Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Cardinal says Priests will marry
The Scotsman ^ | 5/26/2005

Posted on 05/25/2005 10:35:49 PM PDT by sinkspur

THE leader of Scotland's Catholics has risked reigniting a row over married priests by predicting the Vatican will eventually relent and allow the practice.

Cardinal Keith O'Brien, the Archbishop of St Andrews and Edinburgh, said the success of married deacons in the church means the change is likely.

The church leader has upset traditional Catholics in the past with his views on celibacy, homosexuality and the priesthood.

His latest comments were made in an interview with the Catholic Times, which will be published on Sunday,

Asked if he believed married priests will become a reality, he said: "Having seen something of the apostolate of married deacons, I can foresee the day when there will be married priests."

The Cardinal has angered conservative Catholics in the past with his acceptance of gay priests, as long as they remained celibate.

However, since being elevated to the College of Cardinals he has espoused views more in line with Vatican teachings. Cardinal O'Brien's latest comments drew criticism from the right-wing Catholic Truth movement.

A spokesman for the group said: "He is trying to say that he is not necessarily personally in favour of this but we can debate it. It's a sleekit way of trying to have his cake and eat it."

However, a poll of 80 Catholic priests in Scotland conducted only last month suggested 40 per cent believed they should be allowed to marry, but the issue remains thorny to many conservative Catholics.

Cardinal O'Brien gained a reputation as a liberal after he said in 2002, before he became a cardinal, that he saw no end to theological argument against celibacy within the priesthood.

A day later he issued a joint statement with Mario Conti, the archbishop of Glasgow, in which the pair said: "While no-one would suggest clerical celibacy is an unchangeable discipline, we believe it has an enormous value."

The following year he risked angering conservatives again when he broached the subject of married priests.

He said in a thanksgiving mass that the church should have "at every level" a discussion about clerical celibacy.

He said the argument for married priests was supported by the case of married Anglican priests who have converted to Catholicism and been allowed to continue their ministries.

However, at the ecclesiastical senate in Rome in October 2003, he made a statement at the end of the Nicene Creed in which he affirmed support of the church's teachings on celibacy, contraception and homosexuality.

It was claimed at the time, but denied, that the added words were said under pressure from the Vatican.

Since then the Cardinal has been careful not to speak out on any of the issues that caused so much controversy.

A spokesman for the Church said today that the Cardinal's comments were not incompatible with his profession of faith in 2003.

He said: "It is a neutral comment on the issue, it is neither a ringing endorsement of the concept, neither is it an outright denunciation."


TOPICS: Catholic; General Discusssion
KEYWORDS: catholicchurch; europeanchristians; marriage; priests; scotland
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 521-527 next last
To: american colleen

With the Novus Ordo anything can go. You can say anything you want in the way of liberal doctrine and theology-but heaven forbid if you want to perform a TLM-banned for life

Married priests? That along with female ordination, homosexuality and contraception will be the next dominos to fall in the New Church until a Holy Pope or Our Lord himself intervenes.

We can only keep the faith alive and adhere to tradition as Our Lord, the pre Vatican II church, and scripture dictates to save us and our children from Purgatory or worse yet Hell.


101 posted on 05/26/2005 10:09:04 AM PDT by BulldogCatholic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]

To: Torie

A little off topic, but one change I've noted already, and think we'll see more of, is that if any church wants to offer the Tridentine mass, I don't think anyone is going to have the nerve to say anything about it. I would expect it to make a comeback in a big way because I think people are hungry for the cool smoothness of the Gregorian Chant. Look at the way the CDs sell. Put that in a worship context and it is Holy Fire!

And, IMO, this is how it should be. There should be a place for the Novus Ordum, mass in the local language, and there should be a place for preserving the tradition. Why exclude either?

But regarding this Cardinal O'brien, he sounds like one of the Episcoswishes here who don't see that they are swimming against the tide of history that is about to sweep them away.


102 posted on 05/26/2005 10:15:58 AM PDT by johnb838 (Liberalism = Leninism.... Liberalism = Bolshevism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: seamole
Same sense here. Eerie waiting.

It's eerie allright. I'm joining the Catholic church, and earlier I confessed that the only church I've ever been a part of, the Episcopal Church, is a False Church. How far I've come since April 3, 2005. Oh, St. John Paul, Pray for Us. (Can I say that? I'm quite sure he's still stirring the pot.)

103 posted on 05/26/2005 10:18:41 AM PDT by johnb838 (Liberalism = Leninism.... Liberalism = Bolshevism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: annalex
I don't think 1 Timothy 4:3 applies. If St. Paul wanted to point to priestly celibacy as heretical, he would have said, "forbidding priests to marry". And he would not have offered his own celibacy as a worthy example.

No he wouldn't have because there is no such thing as a legitimate priest in the Christian Church, we are all priests.

104 posted on 05/26/2005 10:23:27 AM PDT by biblewonk (Socialism isn't all bad.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: St. Johann Tetzel; Petronski; sinkspur; SuziQ; vox_freedom; cyborg; Selous; B Knotts; Kryptonite; ..
That is the only way to resolve whether we have a fraud/troll on our hands, or just a liberal deacon wrongfully maligned by a crank (myself.)

No it's not the only way This is a very serious matter that WILL be resolved, regardless of any action or non-action taken by Father Schumacher.

Here's one small initial step toward what will be an inevitable resolution:

Q:Sinkspur, are you an active, permanent deacon in the Catholic Church as you have stated numerous times on this forum?

Very simple question. "Yes" or "no" will suffice.

Impersonating clergy was punishable by death under levitcal law. Many people today have been arrested for it. In any case, those who impersonate clergy are precluded from ever becoming a priest in the Catholic Church without a dispensation... which is highly unlikely.

105 posted on 05/26/2005 10:23:40 AM PDT by AAABEST (Kyrie eleison - Christe eleison )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: AAABEST

bump


106 posted on 05/26/2005 10:25:44 AM PDT by cyborg (tagline under construction)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: biblewonk
... there is no such thing as a legitimate priest in the Christian Church, we are all priests.

Interesting. A "bible wonk" who doesn't know the bible.

107 posted on 05/26/2005 10:26:32 AM PDT by AAABEST (Kyrie eleison - Christe eleison )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: AAABEST
Interesting. A "bible wonk" who doesn't know the bible.

Show me from the bible where there is a priesthood within the Christian other than the "priest hood of believers" or Jesus being our high priest.

108 posted on 05/26/2005 10:28:11 AM PDT by biblewonk (Socialism isn't all bad.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
The Cardinal has angered conservative Catholics in the past with his acceptance of gay priests, as long as they remained celibate.

I'm wondering what exactly a "celibate homosexual" might be. Is this something like "government intelligence"?

109 posted on 05/26/2005 10:29:21 AM PDT by <1/1,000,000th%
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: biblewonk

"No he wouldn't have because there is no such thing as a legitimate priest in the Christian Church, we are all priests."

Then why was there no group of Christians who believed that until the XVIth century?

Can you name one of the Fathers, east or west, who rejected the sacrificng priesthood?


110 posted on 05/26/2005 10:35:23 AM PDT by Tantumergo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: biblewonk

You are absolutley right. There is no such thing as a legitimate priest in the Protestant Christian church.


111 posted on 05/26/2005 10:35:37 AM PDT by Rutles4Ever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: american colleen
I was kind of surprised since a poster here on FR has several times made the statement that no deacons were ever accused of abuse.

That's absurd.

Friday, March 7, 2003


Teacher’s death dive
JOHNSTOWN (PA)
The Tribune-Democrat

By PATRICK BUCHNOWSKI, THE TRIBUNE-DEMOCRAT

A Bishop McCort High School teacher died yesterday after he apparently leaped from a building in Canada, one day after he fled Johnstown with a 15-year-old girl.
Thomas M. Lemmon, 38, of the 200 block of Warren Street, Johnstown, was being sought by city police and Canadian authorities for running off with the McCort student, who went willingly. She was unhurt.
Lemmon jumped from the fourth-floor balcony of an apartment complex in Welland, Ontario, authorities said. He was cornered by Niagara Regional Police on a felony Johnstown charge of interfering with the custody of children, and an extradition order had been issued.
It was not clear whether Lemmon was attempting to run or committed suicide, Cambria County District Attorney David Tulowitzki said. ...
The tragedy is the latest to hit the diocese reeling from lawsuits from church members alleging sexual abuse by clergy.
Lemmon’s death left students and faculty wrestling to understand the misfortune that claimed the popular religion instructor and church deacon.

112 posted on 05/26/2005 10:41:41 AM PDT by St. Johann Tetzel (Sometimes "Defending the Faith" means you have to be willing to get your hands dirty...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]

To: AAABEST
No he wouldn't have because there is no such thing as a legitimate priest in Christianity, we are all priests, however the RCC is a whole different thing.
113 posted on 05/26/2005 10:46:17 AM PDT by biblewonk (Socialism isn't all bad.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: biblewonk

The point is, priestly celibacy is not "forbidding people to marry" because people can, and most should marry, according to the Church. Even priests are not forbidden to marry, -- they can leave the Holy Orders and then marry.


114 posted on 05/26/2005 10:46:23 AM PDT by annalex
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: Rutles4Ever

Oops, 113 was for you.


115 posted on 05/26/2005 10:46:46 AM PDT by biblewonk (Socialism isn't all bad.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: annalex
The point is, priestly celibacy is not "forbidding people to marry" because people can, and most should marry, according to the Church. Even priests are not forbidden to marry, -- they can leave the Holy Orders and then marry

The points are: There is no such thing as priestly anything in Christianity except for the exceptions mentioned, and forbidding doesn't mean under penalty of death but only as a "church" rule.

116 posted on 05/26/2005 10:48:48 AM PDT by biblewonk (Socialism isn't all bad.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: biblewonk
There is no such thing as priestly anything in Christianity except for the exceptions mentioned, and forbidding doesn't mean under penalty of death but only as a "church" rule.

If you keep repeating it and repeating it and repeating it...it still won't be true.

117 posted on 05/26/2005 10:51:29 AM PDT by Petronski (A champion of dance, my moves will put you in a trance, and I never leave the disco alone.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: Petronski

It's always been true.


118 posted on 05/26/2005 10:54:03 AM PDT by biblewonk (Socialism isn't all bad.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: AAABEST
No it's not the only way. This is a very serious matter that WILL be resolved, regardless of any action or non-action taken by Father Schumacher.

Claiming to be an ordained active member of the clergy --when one has been instructed that to do so is a violation of Canon Law-- IS a serious canonical crime.

But we must again stress that NO ONE cares about or desires to know the identity of any FReeper presenting themselves in such a fashion.

However, the Catholics have a right to know, and his diocese has a duty to inform them if they are aware of this canonical violation, that someone publicly claiming to be an active ordained clergy member is forbidden to do so, and is, in fact, nothing more than an AmChurch Novus Ordo lay person with no authority in any diocese whatsoever to claim otherwise.

119 posted on 05/26/2005 10:54:56 AM PDT by St. Johann Tetzel (Sometimes "Defending the Faith" means you have to be willing to get your hands dirty...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur; Petronski
SS: It seems obvious that Petronski is on topic and that the faithless Cardinal O'Brien is is bottom-feding liberal scum. Ahhhh, but I repeat myself. O'Brien was required to formally expresss his support for celibacy. He did. He got the red hat he wanted under false pretenses since he started shooting his impertinent mouth off again in favor of undermining celibacy as soon as he felt safe doing so. Make him a thoroughly whipped poster boy for faithless lying in the upper reaches of the hierarchy. I seriously doubt that his summary removaln would harm the Church in Scotland where there is little, under O'Brien's miserable excuse for leadership, to be harmed.

Does that qualify as a personal attack? Is it off topic?

I can always take off on topics that you as well as I know I am refraining from.

120 posted on 05/26/2005 10:56:52 AM PDT by BlackElk (Dean of Discipline of the Tomas de Torquemada Gentlemen's Club)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 521-527 next 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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson