Question for Catholics - Married Priests

2,322 Views | 16 Replies | Last: 4 yr ago by jkag89
RAB91
How long do you want to ignore this user?
With the topic of married priests coming back up these days, what are your thoughts on opening it up in that regard? Logistically, how would you roll it out?

Me personally... I'm ok with it in a limited scope. Just brainstorming here....Maybe something like if you have to be permanent deacon for some number of years (at least 3-5), and then you can become ordained. If you choose to become a priest before you're married, getting married down the road would not be an option.

Anyway.... not tied to the thoughts above, but curious to other's opinions.
chimpanzee
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I get the need for manpower, and the historical precedent, but it does seem like a huge shift in the operating model of the clergy and its organization. The "Pastor's Wife/Family" dynamic in a Catholic parish seems completely odd.
Dad-O-Lot
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I've known a couple of married Catholic Priests. It is possible.

I would be OK with allowing married men to be ordained if their children are grown.

I would not like it if unmarried Priests were allowed to get married.

I just think that a Priest looking for a wife could be very problematic.
People of integrity expect to be believed, when they're not, they let time prove them right.
FTAggies
How long do you want to ignore this user?
It is a weird concept considering the complications of marriage and dating in the US. Is our parish priest going to put up a dating profile on Tinder? What happens when he divorces?
Gig'em
one MEEN Ag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
FTAggies said:

It is a weird concept considering the complications of marriage and dating in the US. Is our parish priest going to put up a dating profile on Tinder? What happens when he divorces?
Sounds like these are all issues the protestant church has lived through. And just like everything else that falls under protestant denominations, you can find where it is implemented well and flourished and where is it not and causes problems. I don't think you'll see Tinder priest profiles because you don't see Tinder church deacon profiles. Its just not viewed above reproach.

I don't think the 'we don't know what it would look like' part of seeing a man of god get married stands up to all the men who lead Christian flocks who are married. I think across the church it would be good to allow marriage in the Catholic church, the first thing God does for man is to create Eve. Paul's comments about not marrying, I think, fall further down the ladder compared to God creating Eve the first place.

I can see the traditional appeal of priests not being married in European history though. It worked 'well' in middle ages because you didn't have powerful church lineages competing against monarchy lineages. Not really relevant on today though, especially if you want to discuss the theological reasons for and against priestly marriage compared to descriptive historical ethics.

That is the noncontroversial reasoning. Controversially, I think you'd address a root cause of sexual sin from the priests if you allowed marriage.
Dad-O-Lot
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
one MEEN Ag said:

FTAggies said:

It is a weird concept considering the complications of marriage and dating in the US. Is our parish priest going to put up a dating profile on Tinder? What happens when he divorces?
Sounds like these are all issues the protestant church has lived through. And just like everything else that falls under protestant denominations, you can find where it is implemented well and flourished and where is it not and causes problems. I don't think you'll see Tinder priest profiles because you don't see Tinder church deacon profiles. Its just not viewed above reproach.

I don't think the 'we don't know what it would look like' part of seeing a man of god get married stands up to all the men who lead Christian flocks who are married. I think across the church it would be good to allow marriage in the Catholic church, the first thing God does for man is to create Eve. Paul's comments about not marrying, I think, fall further down the ladder compared to God creating Eve the first place.

I can see the traditional appeal of priests not being married in European history though. It worked 'well' in middle ages because you didn't have powerful church lineages competing against monarchy lineages. Not really relevant on today though, especially if you want to discuss the theological reasons for and against priestly marriage compared to descriptive historical ethics.

That is the noncontroversial reasoning. Controversially, I think you'd address a root cause of sexual sin from the priests if you allowed marriage.
I don't think you can compare a Catholic Priest to a Protestant Preacher. There are way too many differences in the two roles.

I also do not believe celibacy or restrictions against marriage are root causes of sexual sin of priests.
People of integrity expect to be believed, when they're not, they let time prove them right.
jkag89
How long do you want to ignore this user?
If the Catholic Church opts to allow married priest in the Latin Rite, I'm sure it is going to follow the ancient model in other Catholic Rites and the Orthodox in which married men can be ordained while already ordained single men will not be allowed to marry.
747Ag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
jkag89 said:

If the Catholic Church opts to allow married priest in the Latin Rite, I'm sure it is going to follow the ancient model in other Catholic Rites and the Orthodox in which married men can be ordained while already ordained single men will not be allowed to marry.
And, only the celibates can be elevated to the episcopacy (IIRC).

But, I dislike the overall idea of changing this discipline. I don't think it will be good for the Church, much like the shrinking of religious/monastic life in the last half century.
one MEEN Ag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Dad-O-Lot said:

one MEEN Ag said:

FTAggies said:

It is a weird concept considering the complications of marriage and dating in the US. Is our parish priest going to put up a dating profile on Tinder? What happens when he divorces?
Sounds like these are all issues the protestant church has lived through. And just like everything else that falls under protestant denominations, you can find where it is implemented well and flourished and where is it not and causes problems. I don't think you'll see Tinder priest profiles because you don't see Tinder church deacon profiles. Its just not viewed above reproach.

I don't think the 'we don't know what it would look like' part of seeing a man of god get married stands up to all the men who lead Christian flocks who are married. I think across the church it would be good to allow marriage in the Catholic church, the first thing God does for man is to create Eve. Paul's comments about not marrying, I think, fall further down the ladder compared to God creating Eve the first place.

I can see the traditional appeal of priests not being married in European history though. It worked 'well' in middle ages because you didn't have powerful church lineages competing against monarchy lineages. Not really relevant on today though, especially if you want to discuss the theological reasons for and against priestly marriage compared to descriptive historical ethics.

That is the noncontroversial reasoning. Controversially, I think you'd address a root cause of sexual sin from the priests if you allowed marriage.
I don't think you can compare a Catholic Priest to a Protestant Preacher. There are way too many differences in the two roles.

I also do not believe celibacy or restrictions against marriage are root causes of sexual sin of priests.
Not trying to be argumentative here, but honest question - why not? Both Priests and preacher prepare/lead the service, are responsible for being well versed in theology, and act as guidance counselor, and seek to implement sound doctrine. What about the catholic church specifically would cause men seeking to become priests and also be married have different outcomes than what can already be observed from protestant men seeking to become deacon/preachers and also be married? Its one thing to not like the outcomes, its another to say they are unknown. I can see the viewpoint that in protestant churches you have the whole family under the microscope. The wife and children are judged unfairly and the wife has her own power dynamic stumbling blocks.

You're also claiming that men who cannot act on sexual desire in any way doesn't lead to sexual sin? Denying marriage denies what is innate within every human, God gave restrictions on sex for it to be a blessing - not a commandment to not to engage in it. At the very least, you'd have to consider the requirements to not becoming married knocks out a huge majority of well qualified individuals. The talent pool then has to shift to those who would be okay with not pursuing marriage, creating a higher representation of gay and pedophile behavior.

Ordhound04
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Considering married Priests already exist in the Catholic Church, two examples come to mind is the personal ordinariate of the chair of Saint Peter (Latin Rite), and eastern rite Catholicism, i'm not against the idea in principle. However, with that being said, I'm not convinced that a generalized married priesthood (Similar to Protestant Pastors in model) will solve the clerical shortage problem.

My view is that the 3 major problems that exist due to the clerical shortage is access to sacraments, a lack of clerical visibility/leadership/guidance in the community, and clerical isolation/lack of clerical community.

One way to solve The first issue without having married priests is to empower the diaconate to hear confessions, perform last rites, etc. ( short of transubstantiation ) or to pull from the permanent diaconate and ordain them as "part time" priests in order for them to be able to deliver the sacraments. ( if one wanted to preserve the permanent diaconate as is ). In this capacity their job is not to lead in the way a full time seminary trained priest would, but rather their job is to deliver the sacraments. This also would have the effect of strengthening the clerical community with an influx of new "priests" that can provide fellowship to the full time priests leading.

I would honestly rather see something like that then a full-on married priesthood.
Ordhound04
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
one MEEN Ag said:



Not trying to be argumentative here, but honest question - why not? Both Priests and preacher prepare/lead the service, are responsible for being well versed in theology, and act as guidance counselor, and seek to implement sound doctrine. What about the catholic church specifically would cause men seeking to become priests and also be married have different outcomes than what can already be observed from protestant men seeking to become deacon/preachers and also be married? Its one thing to not like the outcomes, its another to say they are unknown. I can see the viewpoint that in protestant churches you have the whole family under the microscope. The wife and children are judged unfairly and the wife has her own power dynamic stumbling blocks.

You're also claiming that men who cannot act on sexual desire in any way doesn't lead to sexual sin? Denying marriage denies what is innate within every human, God gave restrictions on sex for it to be a blessing - not a commandment to not to engage in it. At the very least, you'd have to consider the requirements to not becoming married knocks out a huge majority of well qualified individuals. The talent pool then has to shift to those who would be okay with not pursuing marriage, creating a higher representation of gay and pedophile behavior.


Considering the issues the Southern Baptist Convention is having with sexual abuse, and the fact that studies show that protestant church insurers handle almost 300 sexual abuse claims a year, I would refute the idea that clerical celibacy contributes to sexual abuse.
one MEEN Ag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Ordhound04 said:

one MEEN Ag said:



Not trying to be argumentative here, but honest question - why not? Both Priests and preacher prepare/lead the service, are responsible for being well versed in theology, and act as guidance counselor, and seek to implement sound doctrine. What about the catholic church specifically would cause men seeking to become priests and also be married have different outcomes than what can already be observed from protestant men seeking to become deacon/preachers and also be married? Its one thing to not like the outcomes, its another to say they are unknown. I can see the viewpoint that in protestant churches you have the whole family under the microscope. The wife and children are judged unfairly and the wife has her own power dynamic stumbling blocks.

You're also claiming that men who cannot act on sexual desire in any way doesn't lead to sexual sin? Denying marriage denies what is innate within every human, God gave restrictions on sex for it to be a blessing - not a commandment to not to engage in it. At the very least, you'd have to consider the requirements to not becoming married knocks out a huge majority of well qualified individuals. The talent pool then has to shift to those who would be okay with not pursuing marriage, creating a higher representation of gay and pedophile behavior.


Considering the issues the Southern Baptist Convention is having with sexual abuse, and the fact that studies show that protestant church insurers handle almost 300 sexual abuse claims a year, I would refute the idea that clerical celibacy contributes to sexual abuse.
I'm not claiming that SBC or any protestant group doesn't have sexual sin, but I think celibacy does shape how sexual sin manifests itself in a church organization. What you have actually refuted is a claim that SBC is wholly above sexual sin, which is a stance nobody is going to claim. Looking at reporting rates only shows you the number of victims who come forward, not those who didn't, nor give insight into the underlying causes. Different types of sexual abuse and different power structures are going to have different reporting rates. Girls are going to report sexual assault at a higher rate than boys.

Ordhound04
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
one MEEN Ag said:

Ordhound04 said:


Considering the issues the Southern Baptist Convention is having with sexual abuse, and the fact that studies show that protestant church insurers handle almost 300 sexual abuse claims a year, I would refute the idea that clerical celibacy contributes to sexual abuse.
I'm not claiming that SBC or any protestant group doesn't have sexual sin, but I think celibacy does shape how sexual sin manifests itself in a church organization. What you have actually refuted is a claim that SBC is wholly above sexual sin, which is a stance nobody is going to claim. Looking at reporting rates only shows you the number of victims who come forward, not those who didn't, nor give insight into the underlying causes. Different types of sexual abuse and different power structures are going to have different reporting rates. Girls are going to report sexual assault at a higher rate than boys.


The problem with your contention is that it does not come with any evidence beyond conjecture. I have provided evidence that protestant churches do have issues with sexual abuse, and they are not constrained by celibacy. This fact provides evidence contrary to your claim of a causal relationship between clerical celibacy and sexual abuse. Moreover this is also under reported according to multiple people, including Basyle "Boz" Tchividjian and others, so the problem is probably worse.

Fundamentally, it's lazy to point to clerical celibacy as the cause. It's not just lazy, its dangerous, particularly to protestant churches who think they don't have to worry about it because its a "Catholic celibacy thing".
Dad-O-Lot
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
one MEEN Ag said:

Dad-O-Lot said:



I don't think you can compare a Catholic Priest to a Protestant Preacher. There are way too many differences in the two roles.

I also do not believe celibacy or restrictions against marriage are root causes of sexual sin of priests.
Not trying to be argumentative here, but honest question - why not? Both Priests and preacher prepare/lead the service, are responsible for being well versed in theology, and act as guidance counselor, and seek to implement sound doctrine. What about the catholic church specifically would cause men seeking to become priests and also be married have different outcomes than what can already be observed from protestant men seeking to become deacon/preachers and also be married? Its one thing to not like the outcomes, its another to say they are unknown. I can see the viewpoint that in protestant churches you have the whole family under the microscope. The wife and children are judged unfairly and the wife has her own power dynamic stumbling blocks.

You're also claiming that men who cannot act on sexual desire in any way doesn't lead to sexual sin? Denying marriage denies what is innate within every human, God gave restrictions on sex for it to be a blessing - not a commandment to not to engage in it. At the very least, you'd have to consider the requirements to not becoming married knocks out a huge majority of well qualified individuals. The talent pool then has to shift to those who would be okay with not pursuing marriage, creating a higher representation of gay and pedophile behavior.


Why not: I don't really have the time or inclination to go into a lot of detail, but there are two primary reasons which make a drastic difference in the roles of Catholic Priest versus Protestant Pastor.
1) The Priestly Hierarchy: Most Protestant Pastors are employees of the specific church they serve. If they don't keep their congregation happy, they are out of a job. If they "challenge" their congregation too much, they will be out of a job. Priests are employees of their Diocese. Their accountability is to their Bishop, who ultimately may be subject to the Vatican.

2) The Sacrament of Reconciliation: Roman Catholic Priests are tasked with listening to and providing absolution for the sins their congregants confess to them. I can imagine that if there were any possible romantic inclination from that priest, their congregants may be less comfortable being 100% honest in their confessions.

You should read some of Bishop Fulton J. Sheen's and other faithful priest's writings regarding Priestly Celibacy.
People of integrity expect to be believed, when they're not, they let time prove them right.
diehard03
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Quote:

I also do not believe celibacy or restrictions against marriage are root causes of sexual sin of priests.

I agree. I think people look at it the wrong way. I think the monsters are choosing the priesthood because it checks a lot of boxes for them: Cover, access, protection, etc. Allowing marriage won't solve these issues.
ramblin_ag02
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I think you're absolutely right. The priests with an overwhelming lust for women go have clandestine sex with women. Just see our earlier thread regarding priests having children. There aren't any priests that really want to have monogamous heterosexual sex but instead take out their lust on children and teens. So letting priests marry definitely won't fix that problem.

However, having a sizable number of married clergy could provide a hefty political counterbalance to the currently influential group of abusive, deviant clergy.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
diehard03
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Quote:

However, having a sizable number of married clergy could provide a hefty political counterbalance to the currently influential group of abusive, deviant clergy.

I don't know honestly. I think the married priests would still protect sexual abusers for the same reason the current ones do: to lift the veil would destroy basically everything.
jkag89
How long do you want to ignore this user?
This article is about a year old but it touches on the issues discussed in this thread -

Eastern prelate urges 'prudence' on married priests
by John L. Allen Jr. and Ines San Martin
Refresh
Page 1 of 1
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.