Vatican Document Calls Celibacy Non-Negotiable

The San Diego Channel ^ | 6/28/03 | Associated Press

[MVV]

UPDATED: 4:42 p.m. EDT June 28, 2003

VATICAN CITY -- The Catholic Church's celibacy requirement for priests is non-negotiable.

That's the word from the Vatican.

The celibacy rule was reaffirmed in a wide-ranging document issued Saturday.

It acknowledges that fewer and fewer men are signing up for the priesthood. But it says letting priests marry isn't the answer.

Instead, it says current priests should dedicate themselves to attracting more candidates by better explaining the priesthood to lay Catholics, and by encouraging children to consider religious vocations.

The document touched on a host of other issues, including a call for Europe to be more welcoming to immigrants.

It also called for the "full participation" of women in the life of the church. But the Vatican says that doesn't mean as priests, since only men can be ordained.

Copyright 2003 by The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

[sinkspur]

She simply limits who she invites to be ordained to the priesthood.

Its all strictly voluntary.

Yes it is. So, tell me why "She" is inviting married Protestant ministers to ordination?

[Cicero]

I meant that there are a slew of liberal historians and Catholic dissenters who are trying to pretend that the priesthood hasn't always been celibate. Revisionists, if you like. I've read quite a bit of early and medieval history, and as I said, I think this liberal claptrap is just wishful thinking combined with propaganda.

[DallasMike]

A celibate priesthood is a recent innovation as in the last 100 years but it certainly was not a part of the early Church.

=

A celibate priesthood is not a recent innovation as in the last 100 years but it certainly was not a part of the early Church.

[Notwithstanding]

If

your habit
was to show loud support
for the good that pope and bishops do
rather than
to limit your loudness to pissing and moaning
about every single misstep
you think they might have made

then

I might give your opinion weight.



But as your habit is clearly established, nothing you type here at FR is credible.

[sinkspur]

As far as I can tell, you're a clergyman who spends a big lot of his time pissing and moaning about the clergy he works for here at FR.

The clergy I work for are wonderful.

There just aren't enough of them!

[Torie]

I don't think you are very familiar with Sinkspur, per his long posting history. If you were, you would never have typed out what you just did. The man wanted to be a priest, but found the constraints not consistent with his essential being, and thus he was denied his profound wish to serve, and has since observed the wreakage before his very eyes, effected in some large measure by the very construct that inhibited him, a wreakage of the Church which he loves passionately, with all its flaws, because it is ministered by humans, which ipso facto are flawed. That is my take on Sinkspur, having read about a thousand posts of his on these matters. Maybe I am wrong.

[Notwithstanding]

Glad to see you admit that you posted (#16) another lie (I wouldgive you credit and call it an untruth, but at this juncture, you r habit is to make false statements for effect without any regard for their veracity - thus your posts are tanatamount to lies).

[narses]

Sinky appears to be a bitter wannabe. He rejects the reality that vocations are strong where orthodoxy rules and weak where pederasts do. He wants, and therefore facts are meaningless.

[sinkspur]

it's totally within the rights of the Vatican to issue orders by fiat.

Yes it is, which is why the Vatican is looking for any loophole it can find to bring Protestant ministers into the priesthood, and keep married Catholic men out!

[DallasMike]

Sinky appears to be a bitter wannabe.

Sinkspur has more brains and character than you and Notwithstanding put together.

[Irene Adler]

As an Episcopalian with a long and friendly interest in the Catholic Church, I have found Sinkspur's posts to be interesting, well-thought-out, intelligent, and informative. He has always seemed to me to be a FReeper of excellent character who loves his Church.

[Aliska]

Let me ask you: if you were drawing water out of a well, and the well started going dry, how would you respond to someone who said " The answer here is clear: Pray that God fills the well with water"?

Pray that God lets you dig a new well that has pure water.

[yooper]

"But it says letting priests marry isn't the answer."

Yes, it's so much easier for the US Catholic hierarchy to cover up for a pedophile. They've been doing it for years........

[Notwithstanding]

Perhaps you may wish to criticize the practice of ordaining married converts, rather than the discipline of celibacy.

In any event, it seems that you are particularly jealous of thses convert ministers who are married.

Your views are jaded.

I would think that the bishops who are living under the discipline themselves are not incapable of understanding the plusses and minuses of celibacy.

I am also quite grateful that the church is very slow to consider changes.

Lets wait 100 more years to see if celibacy has anything to do with this "shortage". And whether the "shortage" is really a bad thing.

[sinkspur]

If your habit was to show loud support for the good that pope and bishops do rather than to limit your loudness to pissing and moaning about every single misstep you think they might have made

Obviously, you've never been into the conflagrations with ultima ratio, Land of the Irish, and the other schizzies on the religion forum, where I have defended John Paul II at every turn!

He is a great Pope, doctrinally, ecumenically, and spiritually. Unfortunately, he is not going to admit that something's broken in attracting men into the priesthood.

Prayer without action, when action is possible, is, IMO, a waste of time. The Good Lord gave us brains to think our way out of problematic situations.

Why don't you propose some solutions instead of attacking me? I'm not the problem here.

I'm serving the Church. What the hell are you doing?

[narses]

Maybe, but I have seen many posts of his that reflect the bitterness to which I refer. His refusal to understand the role heterodoxy has played in this manufactured "crisis" and his insistance on attaching the shortage to the Rule of Celibacy is clearly motivated by his own background and desire. He is far from selfless. Further, his attacks against me when I joined this BBS reflected a character that I see in a different light than you do.

[CobaltBlue]

I am Catholic and my husband Lutheran. My husband's pastor, who is, of course, married, is a far warmer human being than any priest I've ever met.

But I admit I don't have any priest buddies. I had a cousin who was a priest but he left and got married after a few years. And my favorite nuns (high school teachers) did the same.

Not all, of course.

Personally, I don't think there's anything wrong with priests getting married, but I guess it would change the dynamics quite a bit.

Haven't quite thought through nuns getting married, but don't see how that would work.

I've been ticked off at the Church for years for not letting me be an altar girl.

[yooper]

Here's the $64,000 dollar question: Where in the Bible does anyone denote celibacy as a requirement for holiness or servitude?

[sinkspur]

He rejects the reality that vocations are strong where orthodoxy rules and weak where pederasts do.

Vocations are strong in Latin America and Africa, to be sure.

Seminarians get three squares a day, which is more than can be said for some of their families, I'd guess.

[irish_lad]

I agree. Dennis Miller stated it well...

"No money no chicks, what could possibly go wrong? A wise decision for a 19 year old to make. You know, when I was a kid, the Church said that if I ate a hot dog on Fridays, I'd spend eternity around a camp fire with Pol Pot and Hitler, now [referring to pedophile priests] everyone seems a bit murky on the f*ckin rule book."