDT
by
Mrs. Don-o
(I praise you, as you hold hold firmly to the traditions, just as I delivered them to you. 1 Cor 11:2)
To: Mrs. Don-o
This is a declaration that Peter and the Apostles had forsaken the ordinary life of home-wife-family-kids in order to follow Jesus.
.....
No, you miss that He switched from the disciples to every one.
Greek makes it clear...
Matthew 19:2730 (WUESTNT): *As for you, you who took the same road with me which I am traveling*; at the time when all things shall be restored to their pristine glory, when the Son of Man shall have taken his seat upon the throne of His glory, you yourselves also shall seat yourselves upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.
*And everyone whoever is of such a nature* as to have abandoned houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother or children or farms for the sake of my Name, shall receive many times as much, and shall inherit life eternal. Moreover, many who are first
Two groups:
1. The disciples who took the same road as Christ
2. Everyone who is of the same nature
To: aMorePerfectUnion
Yes, that makes it even wider, and so makes the point even better.
Only the Twelve will sit on the Twelve Thrones judging the Twelve Tribes of Israel .
But everyone (*everyone* of this sort, of this nature) who gives up home-wife-family-kids and the rest, for the sake of my Name, shall receive many times as much, and shall inherit life eternal.
28
posted on
10/28/2019 7:12:27 PM PDT
by
Mrs. Don-o
(I praise you, as you hold hold firmly to the traditions, just as I delivered them to you. 1 Cor 11:2)
To: Mrs. Don-o
houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother or children or farms for the sake of my Name,0
...
Yes, but it does not mention wives or marriage and in Greek.
houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother or children or farms for the sake of my Name,
To: Salvation
Married priests? Surprise, most sexual abuse takes place in families. Not a wise move at all.
By that logic you should be arguing for celibacy for everybody.
30
posted on
10/29/2019 8:35:49 AM PDT
by
Buckeye McFrog
(Patrick Henry would have been an anti-vaxxer)
To: aMorePerfectUnion
Interesting. I looked Matthew 19:28 up in BibleHub and found that the word "wife"(wives) is mentioned according to:
King James Version
New King James Version
King James 2000
American King James
Aramaic Bible in Plain English
Berean Study Bible
Berean Literal Bible
Douay-Rheims Bible
Jubilee Bible 2000
Darby Bible
Webster's Bible
World English Bible
Young's Literal Translation
and more(NIV,NHGB, etc.)
That makes me think that the most reputable translations, from the 16th to the 20th century, had the word "wives." I don't think these translators would have simply added the term.
That makes me think there must be minority/alternative Greek texts that don't have "wife/wives."
Now here's my question: the parallel verses in the synoptic are Mark 10:29 and Luke 18:29. Could you please look these up in Greek and see if they have omitted "wife/wives" too?
I'm off to see my rheumatologist so I may not get back to you til later. I'm not ignoring you. I just have a certain amount of doctoring in my "active senior lifestyle". :o\
31
posted on
10/29/2019 11:12:13 AM PDT
by
Mrs. Don-o
(The Bible tells me so.)
To: Mrs. Don-o
Matthew 19:28 - no word wives is mentioned in Greek.
As to translations, your mileage may vary widely, depending on how dynamic or literal the translators are. This means sometimes worlds are added to fill in blanks, or are missing in dynamic translations for the sake of readability. Unfortunately, some translators do not take into account the order of words in Greek - often arranged for emphasis. Much of Bible exposition is correcting translations and then explaining them.
For this reason, my preference is always to study from a more literal translation when I am not using Greek.
But the "best Bible" is the one you read.
One of the most literal translations, the NASB, correctly excludes the word "wife" and "wives."
...
Now here's my question: the parallel verses in the synoptic are Mark 10:29 and Luke 18:29. Could you please look these up in Greek and see if they have omitted "wife/wives" too? Gladly.
Mark 10:29 - "Then Peter said, Look. As for us, having abandoned all our own private possessions, we became your followers, travelling the same road with you that you are taking. And He said to them, Assuredly, I am saying to you, There is no one who has abandoned house or wife or brethren or parents or children for the sake of the kingdom of God, who will not receive how many times as much at this time, and in the age to come life eternal.
(Wuest: The New Testament: an expanded translation carrying the Greek sense of each sentence - nice resource, btw.)
Word wife is present in this passage.
Luke 18:29Then Peter said, Look. As for us, having abandoned all our own private possessions, we became your followers, traveling the same road with you that you are taking. And He said to them, Assuredly, I am saying to you, There is no one who has abandoned house or wife or brethren or parents or children for the sake of the kingdom of God, who will not receive how many times as much at this time, and in the age to come life eternal.
(Wuest, K. S. (1961). The New Testament: an expanded Greek translation)
Word wife is present in this passage.
The issue becomes, how can a follower of Christ "abandon" a "wife" for the sake of the Kingdom of God...?
From Thomas Constable's Commentary (one of my former seminary profs):
"Giving up a wife may refer to giving up marriage rather than leaving a wife, or periods of separation to engage in kingdom business may be in view. Constable, T. (2003). Tom Constable’s Expository Notes on the Bible (Lk 18:29).
I think this view squares with the totality of Scripture teaching concerning marriage, divorce, and abandonment.
Nothing about a preference for singleness, nor marriage.
Just a statement of reward for temporal loss.
To: aMorePerfectUnion
Thanks for doing the Greek research! But this doesn't seem to clear up the difficulty. At the
BibleHub Greek Interlinear NT site, it has "wife" at Matthew 19:28:
wife
gynaika
γυναῖκα
.. .just as it does in the parallel verses in Mark and Luke. It gives the following credit:
"We are grateful to those who have made this project possible: Charles Van der Pool for use of the Apostolic Bible Polyglot Interlinear; Lockman Foundation for use of the NASB Exhaustive Concordance (Strong's); David Troidl and Christopher Kimball for use of the WLC with Strong's Tagging."
So it looks like the standard, Strong's-based Greek text and meaning.
I think we agree that the passage does not mean that men need to abandon their wives (or their children or other familial obligations.) Elsewhere in his Epistles, Paul says that a man who is guilty of neglect of his own flesh-and-blood (family) is worse than an infidel.
It does indicate, though, that Peter said he and the other Apostles had left
aphēken
ἀφῆκεν
has left
V-AIA-3S
home,family, etc.
The word has a range of meanings, according to Strongs: abandoned (1), allow (5), allowed (2), divorce (2), forgave (2), forgive (23), forgiven (23), forgives (1), gave...permission (1), leave (7), leaves (2), leaving (8), left (38), let (9), let...alone (6), let him have (1), neglected (1), neglecting (2), send...away (1), etc.
I'm no scholar, but as I understand it, it would not mean "neglecting or abandoning or divorcing" one's wife and kids, but rather, having left (core meaning) the way of life which involves obligations to dependents, wife and kids, etc. That would apply to celibates as well as to widowers with grown kids, for instance.
The subsequent verse, I hope, means that those who refrain from the "married, with kids" lifestyle for the sake of the Kingdom, will acquire, in their church family, many, many more brothers and sisters, etc. --- not many more wives!!
33
posted on
10/29/2019 1:40:45 PM PDT
by
Mrs. Don-o
(The Bible tells me so.)
To: Mrs. Don-o
I think there are two issues we are discussing.
1. What Peter said
2. Christ's response to Peter about the Apostles
3. Christ's response about all disciples.
The meaning comes from Greek words used, how they are used, and the context in which this is said.
.....
The 3 larger points in all this:
There is no preference, nor command for people in ministry to remain unmarried and no unmarried ministry class. Peter didn't say he, or the Apostles had given up marriage, based on this passage. He had a mother-in-law we know.
It was a message to all disciples and not to the Apostles, that all sacrifice will be repaid many times over.
....
So context of Matthew 19:28
Story of the Rich Young Ruler
Christ's statement that it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than to get into heaven.
v. - Peter's question to Christ,
"Then Peter said to Him, “Behold, we have left everything and followed You; what then will there be for us?”
v. 27, 28 - Christ's response to Peter about the Apostles
"And Jesus said to them, “Truly I say to you, that you who have followed Me, in the regeneration when the Son of Man will sit on His glorious throne, you also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.
v. 29 - Christ's statement about all other disciples
“And everyone who has left houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother or children or farms for My name’s sake, will receive many times as much, and will inherit eternal life. “But many who are first will be last; and the last, first.
20:1–16 - Christ's parable of the workers in the Vinyard
I'll finish up quickly because dinner is served!!
The point of the parable was that God will graciously do more for some of those who work for Him than His justice demands
In view of the context, the 12 disciples correspond to the workers hired at the beginning of the day, the beginning of Jesus’ public ministry. Those hired later correspond to other people who became Jesus’ disciples later in His ministry. One of these people might have been the rich young man if he had become a disciple (vv. 16–22). Peter’s question about what the Twelve would receive (v. 27) had implied that they should receive a greater reward since their sacrifice had been greater. This parable taught him that God would give him a just reward for his sacrificial labor for Jesus. Nonetheless God had the right to give just as great reward to those whose service was not as long. This parable taught the disciples not to think of heavenly rewards in terms of justice, getting in proportion to what they deserved. They should think of them in terms of grace, any reward being an act of God’s grace. Even those hired early in the day received a reward, and the landowner had been gracious and generous in hiring them and not others.
Thos. Constable again...
Sorry not more time to proofread for errors!
To: aMorePerfectUnion
You are quite right that there is no dogma saying clergy have to be celibate. We have always had, and still do have, married men who become deacons and even (although exceptionally) priests ---for example, convert clergy, Anglicans who become Catholic, who are married, and who are permitted to become Catholic priests, and stay married.
Plus, 21 of the 22 Catholic Church (Byzantine Greek Catholic, Ukrainian, Iraqi Chaldean Catholics, etc.) --- they all recruit clergy from the ranks of married men. Only the West (by far the biggest of the Catholic churches) has the norm, the small-t tradition of celibate priests and that's only fairly recently,i.e. in the last 1000 years.
35
posted on
10/29/2019 4:34:52 PM PDT
by
Mrs. Don-o
(The Bible tells me so.)
To: Mrs. Don-o
Keep in mind, too, that we know Peter *had been* married --- he had a mother-in-law. Whether he was still married at the time that he became an Apostle and "left" all --- his nets, his boat, his fishing partners --- all his means of livelihood and (presumably) all obligations toward dependents--- we do not know. He may have been a widower with grown children.
I don't think Our Lord would countenance a man with dependents ditching them without support, and going off to live like Our Lord, Who had no home, no place to lay HIs head.
We call this level of total renunciation ("no marriage, no property," etc.) a "Counsel of Perfection," not a commandment. It is for those who are called to it. It must be a choice freely undertaken: not a requirement for all who would be holy.
36
posted on
10/29/2019 4:45:28 PM PDT
by
Mrs. Don-o
(The Bible tells me so.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-36 last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson