the married Chrisitans cannot be the priest?

[walter1234]

Why can't the married Christians be the priests in Catholic Church?

[Punch]

Why can't the married Christians be the priest in Catholic Church?

Because the Western Church has always had a perverted view of marriage.

[walter1234]

Why can't the married Christians be the priest in Catholic Church?

Because the Western Church has always had a perverted view of marriage.

How does western church pervert  the view of marriage?

[Deacon Lance]

Why can't the married Christians be the priests in Catholic Church?

They can.  An unmarried presbyterate is a discipline of the Latin Catholic Church, but they have exceptions.  Most of the Eastern Catholic Churches have a married presbyterate just as their Orthodox counterparts.

[theistgal]

Married men can become priests in both the Eastern and Western Churches. It's not as common in the West as in the East but it does happen. Usually in the West it's because a married priest in another church converted. For example, we have a married Romanian Catholic priest at our church, who converted from Romanian Orthodoxy.

However, priests must be married *before* they're ordained, in both East and West. A single priest can't just go out and join Match.com, AFAIK.

[TheMathematician]

The only sources I can provide for what I am about to say is based on my years of reading, and what my memory allows me to remember, so treat what im saying accordingly.

Once a man becomes ordained, then he can not become married, regardless if he is Orthodox or Catholic.

It is also true that the RCC, by norm, will not ordain a married man to the priesthood, because that is their normal displince and happens virtually every time.

HOWEVER, if a man whom is married is converting from specific churches (Anglician/-related bodies, Lutherans i believe, and some others that hold an Episcopal structure of some sort(IM leaving out us Orthodox in this, because we are a special case) they CAN be ordained as married priests, though this is the exception,not the norm.


THe unsourced assumption that I shall make, because i believe it to be true from what I have read: A married priest will never be the pastor of a parish, because something makes him ineligible to do so. Assistant priest, yes, pastor, no.

[Agabus]

Married men can become priests in both the Eastern and Western Churches. It's not as common in the West as in the East but it does happen. Usually in the West it's because a married priest in another church converted. For example, we have a married Romanian Catholic priest at our church, who converted from Romanian Orthodoxy.

I know of a couple of married Latin-rite priests who converted (one from Anglicanism and one from Methodism) and were ordained under Pope Paul VI's pastoral provision...But the pastoral provision is mostly an exception.

[Michał Kalina]

Married men can become priests in both the Eastern and Western Churches. It's not as common in the West as in the East but it does happen. Usually in the West it's because a married priest in another church converted. For example, we have a married Romanian Catholic priest at our church, who converted from Romanian Orthodoxy.

An example how Vatican ignores its canon law ^

[Punch]

Why can't the married Christians be the priest in Catholic Church?

Because the Western Church has always had a perverted view of marriage.

How does western church pervert  the view of marriage?

The whole celebacy issue has been around, and a sticking point, between the two Churches since about the 600's.  There is a lot of materiel out there to read if you take the time to look for it.

[Shanghaiski]

Married men can become priests in both the Eastern and Western Churches. It's not as common in the West as in the East but it does happen. Usually in the West it's because a married priest in another church converted. For example, we have a married Romanian Catholic priest at our church, who converted from Romanian Orthodoxy.

An example how Vatican ignores its canon law ^

It's really more like guidelines. Still, they must stick to the code.

[Michał Kalina]

Married men can become priests in both the Eastern and Western Churches. It's not as common in the West as in the East but it does happen. Usually in the West it's because a married priest in another church converted. For example, we have a married Romanian Catholic priest at our church, who converted from Romanian Orthodoxy.

An example how Vatican ignores its canon law ^

It's really more like guidelines. Still, they must stick to the code.

He should have been received into the Romanian Church United with Rome (or whatever they call themselves). There is nothing for interpretation in that. Just another proof Vatican treats its Eastern minions with neglect.

[Asteriktos]

Don't you blaspheme in here!

[OrthoNoob]

Married men can become priests in both the Eastern and Western Churches. It's not as common in the West as in the East but it does happen. Usually in the West it's because a married priest in another church converted. For example, we have a married Romanian Catholic priest at our church, who converted from Romanian Orthodoxy.

An example how Vatican ignores its canon law ^

It's really more like guidelines. Still, they must stick to the code.

He should have been received into the Romanian Church United with Rome (or whatever they call themselves). There is nothing for interpretation in that. Just another proof Vatican treats its Eastern minions with neglect.

Theistgal did say he was a Romanian Catholic priest...

[Michał Kalina]

Married men can become priests in both the Eastern and Western Churches. It's not as common in the West as in the East but it does happen. Usually in the West it's because a married priest in another church converted. For example, we have a married Romanian Catholic priest at our church, who converted from Romanian Orthodoxy.

An example how Vatican ignores its canon law ^

It's really more like guidelines. Still, they must stick to the code.

He should have been received into the Romanian Church United with Rome (or whatever they call themselves). There is nothing for interpretation in that. Just another proof Vatican treats its Eastern minions with neglect.

Theistgal did say he was a Romanian Catholic priest...

Theistgal did say Romanian Orthodox priest converted to the Western Church (implicitly Latin Rite of the Roman Catholic Church). And that is a violation of Roman Catholic canon law (but it's apparently OK since it downgrades Eastern Catholic Churches).

[Asteriktos]

"a married Romanian Catholic priest"

[Michał Kalina]

"a married Romanian Catholic priest"

"Usually in the West it's because a married priest in another church converted. For example"

[Deacon Lance]

Theistgal did say Romanian Orthodox priest converted to the Western Church (implicitly Latin Rite of the Roman Catholic Church). And that is a violation of Roman Catholic canon law (but it's apparently OK since it downgrades Eastern Catholic Churches).

She said at her church, which is Byzantine Catholic, they have a married Romanian Catholic priest.  How you extrapolate that to mean he became Latin Catholic I am unsure.  Her point was married priests in the Latin Catholic are usually converts from the Anglican Church and sometimes other Protestant Churches. In the context of her text I believe by West she means the US and Western Europe as opposed to Easter Europe and the Middle East, not the Latin Catholic Church.  Orthodox priests who join the Catholic Church are enrolled in the equivalent Eastern Catholic Church.  They may however receive biritual faculties and serve in the Latin Church. 

[stanley123]

Why can't the married Christians be the priest in Catholic Church?

Because the Western Church has always had a perverted view of marriage.

Unfortunately, when I look at the annulment situation in the RCC, I have to agree with your opinion here. A while back, a beautiful Lutheran lady appeared on the "60 minutes" program. She said that she had married a Roman Catholic man about 16 years ago and she agreed to raise her children Catholics, which she did. She followed all the Catholic rules and married the Catholic man in the Catholic Church according to the Catholic ceremony. Then after 15 years of marriage, her husband had been unfaithful to the marriage and became involved with a younger woman. He then wanted out of the marriage and applied for an annulment which he then got. The Lutheran lady said that she is suing the Catholic Church for fraud and deception as the Catholic Church had deceived her for 15 years leaving her with the impression that she was married, whereas now, after 15 or so years, the Catholic Church says that she was never married validly or sacramentally. Why then did they require that she go through all of the Catholic ceremony and require her to promise to raise her children as Catholics, when she was never really married in the first place. This was mendacious and fraudulent according to her lawsuit against the RCC  and according to her testimony on the program. She that that this process of annulment would never have come up, except for the fact that her husband had been unfaithful to the marriage. She said that she was OK with a divorce, which declares that there was a marriage, but now they wanted to break up and divorce, but that she was not OK with the idea that for all these years she was never married sacramentally. She said that this annulment idea was a huge insult to her character as a Christian and as a Lutheran, since she never would live with a man without being officially, validly and sacramentally married to him in the eyes of God. Sixteen (approximately) years ago,  the RCC  had her go through a Catholic ceremony and mendaciously and falsely declared that she was married and this was a huge fraud to get her to live with a man for 15 years without being married to him. Now according to the complaint,  the authorities of the RCC say that there was no marriage in the first place.

[Deacon Lance]

When did Lutheran's start believing marriage was a sacrament? 

[stanley123]

When did Lutheran's start believing marriage was a sacrament? 

I don't think that Lutherans believe that marriage is a sacrament. However, today many are not dogmatic about the number of sacraments. Officially, Lutherans teach that Baptism and Holy Communion are the two sacraments. But oftentimes, Confession and Absolution is referred to as the "third sacrament." The other four religious rites ( confirmation, marriage, holy orders, anointing of the sick) are viewed as sacramental and religious in nature, while not necessarily, or so clearly definable as, sacraments.

[choy]

He should have been received into the Romanian Church United with Rome (or whatever they call themselves). There is nothing for interpretation in that. Just another proof Vatican treats its Eastern minions with neglect.

The Vatican does not neglect Eastern Catholics.  In fact there is constant and subtle reminder that Eastern Catholic should become Roman Catholics.  I'm pretty sure the Eastern Catholics will be happy if the Vatican ignores them completely.  No more constant reminder that the priests must embrace celibacy.

[theistgal]

Good grief - ok just to clarify, this Romanian Catholic priest converted from Romanian Orthodox. He's still Romanian,  not Roman.

[serb1389]

Why can't the married Christians be the priest in Catholic Church?

Because the Western Church has always had a perverted view of marriage.

Unfortunately, when I look at the annulment situation in the RCC, I have to agree with your opinion here. A while back, a beautiful Lutheran lady appeared on the "60 minutes" program. She said that she had married a Roman Catholic man about 16 years ago and she agreed to raise her children Catholics, which she did. She followed all the Catholic rules and married the Catholic man in the Catholic Church according to the Catholic ceremony. Then after 15 years of marriage, her husband had been unfaithful to the marriage and became involved with a younger woman. He then wanted out of the marriage and applied for an annulment which he then got. The Lutheran lady said that she is suing the Catholic Church for fraud and deception as the Catholic Church had deceived her for 15 years leaving her with the impression that she was married, whereas now, after 15 or so years, the Catholic Church says that she was never married validly or sacramentally. Why then did they require that she go through all of the Catholic ceremony and require her to promise to raise her children as Catholics, when she was never really married in the first place. This was mendacious and fraudulent according to her lawsuit against the RCC  and according to her testimony on the program. She that that this process of annulment would never have come up, except for the fact that her husband had been unfaithful to the marriage. She said that she was OK with a divorce, which declares that there was a marriage, but now they wanted to break up and divorce, but that she was not OK with the idea that for all these years she was never married sacramentally. She said that this annulment idea was a huge insult to her character as a Christian and as a Lutheran, since she never would live with a man without being officially, validly and sacramentally married to him in the eyes of God. Sixteen (approximately) years ago,  the RCC  had her go through a Catholic ceremony and mendaciously and falsely declared that she was married and this was a huge fraud to get her to live with a man for 15 years without being married to him. Now according to the complaint,  the authorities of the RCC say that there was no marriage in the first place.

This is so sad.  Wonder how they could make a decision like this, from a pastoral standpoint

[stanley123]

Married men can become priests in both the Eastern and Western Churches. It's not as common in the West as in the East but it does happen.

I believe that I read that a while back, the Ruthenian Byzantine Catholic Church petitioned the Vatican to allow American married men to be ordained in that Church in the USA. The petition was turned down by Cardinal Ratzinger. If the Vatican does not grant petitions such as this in the Eastern Catholic Churches in the USA which are united to Rome, what guarantee do the Eastern Orthodox have that in the case of a reunion between the RCC and the EOC, that the Vatican won't be pressuring them to embrace celibacy as a general rule? Wasn't there an agreement at the time of the reunion between the RCC and the Eastern Catholic Churches that the Vatican would allow the ECC to keep their customs?

[Deacon Lance]

Married men can become priests in both the Eastern and Western Churches. It's not as common in the West as in the East but it does happen.

I believe that I read that a while back, the Ruthenian Byzantine Catholic Church petitioned the Vatican to allow American married men to be ordained in that Church in the USA. The petition was turned down by Cardinal Ratzinger. If the Vatican does not grant petitions such as this in the Eastern Catholic Churches in the USA which are united to Rome, what guarantee do the Eastern Orthodox have that in the case of a reunion between the RCC and the EOC, that the Vatican won't be pressuring them to embrace celibacy as a general rule? Wasn't there an agreement at the time of the reunion between the RCC and the Eastern Catholic Churches that the Vatican would allow the ECC to keep their customs?

Wrong.  The Byzantine Catholic Metropolia in the US must petition Rome on a case by case to ordain married men the presbyterate and have done so.  (I don't agree with this requirement but that is a different thread)  I believe now all four Eparchies have married priests ministering in them.  The seminary has married men studying there.  The Ukrainians, Melkites and Romanians all have married presbyters both ordained here and abroad.

[stanley123]

Married men can become priests in both the Eastern and Western Churches. It's not as common in the West as in the East but it does happen.

I believe that I read that a while back, the Ruthenian Byzantine Catholic Church petitioned the Vatican to allow American married men to be ordained in that Church in the USA. The petition was turned down by Cardinal Ratzinger. If the Vatican does not grant petitions such as this in the Eastern Catholic Churches in the USA which are united to Rome, what guarantee do the Eastern Orthodox have that in the case of a reunion between the RCC and the EOC, that the Vatican won't be pressuring them to embrace celibacy as a general rule? Wasn't there an agreement at the time of the reunion between the RCC and the Eastern Catholic Churches that the Vatican would allow the ECC to keep their customs?

Wrong.  The Byzantine Catholic Metropolia in the US must petition Rome on a case by case to ordain married men the presbyterate and have done so.  (I don't agree with this requirement but that is a different thread)  I believe now all four Eparchies have married priests ministering in them.  The seminary has married men studying there.  The Ukrainians, Melkites and Romanians all have married presbyters both ordained here and abroad.

So there is no general permission to ordain married men, but there must be approval from Rome on a case by case basis. I was talking about the approval of a general permission to ordain married men as priests. How many married men have been approved by Rome to be ordained as priests in the Ruthenian Byzantime Catholic Church in the last 20 years?
Rome banned the practice of ordaining married men to the priesthood " in America in 1929 after Latin-rite bishops complained that Slavic priests with wives and children were scandalizing the Irish faithful. That ban led many Eastern Catholics here to convert to Orthodoxy."In 1998, Metropolitan Judson Procyk of Pittsburgh "was set to announce that Rome had approved 50 new canons governing everything from seminary education to sacraments. One would have allowed Byzantine bishops in the United States to ordain married men without special permission.
But a conservative Catholic news organization misinterpreted the change as a revolt against Rome. The Vatican then placed all 50 laws on hold while talks continued between officials of the Vatican's Congregation for Oriental Churches and Byzantine canon lawyers from the United States."
Presently, "it is possible to ordain a married deacon [to the priesthood], with permission from Rome." according to Metropolitan Procyk.
Please see: http://old.post-gazette.com/regionstate/19991002byzantine4.asp

[Deacon Lance]

There was no petition.  It was included in the draft of our particular law.  One of our own priests leaked the info in a way that gave EWTN a fit and made Rome nervous.

How many in the past twenty years?  I don't know.  I do know that the every Greek Catholic Eparchy in the US has married presbyters.  The Ukrainians have the most, I would estimate 50% of their priests in the US.  We (Ruthenians) have the fewest and Bishop John in Parma is the only one to ordain any by his own hand.  This is the otherside of the coin.  You have to have bishops willing to ordain married men.  Most of ours have been unwilling, feeling the people will have a hard time with it and most of the parishes can't afford it.

[stanley123]

There was no petition.  It was included in the draft of our particular law.  One of our own priests leaked the info in a way that gave EWTN a fit and made Rome nervous.

How many in the past twenty years?  I don't know.  I do know that the every Greek Catholic Eparchy in the US has married presbyters.  The Ukrainians have the most, I would estimate 50% of their priests in the US.  We (Ruthenians) have the fewest and Bishop John in Parma is the only one to ordain any by his own hand.  This is the otherside of the coin.  You have to have bishops willing to ordain married men.  Most of ours have been unwilling, feeling the people will have a hard time with it and most of the parishes can't afford it.

After the Melkite Greek Catholic Patriarch had ordained a married man as a priest in his diocese, he got a letter from Pope Paul VI in 1978 which declared that the ordination was illicit and that the priestly faculties were removed. It was reported that the Pope said that he suspended the application of the general principle of preservation of Eastern traditions. If the Pope decides to suspend an official agreement with the Eastern Catholic Churches to preserve their traditions, then should the Orthodox be somewhat dubious or wary about a reunion with Rome?
See: http://orthocath.wordpress.com/2011/10/22/repost-can-east-west-coexist-with-married-priests-2/

[stanley123]

There was no petition.  

So in 1998, the Ruthenian Byzantine Catholic Church did not seek to have Rome approve Statute 44 of the Ruthenian particular law and thereby overturn the decree Cum data fuerit?

[stanley123]

 One of our own priests leaked the info in a way that gave EWTN a fit and made Rome nervous.

That's odd.  In other words,  at least partially,  the Vatican came to  its decision on married priests based on what the people at EWTN say? But hasn't EWTN been known for having a number of scandalous priests who have gone  seriously wrong? For example, Father Ken Roberts,  Father John Bertolucci, Father Francis Mary Stone, Father Alberto Cutié, Fr. Thomas Euteneuer, Fr. John Corapi, and others such as Father Robert Sirico ? How come EWTN, which is reported to have had many priests with moral problems,  has such an influence on the Vatican when it comes to the Eastern Catholic Churches?
http://www.catholicintl.com/index.php/catholic/scandals/1034-ewtn-stuck-with-a-crop-of-wayward-priests-and-prelates

[Deacon Lance]

There was no petition.  

So in 1998, the Ruthenian Byzantine Catholic Church did not seek to have Rome approve Statute 44 of the Ruthenian particular law and thereby overturn the decree Cum data fuerit?

They submitted the Metropolia's particular law for approval.  The feeling was that Cum Data Fuerit was a dead issue as it was supposed to be renewed ever ten years and this was not done after Vatican II and that the CCEO abbrogated previous law.  You are presenting it as if a specific petition to solely overturn Cum Data Fuerit was forwarded and that is not what happened.  I know before the promulgation of our particular law we had no married priests, now we have several.

[Deacon Lance]

 One of our own priests leaked the info in a way that gave EWTN a fit and made Rome nervous.

That's odd.  In other words,  at least partially,  the Vatican came to  its decision on married priests based on what the people at EWTN say? But hasn't EWTN been known for having a number of scandalous priests who have gone  seriously wrong? For example, Father Ken Roberts,  Father John Bertolucci, Father Francis Mary Stone, Father Alberto Cutié, Fr. Thomas Euteneuer, Fr. John Corapi, and others such as Father Robert Sirico ? How come EWTN, which is reported to have had many priests with moral problems,  has such an influence on the Vatican when it comes to the Eastern Catholic Churches?
http://www.catholicintl.com/index.php/catholic/scandals/1034-ewtn-stuck-with-a-crop-of-wayward-priests-and-prelates

I think the alarm they sounded casued problems for us.  It didn't have to be them.  It could have been the Latin bishops or the Nuncio or NCR, etc.  This was supposed to be done without fanfare and one of own makes it look like a confrontation and EWTN ran with it. 

[JamesR]

Isn't the Roman Catholic practice of not allowing Priests to marry actually closer to the Apostolic Tradition opposed to the Orthodox practice of allowing them to marry? The Scriptures make it very clear that a Priest is to be a single man. Why do we allow Priests to marry?

[stanley123]

Married men can become priests in both the Eastern and Western Churches.

"Rome to US Eastern Catholics: New Priests Should “Embrace Celibacy”…"
May 17, 2012 By The Crescat
"...Catholic News Service today reported the comments of the head of the papal office overseeing US Eastern Catholic Bishops that new vocations to the priesthood in US Eastern Catholic Churches should be “embracing celibacy” because “mandatory celibacy is the general rule for priests” in the US. "
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/thecrescat/2012/05/rome-to-us-eastern-catholics-new-priests-should-%E2%80%9Cembrace-celibacy%E2%80%9D.html

[Cymbyz]

By economy long in use now, priests may not marry, but we do ordain married men; the marriage has to come before the ordination.

[ialmisry]

Isn't the Roman Catholic practice of not allowing Priests to marry actually closer to the Apostolic Tradition opposed to the Orthodox practice of allowing them to marry? The Scriptures make it very clear that a Priest is to be a single man. Why do we allow Priests to marry?

The Scriptures make it clear that a priest is to be the husband of one wife.  No rule of him having to be single is found in scripture.

[Cyrillic]

Isn't the Roman Catholic practice of not allowing Priests to marry actually closer to the Apostolic Tradition opposed to the Orthodox practice of allowing them to marry? The Scriptures make it very clear that a Priest is to be a single man. Why do we allow Priests to marry?

The Scriptures make it clear that a priest is to be the husband of one wife.  No rule of him having to be single is found in scripture.

Same for the bishops, though.

Married men can become priests in both the Eastern and Western Churches. It's not as common in the West as in the East but it does happen. Usually in the West it's because a married priest in another church converted. For example, we have a married Romanian Catholic priest at our church, who converted from Romanian Orthodoxy.

An example how Vatican ignores its canon law ^

Yes. You call it oikonomia, IIRC.

[JoeS2]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexis_Toth

JoeS

[username!]

Why can't the married Christians be the priests in Catholic Church?

They can.  An unmarried presbyterate is a discipline of the Latin Catholic Church, but they have exceptions.  Most of the Eastern Catholic Churches have a married presbyterate just as their Orthodox counterparts.

And the Pittsburgh Eparchy of the Ruthenians has ordained how many married men to the priesthood?  I know one or two have been ordained in other eparchies.  But it's not the standard practice yet and yinz have had a long time since Data cum fuerit ( I think that's the name of it).

[username!]

Isn't the Roman Catholic practice of not allowing Priests to marry actually closer to the Apostolic Tradition opposed to the Orthodox practice of allowing them to marry? The Scriptures make it very clear that a Priest is to be a single man. Why do we allow Priests to marry?

It's easier to get advice from a married man on your marriage than it is to get marriage advice from a 23 year old "celibate" priest.
Sex in the Roman Catholic church is only for baby making.  Not for pleasure.
This is one of those truisms they don't tell you in the visit us brochure.

[Michał Kalina]

Ukrainian Catholic bishops in Poland are not allowed to ordain married men. Married men are ordained during some trips to Ukraine and then they come back.

[ialmisry]

Isn't the Roman Catholic practice of not allowing Priests to marry actually closer to the Apostolic Tradition opposed to the Orthodox practice of allowing them to marry? The Scriptures make it very clear that a Priest is to be a single man. Why do we allow Priests to marry?

The Scriptures make it clear that a priest is to be the husband of one wife.  No rule of him having to be single is found in scripture.

Same for the bishops, though.

We do have bishops who have married.  I don't know if the Vatican has any.

Married men can become priests in both the Eastern and Western Churches. It's not as common in the West as in the East but it does happen. Usually in the West it's because a married priest in another church converted. For example, we have a married Romanian Catholic priest at our church, who converted from Romanian Orthodoxy.

An example how Vatican ignores its canon law ^

Yes. You call it oikonomia, IIRC.

Not that we don't.

[Tony]

Where in the Scriptures is that? St Peter himself was married.

Isn't the Roman Catholic practice of not allowing Priests to marry actually closer to the Apostolic Tradition opposed to the Orthodox practice of allowing them to marry? The Scriptures make it very clear that a Priest is to be a single man. Why do we allow Priests to marry?

[Wyatt]

Where in the Scriptures is that? St Peter himself was married.

Isn't the Roman Catholic practice of not allowing Priests to marry actually closer to the Apostolic Tradition opposed to the Orthodox practice of allowing them to marry? The Scriptures make it very clear that a Priest is to be a single man. Why do we allow Priests to marry?

Are we going with sola scriptura when it's convenient? I'm not sure how crucial scriptural backing is when speaking of disciplines rather than doctrines or dogmas.

[PeterTheAleut]

Where in the Scriptures is that? St Peter himself was married.

Isn't the Roman Catholic practice of not allowing Priests to marry actually closer to the Apostolic Tradition opposed to the Orthodox practice of allowing them to marry? The Scriptures make it very clear that a Priest is to be a single man. Why do we allow Priests to marry?

Are we going with sola scriptura when it's convenient? I'm not sure how crucial scriptural backing is when speaking of disciplines rather than doctrines or dogmas.

Tony's not advocating what you think he is. He merely offered a corrective to JamesR's erroneous statement that an unmarried priesthood is mandated in the Scriptures.

[Tags:]

OrthodoxChristianity.net > Moderated Forums > Orthodox-Other Christian Discussion > Orthodox-Catholic Discussion (Moderator: username!) > Topic: the married Chrisitans cannot be the priest?