Posted on 11/07/2019 3:55:27 PM PST by ebb tide
ROME, November 7, 2019 (LifeSiteNews) – Italian Cardinal Camillo Ruini, a close ally of John Paul II and the previous head of the country’s bishops’ conference, said the Amazon Synod made the “wrong choice” in recommending in its final document that married men be ordained as priests. He added that he hopes and prays Pope Francis will “not confirm” the recommendation.
Cardinal Ruini, a former Vicar General of Rome, told Italian daily Corriere della Sera in a Nov. 3 interview: “In the Amazon, and also in other parts of the world, there is a serious shortage of priests, and Christian communities often remain deprived of the Mass.” The cardinal went on to say that it is “understandable that there is a push to ordain married deacons as priests,” adding that it is “in this sense most of the synod was in favor of ordaining married deacons to the priesthood.”
“In my opinion, however, this is a wrong choice. And I hope and pray that the Pope, in the upcoming post-synodal apostolic exhortation, will not confirm it,” the cardinal said.
At 88 years old, the eminent clergyman identified two reasons why it would be a mistake to make an exception in the vast Amazonian region to priestly celibacy in the Latin rite of the Catholic Church. According to Cardinal Ruini, the first reason is that in today’s “eroticized” society, “priestly celibacy is a great sign of total dedication to God and to the service of our brothers.”
The working document, Instrumentum Laboris, that preceded the Amazonia Synod, recommended that so-called viri probati (mature married men) be considered for ordination to the priesthood. Critics of the proposal, including cardinals Walter Brandmuller and Gerhard Muller, have rejected it, stating that it would be a stark departure from millennial Church tradition.
As expected, the Synod’s Final Document calls for the admittance to the priesthood of married men already deacons.
“[W]e propose to establish criteria and dispositions on the part of the competent authority [...] to ordain as priests men who are apt for it and who are recognized by the community, who are fruitful permanent deacons and who receive an adequate formation for the priesthood, even if they have a legitimately constituted and stable family [...]. With regard to this, some wished that the topic be addressed in a universal way,” the final document states.
The last proposal about addressing the topic in a “universal way” appears to refer to the ordination of married men outside of the Amazon region.
Relinquishing the discipline of celibacy in even just one region, the Cardinal declared, “would be to yield to the spirit of the world, which always tries to penetrate the Church, and that would hardly stop with exceptional cases like the Amazon.” Another reason to adhere to the requirement for celibacy, said the Cardinal, is that married priests and their wives are not immune to the effects of the crisis in the institution of marriage.
“Their human and spiritual condition could not fail to be affected,” he said. When asked by the interviewer whether having married priests would create a “mess,” the Cardinal answered affirmatively.
Cardinal Ruini admitted that celibacy was a trial for him, even though “it is a great gift that the Lord gave me.” For him, a consolation has been his close relations with his sister and other family members, as well as his friendship with young people. He said, “And I am fortunate to live with people who are like a family to me.”
According to Cardinal Ruini, there is “only one decisive answer” to the problem of vocations to the priesthood: “We Christians, and in particular we priests and religious, must be closer to God in our lives, lead a more holy life, and beg God for all this in prayer. Without getting tired.”
Cardinal Ruini was asked by interviewer Aldo Cazzullo whether he agrees with Pope emeritus Benedict XVI that the crisis of Europe is “anthropological: man no longer knows who he is.” The Cardinal affirmed, “The main reason we no longer know who we are is that we no longer believe we are made in the image of God; the consequence is that we no longer have our identity, compared to the rest of nature.”
Ping
What, no gay marriage in the Catholic Church?
Why no married men? Peter was married. He even had a mother in law.
It all seems based on Paul saying it was better not to be married.
It is a Catholic church rule, not even doctrine or dogma.
Most likely, priesthood in Middle ages was such a high level in the social order, with high material rewards in security and material comfort, that there was very stiff competition to be a priest.
This would be one way to trim down the competition.
Be fruitful and multiply- except priests.
I know that in my marriage there have been days when I was glad to go to work just to be away from my wife and family.
But on those days, I don’t think I could have cleared my mind to say a mass or hear a confession.
On those days my mind could not have focused on God and the divine rites.
On those days you may need a priest, but you are not ready to be a priest.
Although a priest may take a day off from time to time, they never get a day off from being a priest. This is also true of being a husband. Both are vocations that require 100% commitment. I think this is why priest can not be married. There can be no divided responsibilities in either vocation.
Don’t take this the wrong way. A husband and father must be devoted to God 100%. But he must be the head of a family and devoted to bringing those souls entrusted to him to the eternal salvation of Christ.
A priest has the same responsibility but on a larger scale. A priest is entrusted with a parish and has that same responsibility to the members of his parish, to bring those souls to ever lasting life in the City of God.
It predates the Christ and goes back to Judaism.
The Temple Priest were required to be celibate on the days that they performed sacrifices in the temple. It was part of the rituals of purification prior to performing sacrifices.
The priest could be married but must be celibate on the days of sacrifice. But the priest rotated the duties of performing sacrifices, so they needed only be celibate occasionally.
Also, sacrifices could only be offered in the temple in Jerusalem so a priest anywhere else was not obligated.
Roman Catholic priest are required to offer the sacrifice of the mass daily, so such an arrangement is impossible.
Did Jesus Christ or any of His twelve apostles "multiply"?
The 3 pastoral letters from Paul beg to differ.
We CAN know that Jesus didn't, but can anyone say the same about the Apostles? Well, let's see what some early church fathers mentioned:
From http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/250103.htm, Eusebius of Caesarea's Church History talks a bit about this:
Clement, indeed, whose words we have just quoted, after the above-mentioned facts gives a statement, on account of those who rejected marriage, of the apostles that had wives. Or will they, says he, reject even the apostles? For Peter and Philip begot children; and Philip also gave his daughters in marriage. And Paul does not hesitate, in one of his epistles, to greet his wife, whom he did not take about with him, that he might not be inconvenienced in his ministry.
That Philip the apostle dwelt at Hierapolis with his daughters has been already stated. But it must be noted here that Papias, their contemporary, says that he heard a wonderful tale from the daughters of Philip.
Clement, indeed, whose words we have just quoted, after the above-mentioned facts gives a statement, on account of those who rejected marriage, of the apostles that had wives. "Or will they," says he, "reject even the apostles? For Peter and Philip begot children; and Philip also gave his daughters in marriage. And Paul does not hesitate, in one of his epistles, to greet his wife, whom he did not take about with him, that he might not be inconvenienced in his ministry."
Peter was married and may have had children.
Phillip was married also. He may have had four daughters, if he was the same Philip the Evangelist mentioned in Acts.
Philip’s daughters were evangelists in their own right, since they are mentioned in the context of converting people to Christianity.
Some of the other apostles were married as well, but the Bible doesn’t say which ones, specifically.
That’s not sola scriptura, is it?
Huh? I would think that after all this time you would finally understand what that term means. Guess not.
Nobody’s dancing here but YOU! LOL!
Why would I bring up Luther? He’s the prime example of breaking his vow of celibacy.
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.