Alright, I am sure I am going to get some heat for this, and I am sure there is a thread somewhere addressing this issue, but I am curious as to what you think with regard to this issue.

Personally, it seems, that one day, don't know when, it will eventually be implemented. Now, don't think me nuts for saying so, nor think I have jumped on the progressive train, but talking to a few good priests, it seems that there is something in the works.

Allow me to demonstrate: Recently there have been a few ordained priests, that were married with kids, coming over from the Episcopal Church. Now, here's the thing, in my diocese and the one I study in, there has been an allowance of ordinations of these priests to the Catholic priesthood. I am not sure where they live, I would imagine a house, and I am not sure of all the particulars, but it seems that these dioceses have allowed for their ordination.

My question, as shared by another priest, is if the Catholic Church did not want any married priests, then why would they ordain them priests? Why not deacons? Why did it have to be priests?

The speculation by one priest is that the Church is slowly introducing it as an "alternate" option for those that are already married. In other words, you have to be married before being ordained.

Another priest, who has since has left to get married, and was an excellent canon lawyer posed an excellent question to this issue as well. How can two very important vows complement each other? How can a priest who has sworn a vow of consealment take a vow to his wife that he will withold nothing from her?

-- (seminarian@ziplip.com), January 05, 2003

Answers

In other words, he has sworn a vow of never revealing anything from the confessional, and also takes a vow to reveal everything to his wife. How can the two complement each other when they seem to be polar opposites?

Further, if we ever see the day of married priests, how long after their married would they be allowed to be ordained? What about when they are to live in a seminary for four years, where would the wives live, and what would be the protocol they are to follow?

Personally, I am curious as to what others feel about this issue, especially those on this forum that, like myself, are studying to be priests. Would it change the view of the priesthood? Would we still have the same priesthood? What about when the priests start thinking that they have been "called" to the married life AFTER being ordained? What would happen then?

Finally, it seems that that may solve SOME of the problems inherent in the Church today, but I don't think it would solve them all. Besides, didn't St. Paul say "The unmarried man is anxious about the affairs of the Lord, how to please the Lord; but the married man is anxious about worldly affairs, how to please his wife, and his interests are divided." Can a divided heart stand when faced with two great sacraments and being bound by two of the greatest vows that a human can submit to? I guess time will tell.

-- (seminarian@ziplip.com), January 05, 2003.

Dear seminarian,

Marriage does not include a vow that one will not conceal anything from one's spouse, especially if one happens to be a doctor, lawyer, judge, marriage counselor, clergyman, psychiatrist, etc. A great many professions require access to confidential information that cannot ethically, and in many cases legally be passed on to anyone, including one's spouse.

Peace! Paul

-- Paul (PaulCyp@cox.net), January 06, 2003.

Wow, I was seriously misinformed, thanks for the clarification.

-- (seminarian@ziplip.com), January 06, 2003.

Seminarian writes:

" The speculation by one priest is that the Church is slowly introducing it as an "alternate" option for those that are already married. In other words, you have to be married before being ordained."

I never liked this kind of speculation. A similar "speculation" supposes that female altar servers (altar girls?) are a preamble to women's ordination.

Anyway, I hope we all can discuss this accurately. We're really talking about the Western Catholic Tradition, not the Eastern Traditions. In the East, priests can be married.

Seminarian writes:

"Further, if we ever see the day of married priests, how long after their married would they be allowed to be ordained? What about when they are to live in a seminary for four years, where would the wives live, and what would be the protocol they are to follow? "

I wondered about this myself. Though Eastern Catholic and Orthodox priests can be married, they cannot marry after their ordination. This means that that pretty much all of them have to be married when attending the seminary. Hmmm...

Anyway, this is one of those topics that I'm always interested in, so that's my $0.02.

Enjoy,

Mateo.

PS--Seminarian, you and your brother seminarians are always in my prayers!

-- (MattElFeo@netscape.net), January 06, 2003.

PS--Seminarian, you and your brother seminarians are always in my prayers!

Thank you Mateo it has been quite difficult lately, I need and appreciate all the prayers I can get.

Thanks again

God Bless

-- (seminarian@ziplip.com), January 06, 2003.

I have never been against the concept of Catholic priests being married men. If the church decided that it was permitting priests to marry, it wouldn't bother me at all. I grew up in a Greek Orthodox neighborhood in Boston and was quite accustomed to their married priests. From a standpoint of being away from the church for many years and being in the Protestant churches, I can say that it has been my personal observation that married men do NOT have the time that a priest has to devote to God's work. They are just as tied up in soccer games and school open houses and sick children/wives as everyone else is. So often, when someone in the congregation needs spiritual guidance for a crisis, the pastor is unavailable due to a family event. I'm not saying that a priest in hanging in the rectory 24/7, but they sure aren't busy driving "junior" to take his SAT's either while "mom" is at work. On the other hand..LOL..our Orthodox brothers have made do nicely...I was unaware that the church had ordained any married men whose wives were still living..interesting.

-- lesley (martchas@hotmail.com), January 06, 2003.

Yes, the Church has ordained a considerable number of ex-Anglican and ex-Episcopalian priests as Catholic priests. One such priest was ordained here just last month. I first met him when he was just a married "former Episcopalian priest" who had converted to Catholicism and was teaching theology at a local Catholic College. Then, a year or so later he was ordained a Catholic deacon; and then most recently he was ordained a Catholic priest. While not commonplace, this situation is not extremely rare either. It has probably occurred at least a couple of hundred times. Of course, while conversion of non-Catholic priests is the principle source of married priests in the Latin Rite, there a great many married Catholic priests in the Eastern Rite of the Church, which allows married men to become priests.

Anglican, Episcopalian, and Orthodox priests who are married do seem to make it work, though there is really no way to assess the quality of their marriages, and these churches do not accept divorce. Protestant ministers have a high rate of divorce, and one cannot help wondering if the tension between the demands of ministry on the one hand, and family responsibilities on the other, is the main cause of these relationship problems. One might also wonder whether similar problems lie beneath the surface in the marriages of Catholic priests. I haven't heard of any studies being done.

continued ............

-- Paul (PaulCyp@cox.net), January 06, 2003.

The problems Lesley ennumerated above are just the kinds of reasons why I personally believe that the unmarried priesthood is a wise policy. If married men are allowed to become priests, I think we may see a sumultaneous increase in the quantity, and decrease in the quality of priests. St. Paul understood the tension between service to the Church and service to a family. He wrote:

"I want you to be free from concerns. One who is unmarried is concerned about the things of the Lord, how he may please the Lord; but one who is married is concerned about the things of the world, how he may please his wife, and his interests are divided" (1 Cor 7:32-34)

-- Paul (PaulCyp@cox.net), January 06, 2003.

Dear Seminarian,

In your original post you said:

"...and I am not sure of all the particulars, but it seems that these dioceses have allowed for their ordination. "

I just wanted to let you know that the married priest at my parish received his permsission to become a priest DIRECTLY from Pope John Paul II. It went through the diocese, but permission had to come from the pope himself.

cksunshine

P.S. Everytime I read a post from you I try to remember to say a prayer for you and for your heart. Hope things are continuing to be ok.

-- cksunshine (ck_sunshine@hotmail.com), January 06, 2003.

Yes CK, that was my point, that the Pope is now allowing for a married priesthood. Although, it has been kept relatively quiet, and it is not widely known, it is happening. The question I am posing, is why is it happening? Realistically, the Church could just ordain them permanent deacons, but instead they have chosen the priesthood. It seems the Church is moving in that direction, but again, only time will truly tell.

P.S. Thank you for keeping me in your prayer, you can be assured that you are also in mine.

God Bless

-- (seminarian@ziplip.com), January 06, 2003.

We have a local priest, married, a convert from the Episcopal church, who says one of the local indult Latin Masses. A great priest. Enough said. I believe his children are older. But I'll give another example. At the local Ukrainian Catholic Church, there was a married priest from Ukraine, with 3 small children. Many in the parish complained because when he was called to come out for sick calls, on several occasions, he told the caller to find another priest because he was babysitting! I guess his wife was going to night school. He is now under suspension for a year and cannot say Mass. I don't know how he is supporting his family.... The priest is married to his Church. A married man's family should come first. Yes, I fully accept where Episcopalian ministers converting become priests...etc. But this is meant to be an exception to the rule.

-- Christina (introibo2000@yahoo.com), January 06, 2003.

Dear seminarian,

It is being "kept relatively quiet? The recent ordination of our ex-Episcopalian priest was on the front page of the diocesan paper, complete with pictures! What reason would the Church have for keeping it quiet? Is it something to be ashamed of?

Peace! Paul

-- Paul (PaulCyp@cox.net), January 06, 2003.

Hello, Paul.
You wrote: "Anglican, Episcopalian, and Orthodox [A/E/O] priests who are married do seem to make it work, though there is really no way to assess the quality of their marriages, and these churches do not accept divorce."

By your final phrase, do you mean to say (1) that the A/E/Os "do not accept divorce" at all -- or that (2) the A/E/Os will not allow their clergy to divorce?

If you mean the first, I'm sure that you are mistaken, because the two protestant denominations (Anglican and Episcopalian), as well as the Eastern Orthodox churches, all permit divorce and "remarriage" to the laity.

If you mean the second, then I would ask these further questions:
1. Did you mean to say that Anglican and Episcopalian clergy cannot even divorce -- or only that they cannot "remarry"? I find it hard to believe that they would be excommunicated if divorced and not remarried. I would even suspect that they can be "remarried" without being excommunicated (though they may have to give up their pastorships). I'm not sure about this.
2. Did you mean to say that a married Orthodox priest would be excommunicated after being divorced? (I know that he cannot "remarry," because no Orthodox priest can get married after his ordination.)

Thank you, in advance, for clarifications.
John

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@hotmail.com), January 06, 2003.

-- (_@_._), January 06, 2003.

Dear seminarian, It is being "kept relatively quiet? The recent ordination of our ex- Episcopalian priest was on the front page of the diocesan paper, complete with pictures! What reason would the Church have for keeping it quiet? Is it something to be ashamed of?

Well, relatively quiet in the major scheme of things. There have been more than a few ordination of married priests, and they are not frequently heard of.

I don't think it is something that the Church is to be ashamed of, rather, I was just saying that the Church has not spoken too widely about it, the way it has with other issues facing the Church today.

God Bless

-- (seminarian@ziplip.com), January 06, 2003.

Very interesting discussion. I have two questions about married Eastern-rite priests.

First of all, I have heard that Eastern-Catholic dioceses in North America may not ordain married men. I was looking at a list of faculty for a Catholic Univeristy in Ottawa, ON; it included three married Ukrainian Catholic priests, but all of these had been ordained in Europe.

Secondly, I have heared that the question of marriage after ordination in the Orthodox Church is not as cut-and-dried as at first glance. For example, one might be able to express his intention to marry before being ordained deacon, as long as the marriage takes place before he is priested. At the same time, I have heared that there is a lot of disagreement among bishops and canon-lawyers as to remarriage after the death of a spouse. Apparently, some priests whose wives have died have remarried, and been allowed to continue functioning as priests by their bishops. (In no case has a priest remarried after a divorce been allowed to be remain an active priest.)

Would anybody be able to clarify this for me?

My own personal view on this subject is that the single life is extremely important for the church, and I regret that this is something that the protestant churches (I am from a protestant background) have almost entirely lost. But the same St. Paul who wished that his readers would be able to live without marriage also strongly defended the right of Christian missionaries to travel with their wives.

I feel that there is a difference between the call to singleness, and the call to serve as a parish-priest.

Michael

-- Michael Trolly (mtrolly@redeemer.on.ca), January 27, 2003.

I must say, you have raised quite an interesting question. Note first off, I have no degree whatsoever in Biblical Doctrine, I'm simply stating my own observations. I cracked open my Bible to Leviticus where God is telling Moses how to set up the first Temple of the Isrealite nation, and how to ordain Aaron and his sons. I thought I had read something that would shed a light on the subject for me, but I never found it. What did strike me, though, was that Aaron's family was given the priesthood, right? (Please correct me if I'm wrong) In order for something to stay in the family, there has to be a family. That means marriage and kids. I know this skirts the actual ethical question of marriage after ordination, but I just though it was neat to find a basis for what does exist. According to Leviticus, it's O.K. to be married and a priest. Single would definitely enable one to make a bigger dent in the realm of Satan, and would be a very honorable state of service, but a married man has his place in the ministry. I think ultimately it all depends on God. He still speaks to us, and he can let us know whether he thinks it is O.K. for priests to marry or not. It all comes down to trust in Him.

I pray that in their move to appeal so to speak to the modern pagan world, that they will not neglect His word.

So there's my little uneducated two cents. God Bless!

LJC

-- LJC (victorywindowset@sympatico.ca), April 08, 2003.

Dear LJC,

"According to Leviticus, it's O.K. to be married and a priest."

A: While there is no reason to suppose that the rules for the Levitical priesthood would be applicable to the Christian Church (after all, few of the prescriptions of the Mosaic Law apply to Christians), the Church does in fact agree that there is nothing intrinsically wrong with married priests. In fact, there are a great many married Catholic priests today. Married priests are commonplace in the Eastern Rite of the Catholic Church, and there are even a fair number of married priests now in the Latin Rite of the Church, principally married Anglican or Episcopal priests who have converted, and married Eastern Rite priests who have come over to the Latin Rite. So the Church is completely open to the idea of married priests, should it become evident that such a regulation in the Latin Rite would be of greatest benefit to the Church and the ministry.

-- Paul (PaulCyp@cox.net), April 08, 2003.

I am a married Catholic priest, formerly Episcopalian. It is a wonderful gift, to be able to serve again as a priest, after having sacrificed it for the greater good of becoming Catholic. Yes, indeed, there are conflicts between marriage and priesthood, but keeping a confidence and the seal of the confessional are not part of it. The main conflict is time: I'm working full time as a chaplain, plus assist in a parish on weekends, plus the occasional funeral or wedding. My kids and wife help keep me sane, grounded, and balanced. I just spent a week hiking with my 15 year old son. My wife received her MA in theology while I was in seminary, and teaches at a Jesuit high school. Is this a back door to a married priesthood in the western rite? I don't think so, except for those, sometimes even bishops, who misunderstand. More than anything, it is a recognition of just how close the relations between the Anglican and Catholic church were becoming. Paul VI called them "Sister Churches" and gave the Archbishop of Canterbury his episcopal ring. It seemed as if a type of reunion was possible. Was it a tragedy or that the Anglican system shipwrecked? Or would it have been an even greater disaster if "reunion" had happened before the ordination of women and the fragmentation of Anglicanism? FYI, Episcopal priests can and often do divorce and remarry, sometimes several times. Thank you, Pope John Paul II for granting this great privilege!

-- (Fr.) Ernest Davis (erniedavis@earthlink.net), July 21, 2003.

Jmj

Thanks, Fr. Davis.
The forum is blessed to have first-hand testimony. [Will you be on "The Journey Home" some day?] I think that these words of yours should be very telling to those who recommend a change in the current discipline: "The main conflict is time." We (pro-celibacy) laymen have assumed and stated the same thing, so it is good to have you confirm it.

You wrote: "Or would it have been an even greater disaster if 'reunion' had happened before the ordination of women and the fragmentation of Anglicanism?"

Actually, many are shocked to learn that "the ordination [sic] of women" had already begun to occur in the Anglican Communion, even a decade before the papacy of John XXIII (1958-1963). I believe that Pope Paul VI feared that this kind of "ordination" was about to spread rapidly to the rest of Anglicanism -- and that he tried to bring about a reunion with the "Church of England" before that could occur. The first "priestly ordinations" of women in the Anglican Communion occurred in Hong Kong in 1948.

God bless you.
John

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@hotmail.com), July 22, 2003.

I do not have an answer, but I do agree that Priests should be allowed to marry. Were Priests 'living in sin' for the first 1000 years? 'The Church' loves to quote St. Paul. Did he not say that 'there is no male or female ... all are one in Christ'? Where in the Bible are Bishops, Cardinals and Popes mentioned? How can we have a 'Holy See' which has been so corrupt in the past? But the biggest question I have is "How did 'The Church' come to mean a bunch of 'out of touch' old men in Rome, while ignoring the much larger 'body' of the Church? Whenever I watch 'Harry Potter' and see Valdemort I think of the Papacy and the Cardinals. Valdemort said: "There is no good and evil, there is only power, and those too weak to seak it." I have a picture of the 'laughing Christ' on my wall ... I like to think that He is a man of Joy and Laughter. By the way, where is Matthew Fox these days? ej adams

-- Edward J. Adams (ejadams@cableregina.com), February 19, 2004.

Mr. Adams:

Sex isn't a sin. Marriage isn't a sin.

Priests are celibates because Our Divine Lord is celibate. They stand amidst us as true images of Christ; alter-egoes of Our Lord. This is called In persona Christi, by theologians.

It isn't a theological doctrine, but an eclessiastical discipline. Priests do not enter their vocations ''robbed'' of their right to take wives. If they wish to marry, they can enter the vocation we know as Matrimony. A different, and very worthy; a BLESSED vocation.

Vocation to the holy priesthood calls for CHOOSING celibacy. Priests CHOOSE to remain single. Not in order to avoid sin; but to serve God with all their hearts. No one in the Catholic Church forces celibacy on any priest. He elects to remain celibate when he follows the vocation of Holy Orders. Nuns do the same, as vocational religious'.

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), February 19, 2004.

As an outsider looking in I found the celibate priesthood to be one of many issues that was quite alien to me. With time and study however I have come to agree with all of the Church's controvertial stances.

1) I think the celibate priesthood PROVES the faith of the Church's clergy. Seeing a husband and wife (envangelical) team preach on TV does not inspire me as much as it makes me feel more cynical.

2) Married clergy would have enormous family pressures and conflicts. Do I go to Jrs ball game or do last rites on Mrs Smith?

3) Would married clergy have a vow of poverty? This could be a big money issue. I know money isnt everything but parishioners in good faith would have to assist the priests.

4) As devout catholics the married priests should have lots of children. See #3.

5) The Church can choose priests through the ordination process but cannot choose wives. Wives would have the ears of their husbands and many might have views contrary to Church teachings. Some wives would be of other faiths which could likewise prove problematic.

6) Being married immerses you in the "real" world. It becomes tougher to deal objectively with tough issues like abortion, contraception, sodomy, divorce etc.

7) What if your wife insists on contraception? See #6

8) What if your child has an abortion? See #6

9) It seems that this "real" world contact could lead to more scandals --more than the current scandals

I love women and even married one but I think it would be tough to both send the message of faith AND live the life of service required as a priest.

-- David F (dqf@cox.net), February 20, 2004.

3) Would married clergy have a vow of poverty? This could be a big money issue. I know money isnt everything but parishioners in good faith would have to assist the priests.

Priests do not take any vows at all. Only memebers of religious orders take vows.

-- Hugh (hugh@inspired.com), February 21, 2004.

You are partly correct. Diocesine priests take vows of celibacy and obedience to their bishop.

Members of religious orders have additional vows like poverty.

Some priests that minister to the community are members of religious orders with vows of poverty.

Still the premise of money for priestly families stands whether the priest has made a vow of poverty or not.

-- David F (dqf@cox.net), February 21, 2004.

I am wrong. secular priests take a promise not a vow.

-- David F (dqf@cox.net), February 21, 2004.

Excuse me; what is a ''secular priest?''

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), February 21, 2004.

From Holy Orders site.

What is the difference between a religious order priest and a secular priest?

There are two types of priest, religious and secular. A secular priest, sometimes called a diocesan priest, is a parish priest who belongs to a particular diocese. Monsignor Horrigan and Fr. Wassinger are secular priests. They will always remain in the Archdiocese of Denver although they will move from parish to parish within the archdiocese. They go wherever the Archbishop tells them to go.

A religious priest belongs to a religious order. Religious order priests have different charisms or missions, which vary from order to order. Some do missionary work like the Maryknoll Fathers. Some work with the poor like the Franciscans and Capuchins. Some teach like the Dominicans and the Jesuits.

-- David F (dqf@cox.net), February 21, 2004.

Diocesan priests of the Latin Church make a promise of obedience to their bishop (and his successors) only. No vows at all and no other promises. They make this promise at their diaconate ordination and it is renewed again at their priestly ordination (for those going on). The first obedience the bishop then asks of them is celibate chastity.

Diocesan priests in, at least some of, the Eastern Catholic Churches do not even make promises.

-- Fr. Mike Skrocki, JCL (abounamike@aol.com), February 23, 2004.

Fr. Mike, I can't tell you how much I enjoy reading your very informative and succinct posts. Please continue to share the faith with us in the future.

-- Ed (catholic4444@yahoo.ca), February 23, 2004.

I think that it would be highly irregular for the Church to make celibacy optional. Sometimes people talk about the late origins of the tradition, but this is misleading: virginity was an honored state from the very beginning, and continence (abstinence) was the law of the Church for married priest after the 5th century.

Besides, Pope John Paul II is not very interested in making any changes in the near or remote future.

"The synod does not wish to leave any doubts in the mind of anyone regarding the Church's firm will to maintain the law that demands perpetual and freely chosen celibacy for present and future candidates for priestly ordination in the Latin rite. The synod would like to see celibacy presented and explained in the fullness of its biblical, theological and spiritual richness, as a precious gift given by God to his Church and as a sign of the kingdom which is not of this world -- a sign of God's love for this world and of the undivided love of the priest for God and for God's people, with the result that celibacy is seen as a positive enrichment of the priesthood."

I would highly recommend reading #20 of the Pope's Pastores Dabo Vobis for a highly refined understanding of the value of celibacy.

v---- celibate. Celebrate! :)

-- anon (ymous@god.bless), February 24, 2004.

Fr. Mike,

I've been to a couple of ordinations, and they haven't been as you described. I understood that two promises--obedience and celibacy-- were the norm.

However, I have been told that Dominicans only take a vow of obedience (to their superior [abbot?] and to our Blessed Mother), whence comes poverty and celibacy.

-- anon (ymous@god.bless), February 24, 2004.

Anon,

While it may not have been obvious in the ritual that promise of celibacy comes AFTER the promise of obedience and is actually being asked for under the promise of obedience that was just taken.

Hope that's helpful.

-- Fr. Michael Skrocki, JCL (abounamike@aol.com), February 26, 2004.

Was not there a time many centuries ago where the church allowed married priests but then did away with it? It does seem better if a priest is not married so his entire focus is on Christ as saint Paul says.

My priest says that there is a great shortage of priest now-a-days, at least in the state I live in. Would it be bad for priest to be married again like before or do any of you think that would just be giving in to the wants of the flesh?

-- Jason (Enchanted fire@aol.com), February 28, 2004.

Jason,
Celibate priests in the Latin Rite of Catholicism is a custom, not dogma. The custom can change without affecting the faith. The universality of this custom did not come suddenly, it evolved over several centuries. It is true that in the very early Church some priests of the Latin Rite married, and some did not choosing instead to follow Christ’s lead and remain celibate devoting their entire life’s energy to proclaiming the Good News of Jesus Christ. There is considerable debate amongst historians as to whether married priests were ever common. The first important declaration by Church authorities in favor of celibacy was made first by the Council of Elvira in 305 in Spain. This was followed by the Councils of Galatia and Cappadocia in 315, and the highly influential First Council of Nicaea (325) at which it was decided to accept the prohibition of marriage after ordination. While affirmed by the Roman council in 386 and in other assemblies, celibacy was not universally recognized in the West until the eleventh century and the Gregorian Reform. At the Synod of Sutri (1074) convened by Pope Gregory VII (r. 1073- 1085), priests were not allowed to marry and married men were declared ineligible for ordination.

The reason for the shortage of priests has a lot of reasons behind it. There is little interest in Rome to allow priests to marry instead the emphasis has been to return to an orthodoxy of faith that the Church in the United States has abandoned. In other parts of the world where orthodoxy is not a problem, vocations are also not a problem.

For more on this, see: this article.

In Christ

-- Bill Nelson (bnelson45@hotmail.com), February 28, 2004.

end link

-- Bill Nelson (bnelson45@Hotmail.com), February 28, 2004.