Free Republic
Browse · Search
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 ... 461-480481-500501-520521-527 last
Comment #521 Removed by Moderator

Comment #522 Removed by Moderator

To: seamole

Thank you.

So, what constitutes a valid marriage -- exchange of vows and marriageability?

523 posted on 06/13/2005 10:05:16 AM PDT by annalex
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 520 | View Replies]

To: seamole
Yes, they were.

No way man. Nope not at all. :-P

524 posted on 06/13/2005 10:35:39 AM PDT by biblewonk (Yes I think I am a bible worshipper.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 522 | View Replies]

Comment #525 Removed by Moderator

To: seamole
Well, again, priest is derived from presbyter. We do not call the priest "presbyter" in common English usage, because we have called him "priest" in all the 1600+ years since Christianity was introduced to the English. Yet we don't have a separate word for sacerdos except "priest", and we need to distinguish between the common sacerdos and the presbyter sacerdos through some means, as the presbyters are very important to us. As you say, they are professionals and they are the only ones allowed to perform various sacraments, including the Eucharist, which we Catholics (and Orthodox, Anglicans, Lutherans, and the Churches of Christ, among others) hold in the highest esteem.

I certainly don't know about word derivation but I know for sure that an elder in the NT church is in no way a Priest in the OT sense. So why do you keep saying that it is. The two jobs are totally different.

526 posted on 06/14/2005 4:52:17 AM PDT by biblewonk (Yes I think I am a bible worshipper.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 519 | View Replies]

To: seamole
Whenever this problem has arisen in the Latin language, the Catholic Church has tended to put new words into common Latin usage, or to solemnly define words that had previously been used with different meanings. This is how the term Sacrament became so important in Catholic theology.

Yet another thing I dislike about the RCC.

527 posted on 06/14/2005 4:53:10 AM PDT by biblewonk (Yes I think I am a bible worshipper.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 519 | View Replies]

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 461-480481-500501-520521-527 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
Topics · Post Article

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