Posted on 01/07/2016 4:38:21 AM PST by NYer
I knew an eccentric Englishman who had the delightful knack of mixing his metaphors. This tendency was especially pronounced when he was upset. One of his most memorable mix-ups was when he was worried about some innovation and he spluttered, "Why that would be the thin edge of the iceberg getting its toe in the door!"
I'm a Catholic priest. I have a wife and four children. I was able to be ordained through a special system called the Pastoral Provision which was set up by Pope St. John Paul II to enable married former Anglican (and sometimes Lutheran) ministers to receive a dispensation from the vow of celibacy allowing them to be ordained as Catholic priests. The permission was extended under Pope Benedict XVI to former Anglicans in other countries around the world.
In addition to "Pastoral Provision Priests" there are some married priests ministering within the three personal ordinariates set up by Benedict XVI to provide a unique "church within the church" for people from the Anglican tradition. Furthermore, permission for married men to be ordained has been part of the tradition of several of the Eastern rite churches for a long time.
The fact of the matter therefore, is that we already have married Catholic priests. We are very few in number, but is our existence "the thin edge of the iceberg getting its toe in the door"?
Some Catholics argue that these exceptions to the rule of celibacy for priests will bring about a change in the historic discipline. Liberal Catholics push for the change seeing it as the first step towards women priests and the whole secular agenda. Consequently, some conservative Catholics look askance at married priests, worry that it is indeed "the thin edge of the iceberg getting its toe in the door" and resist any change to the rule.
It is vital for both sides in the debate to understand that the issues of married priests and women priests are completely separate. Priestly celibacy is a matter of church discipline. The sex of a person being ordained is a matter of church doctrine. The distinction between discipline and doctrine is rarely understood by most Catholics and it is certainly not understood by the woman and man in the street.
Church discipline has to do with how things are done, not why they are done. Examples of matters of discipline questions are, "Do we need to fast on Fridays" or "What liturgy is it acceptable to use?" The Church has the authority to change the disciplines.
Women priests are a matter of doctrine, not discipline. Pope St John Paul II decreed that the church does not have the authority to ordain women as priests. This decision was based on the study undertaken by Pope Paul VI and was rooted in fundamental understandings of church authority and the sacraments. John Paul's decision was then deemed "infallible" by Pope Benedict XVI when working as the head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. Apologist Jimmy Akin explains these decisions and provides links to all the documents on his website here.
Pope Francis has affirmed the teaching of his three predecessors when he has stated, "The door to women's ordination is closed." Therefore we can assuredly conclude that having married priests is not "the thin edge of the iceberg getting its toe in the door." Married priests are a possibility. Women priests are not a possibility.
The question remains therefore, "Should the church change her rules and allow priests to marry?" While it is possible that the rules could change it is very unlikely that priests who have already taken a vow of celibacy would be permitted to marry. What is more likely is that a limited permission would be given for some bishops to admit men who are already married to the priesthood. In areas where there is an acute shortage of priests, bishops may be given permission to ordain what the church calls viri probati-- which means "tested men". In other words, older men whose marriages are stable and who are proven to be reliable, mature and wise.
Canon lawyers will have to quarrel about how this can be done, but others suggest that as an act of mercy, another group of men--priests who left the ministry and married--might be re-admitted to ministry on a case by case basis.
Married men as Catholic priests could work, but I can speak from experience that the demands are great on the man and his marriage. Furthermore, from the experience of the Eastern rite churches and Protestant groups, it's safe to say that having married priests on a large scale may cause more problems than it solves.
That's why I predict that a change will not be happening any time soon.
Â
Fr. Dwight Longenecker is a former Evangelical, then an Anglican priest, and now a Catholic priest. Visit his website at dwightlongenecker.com to browse his books and be in touch.
Church discipline has to do with how things are done, not why they are done. Examples of matters of discipline questions are, "Do we need to fast on Fridays" or "What liturgy is it acceptable to use?" The Church has the authority to change the disciplines.
Catholic ping!
This is a point that is often ignored in discussions, especially by proponents of change. Married clergy are not a new thing. They have existed in various Christian churches for many centuries. Both the positive and the negative aspects have been observed and documented.
Yes, dating Priests, divorced Priests, philandering Priests,....don’t exactly “solve” anything.
The married, former Protestant, Catholic Priests I know, or am aware of have been married at least 25 years.
That reduces the risk for the above stated behavior.
What amazes me is how blind people are to liberals. Look at the Episcopal church. The FACTS IF WHAT WILL HAPPEN are right before your eyes. The Catholics have a pope that preaches global warming and gay rights instead of Christianity. The Liberal Religeon is like cancer, and it is taking down the Catholic Church...cell by cell. If they don’t do something radical, they will lose their church as I did.
I remember back in my college years at St. Joseph’s discussing with my best friend there about married versus celebrate clergy. I argued the pro-celebrate and he argued the pro-married. The interesting point is I’m Protestant and he’s Catholic.
I personally know 3 priests who left the priesthood to marry. They also left the Catholic Church.
I am concerned for them and hope that they regain their faith.
Many of the relevant points are entirely practical, independent of doctrinal differences.
Sorry, that post was meant for GreyFriar.
One of the greatest people I've ever met in my life to this point was a Catholic priest who left the priesthood (probably 20-25 years ago) after serving very admirably for a significant amount of time. He was embraced by Rome, for the way that he did it (with glowing comments from the Vatican on paper), and remained very active in the Church as a Eucharistic minister. He never lost his faith. He eventually married (years later, and not related to his leaving), and was a model husband. Amazing man.
On a separate note, one of the most inspiring priests I've ever known had been married and had two children. His wife was killed by a drunk driver, and he was devastated. He raised his children, never remarried, then went to seminary and was ordained. Amazing priest.
A Catholic priest is not permitted to marry. The only way to be a married Catholic priest is to be ordained after getting married. If a Catholic priest is widowed, for example, he would be unable to remarry. So, no (faithful) priests would be dating. They are already not permitted to philander...
There is absolutely nothing in the Bible prohibiting priests from being married men. In point of fact priests were married men in the Bible from Aaron on down. God’s plan is to be fruitful and multiply. It is also worth noting that married priests were the norm for the first ten centuries of Church history. Compulsory clerical celibacy was introduced in the Middle Ages, to fight rampant corruption in the Church, not for any reasons which can be found in the Bible. The Church today acknowledges that celibacy is a discipline, not a dogma or a doctrine, therefore always subject to change. Holy Matrimony and Holy Orders do not have to be mutually exclusive. Celibacy is the Church’s plan, not God’s plan.
I doubt that it happens.
On a separate note, one of the most inspiring priests I’ve ever known had been married and had two children. His wife was killed by a drunk driver, and he was devastated. He raised his children, never remarried, then went to seminary and was ordained. Amazing priest.
I know of a priest who was divorced with two children when he became a priest. Of course, a condition was that he would never marry again.
One of the most inspiring priests I have ever known left the priesthood to marry a woman. They had a son, but the marriage didn’t last and they divorced. He realized he had made a big mistake and petitioned to again actively serve as a priest. We was advised that he would need to have a bishop agree to sponsor him and he could not return to the priesthood until his son reached his 18th birthday. I won’t go into the details, but after a long tortuous journey, he returned to service and has since been on fire for the Lord.
Try reading what I actually wrote before pretending to inform me.
I have never thought Fr. Longnecker to be a very orthodox Catholic.
In my opinion, he is one Anglican “priest” you can take out of the Church of England, but you can’t take the Anglican out of him.
Agreed.
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.