Pope says favors celibacy for priests but door open to change - chicagotribune.com

 

ROME (Reuters) - Pope Francis on Monday said he believed that Roman Catholic priests should be celibate but the rule was not an unchangeable dogma, and "the door is always open" to change.

 

 

Francis made similar comments when he was archbishop of Buenos Aires but his remarks to reporters on a plane returning from a Middle East trip were the first he has made since becoming pope.

 

 

"Celibacy is not a dogma," he said in answer to a question about whether the Catholic Church could some day allow priests to marry as they can in some other Christian Churches.

 

 

"It is a rule of life that I appreciate very much and I think it is a gift for the Church but since it is not a dogma, the door is always open," he said.

I'm especially interested in the view of our resident Catholics on this.

 

How do you feel about the Pope's comments?

Is this issue not Catholic doctrine?

If not, then should the policy ever be changed to allow Priests to marry?

As one of the "moderate" Catholics I'm cool with it either way.

I have never understood the ruling and how it came to be.

I think priests should be allowed to marry and have a family if they wish.

Here is a statement that may be shocking to some - The Catholic Church already has some priests that are married and some have children.

I'm especially interested in the view of our resident Catholics on this.

 

Mackerel Snapping Papist here!

 

How do you feel about the Pope's comments?

 

Priestly celibacy is an issue I can't make up my mind on. Regardless, this is not an issue that will change over night, it would take several years of (I cannot remember what they are called but it is when the Pope calls the bishops and top Theologians to Rome to discuss one or more issues.) to change this discipline. The term I am searching for such a meeting is not Church Council, it is something else but I cannot think of it.

 

Is this issue not Catholic doctrine?

 

Actually it is not. Things can be broken up into Dogma, Doctrine and Discipline. A Dogma is a major teaching of the church. An example is, Murder is Grave Sin. A Doctrine takes a Dogma a step further. Such as, Abortion is murder, therefore Abortion is Grave Sin. Another example of Dogma is, God is God the Father (Yahweh), God the Son (Jesus) and God the Holy Spirit. A Doctrine that comes from this is that Jesus has a dual nature both God and Man. Teaching that Jesus was man only is heresy. Difficult to fully grasp but the Truth (according to the Catholic Church and I believe most Protestant Churches I believe). Where Dogma and Doctrine are similar is that the are infallible teachings that go back to the earliest days of the church. While church leaders can expand on these teachings like St. Augustine of Hippo did, they cannot change.

 

A Discipline is a practice of the church which the church uses in worship, teaching, etc.. An example of this is abstaining from meat (more specifically Carne since the Latin Phrase Carne does not included Fish like the English word meat does) on Fridays during Lent. The purpose of this practice amongst Catholics and some Protestants is for the faithful to experience an inconvenience or very mild suffering (taking liberty with the word suffering) to better appreciate the suffering Christ experienced on Good Friday. Abstaining from meat is a long time Discipline but is in no way infallible, the church could modify or end that Discipline if it chose. And it was modified during Vatican Council II when EVERY Friday we were supposed to abstain but now just during Lent.

 

The structure of the Mass is another Discipline. The mass can change and was changed during Vatican Council II. Also, while Dogmas and Doctrine's are universally accepted throughout the Catholic Church, disciplines are not always. In the Latin Rite (99% of Americans are Latin Rite Catholics or more commonly called Roman Catholics) we celebrate the Mass. In the Eastern Rite, the celebrate their own version of Liturgy (Mass is a Latin Phrase so the Eastern Rite which is more Greek oriented does not use that phrase). Just for some background, Eastern Rite Catholics come from former sects of the Eastern Orthodox Church which decided to come back into communion with the Catholic Church. When they came back, they had to accept all of the Dogmas and Doctrines of the Catholic Church which really was not a big deal since the Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Christians only differ in one area of faith. One of the areas of Discipline that Eastern Rite Catholics kept was their Liturgy. If you were to attend and Eastern Rite Liturgy, it is almost identical to an Eastern Orthodox Liturgy. Also, during Lent, or the Great Lent as Eastern Rite Catholics and Eastern Orthodox Christians call it, is MUCH, MUCH more strict than what we Roman Catholics go through. We are wimps compared to them.

 

Now, where am I going with this long explanation of Discipline? Priestly Celibacy is another example of a Discipline that can change. Granted it is a discipline so steeped in tradition that it will not change over night but it can change. Priestly celibacy is another example of a discipline the Latin Rite practices and the Eastern Rite does not. In the Eastern Rite (similar to Eastern Orthodox Christians, they kept that discipline when they left the Eastern Orthodox Church and came into communion with Rome) a married Catholic man can go into the priesthood. Because he is married, he can never become a bishop (just like with the Eastern Orthodox Church, only single celibate men are allowed to become bishops). Also like the Eastern Orthodox Church, you have to be married BEFORE becoming a priest. Once ordained, you cannot marry or if you wife passes away, you cannot remarry. So, my guess is, if the bishops of the church (the pope is a bishop, he is the bishop of Rome) decide to get away from priestly celibacy for the Latin Rite, my guess is the Latin Rite will follow the exact Discipline of the Eastern Rite and Eastern Orthodox Church being married men can become priests but once a priest you cannot marry or remarry if your wife passes away and a married priest cannot become a bishop.

 

If not, then should the policy ever be changed to allow Priests to marry?

 

That is a very difficult question to answer. It really depends on how you look at the priesthood. When it comes to bishops, the Latin Rite, the Eastern Rite and the Eastern Orthodox Church are all three in agreement basically. That being, Jesus is the Groom and the church is his Bride. Jesus loves the church like a Groom loves his Bride and died for the church like a Groom should be willing to do for his beloved Bride. Saying that, all three groups agree that bishops, should to the best of their ability imitate Christ (bishops are man are not perfect like Christ is so bishops can only imitate Christ as best as humanly possible) and a bishop should love his diocese and be willing to sacrifice for his diocese like Christ loves the Church and sacrificed for the church just like how a groom loves and sacrifices for the bride. So, the common belief among all three is that if a bishops fully devotes his love and commitment to his diocese, he cannot also be a groom to a woman, the commitment can only go to one body.

 

Where the three departments differ is if such a discipline applies to priests. The Latin Rite says it does. That a priest looks to his parish with the same love and commitment that a groom shows his bride and to a degree, the same love and commitment Christ shows the church. Eastern Rite Catholics and the Eastern Orthodox Church do not look at the relationship the same. Still a sacred relationship between a priest and his parish but the relationship does not negate the ability for the priest to be married and have a family.

 

Now, for non Catholics/Eastern Orthodox Christians, this whole think probably sounds absurd since you guys are more used to the minister/preacher/pastor who is an employee of a local church and can have a family and can leave a life of ministry if he choses and go into another career. For Catholics and Eastern Orthodox Christians, the priesthood is not a career, it is a vocation. I don't say that to put down non Catholic clergy, just to point out the difference. When a man becomes a priest, the relationship is viewed as a bond similar to the bond between man and wife.

 

OK, that was way longer than I intended LOL.

Here is a statement that may be shocking to some - The Catholic Church already has some priests that are married and some have children.

 

Very true. First of all, the Catholic Church to this day still recognizes the priesthood of the Eastern Orthodox Church. So, if an Eastern Orthodox priest decided to convert to Catholicism, he is not "re-ordained", he is still a priest when he converts. Now he probably will be asked to go to Seminary but he will still be a priest and will probably be assigned to a parish.

 

If a married clergyman from a Protestant faith converts to Catholicism, the possibility he could become a priest. I don't know the whole process but we have to married priests in Louisville. One is a former Episcopalian priest, the other is a former Baptist minister. I believe the Episcopalian Priest was easier since the Episcopalian priesthood has some similarities to the Eastern and Latin Rite priesthoods.

So in the Eastern Rite, do they have to be married prior to even enrolling in the Seminary? Or just as long as it happens before they take their vows?

Bert, thank you for that very detailed explanation to my questions. I very much appreciate your information and your opinion. I learned quite a bit about my Catholic brothers' beliefs from your post and that is exactly what I was looking for.

St. Mary's in Alexandria has a priest that has a daughter.

 

My personal view is it's a dumb rule that is severely hindering the church's ability to attract men to the priesthood.

The pastor at my parish made a very good argument in favor an unmarried priesthood from the pulpit one Sunday. It made great sense to me.

 

A priest with a family COULD find himself conflicted between his duty to his family and his duty to his parishioners. He felt that a priest shouldn't have to prioritize either his family or his parishioners over the other. For example a family event very important to his children is happening when he get a call requesting a visit to a sick parishioner. Does he leave his family and potentially upset that dynamic to fulfill his duties? The closest parallel I can figure to this is a physician on call but a doctor is able to schedule his/her call days so they can schedule family events around it. A priest can't do that.

 

My pastor explained it much more eloquently then I am able to. As a person who used to be 100% in favor of allowing priests to marry, his homily that day caused me to re-think. I'm still not opposed to priest marrying but I'm no longer willing to call it a stupid rule with no positive effect on the priesthood.

St. Mary's in Alexandria has a priest that has a daughter.

 

My personal view is it's a dumb rule that is severely hindering the church's ability to attract men to the priesthood.

 

UKMF, the priest at St. Mary's has a son, not a daughter. I know because he used to be my pastor at St. Anthony's. Nice, polite teenager. The circumstances of what happened have been discussed in another thread. I will not be commenting further on that situation because, over the years, it was dealt with in an appropriate manner for all involved.

UKMF, the priest at St. Mary's has a son, not a daughter. I know because he used to be my pastor at St. Anthony's. Nice, polite teenager. The circumstances of what happened have been discussed in another thread. I will not be commenting further on that situation because, over the years, it was dealt with in an appropriate manner for all involved.

 

Could've sworn he said he had a daughter when I spoke with him recently. Regardless, he has a child, and the details of the situation are irrelevant. Doesn't make him any less of a priest, IMO, it only makes him a better one.

The pastor at my parish made a very good argument in favor an unmarried priesthood from the pulpit one Sunday. It made great sense to me.

 

A priest with a family COULD find himself conflicted between his duty to his family and his duty to his parishioners. He felt that a priest shouldn't have to prioritize either his family or his parishioners over the other. For example a family event very important to his children is happening when he get a call requesting a visit to a sick parishioner. Does he leave his family and potentially upset that dynamic to fulfill his duties? The closest parallel I can figure to this is a physician on call but a doctor is able to schedule his/her call days so they can schedule family events around it. A priest can't do that.

 

My pastor explained it much more eloquently then I am able to. As a person who used to be 100% in favor of allowing priests to marry, his homily that day caused me to re-think. I'm still not opposed to priest marrying but I'm no longer willing to call it a stupid rule with no positive effect on the priesthood.

And to that I would say that allowing marriage and family would bring more priests to the priesthood, allowing more priests to "cover" for each other, similar to a physician on call.

And to that I would say that allowing marriage and family would bring more priests to the priesthood, allowing more priests to "cover" for each other, similar to a physician on call.

 

I am quite impressed with the number of seminarians in the Diocese of Covington. I think 4 are about to be ordained soon. For the size, I think they are doing a whole lot better than other dioceses in the number of men studying to be priests.