PatrickRitaMichael Posted January 23, 2004 Share Posted January 23, 2004 (edited) i once read a letter to the editor in a catholic magazine from a woman who asked, if we allow priests to marry and have kids, who is going to set up their college funds? i thought it was an interesting point since priests are (in my understanding) dependent upon the Church for living expenses. God forbid the day that people consider the priesthood simply another career!! Sigga, good point! God is still working in people's hearts and calling them to the priesthood in other parts of the world. good thing the whole world does not consist of the US only. we like foreign priests anyway, it reminds us of what heaven will be like: multicultural :P Edited January 23, 2004 by PatrickRitaMichael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paladin D Posted January 23, 2004 Share Posted January 23, 2004 Hey M.SIGGA, is there a list somewhere of what the Vatican labels as "missionary nations"? I would understand the United States being one, but what are the others? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrndveritatis Posted January 23, 2004 Share Posted January 23, 2004 It is not a doctrine, rather it is a discipline. The Pope can change it whenever he wants to. But it won't be changed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willguy Posted January 23, 2004 Share Posted January 23, 2004 Right now, 15% of all parishes are without a priest and they predict that 25% will in two decades given the retirement of active ones. First, I believe this is a US statistic. You have to remember, we are a CATHOLIC (universal, meaning everywhere) church. The pope isn't going to bend over backwards for one country, even (perhaps especially) the US. Second, what's your point? God will provide. I pray that the discipline of priestly celibacy is NEVER repealed. I pray that it becomes doctrine, or even dogma. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.SIGGA Posted January 23, 2004 Share Posted January 23, 2004 Hey M.SIGGA, is there a list somewhere of what the Vatican labels as "missionary nations"? I would understand the United States being one, but what are the others? All nations that were never designated "Catholic Countries" are considered missionary countries. Catholic nations sent out thousands of missionaries to convert the pagan world to Christianity, which was mainly accomplished through the efforts of the Jesuits, Dominicans, and the Franciscans. The U.S. for example was founded as a secular state with Protestant ethics and principles. The Church ordered mass numbers of priests and nuns to move along with people who decided to imigrate to the New World from Catholic countries. The immigration from Europe continued in large waves until WWII, so there was a constant flow of European priests and nuns and seminarians. Now the flow is comming in from heavily Catholic Nations in the Southern Hemisphere that were preserved from the West's Americanism and secularization. America's irreligious and secular way of life is a big problem in fostering vocations in the West, so our seminaries don't grow that fast and they began declining after the 1950s. Europe's secular anti-clericalism has been snoballing since Revolutionary France and Napoleon. Ethinc minorty communities in all nations are also considered missionary outreaches, ex. African Americans, Latinos in the U.S., Native Americans, Vietnamese Americans, etc. I was told this by a missionary who visited my parish, but try http://www.vatican.va or http://www.catholicextension.org or look it up on the web for more details. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hyperdulia again Posted January 23, 2004 Share Posted January 23, 2004 Dojo?! you live in Starkvegas?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winchester Posted January 23, 2004 Share Posted January 23, 2004 Oddly, when people would spend months with no access to a priest in the Middle ages, there was no removal of the celibacy requirement for Catholic priests in the Roman Rite. Question for you, Bruce: how many Rites in the Catholic Church do not require celibacy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laudate_Dominum Posted January 23, 2004 Share Posted January 23, 2004 (edited) First of all, there already are some Catholic priests who are married: Eastern Rite Catholic priests and some priests who were married clergy from protestant denominations that were allowed to be ordained Catholic priests and allowed to stay married (this obviously requires special permission, of course). Because of that, I would not be scandalized if the Church allowed married men to be ordained across the board (although it would take some getting used to). It would be a scandal if the Church allowed married men to be priests accross the board. The Sacrament of Holy Orders configures a man to Christ in such a way that celibacy is in a big way the ideal state. While some Eastern Rite priests are married, it is very rare in most parts of the world. I am not aware of any Eastern Rite Bishops in this country who will ordain a married man even though they can according to their canon law, and they have a pretty serious need for new priests these days believe me! The married priesthood is a rare thing and only appropriate in particular cultural contexts and situations. And married priests cannot recieve the fullness of the Sacrament of Holy Orders (meaning they can't become Bishops). What might happen someday, although I hope not for various reasons, is that the Church would allow married men to become priests in certain circumstances but it would be rare (like when a married Anglican clergyman becomes Catholic and wants to remain a priest). Maybe a married man who is well established or perhaps retired and who's children are grown up and who lives in an area in serious need of priests could be ordained. Something like that. As long as it was strictly regulated to maintain the truth of priestly identity which is already in a crisis these days. Edited January 23, 2004 by Laudate_Dominum Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hyperdulia again Posted January 23, 2004 Share Posted January 23, 2004 The only reason married priests can't become gbishops is because the Church changed that discipline. It wouldn't be scandalous for the Church to change any discipline she felt inclined to change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dUSt Posted January 23, 2004 Share Posted January 23, 2004 I don't think any priest that I know would be able to function in the same capacity if they had a wife or child. A marriage takes a lot of time, effort and devotion. The same goes for the priesthood. How could one possibly divide and manage both!? It would be like having two brides. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laudate_Dominum Posted January 23, 2004 Share Posted January 23, 2004 (edited) It wouldn't be scandalous for the Church to change any discipline she felt inclined to change. That's not true at all. What if the Church suddenly dropped all it's disciplines? I'd be pretty freakin scandalized. Just because the Church "can" do something doesn't mean it should. I don't deny that the Church has the authority to change disciplines, but that doesn't mean they are arbitrary or meaningless. The Church's disciplines express and correspond to truths of the Faith and while these disciplines in themselves are not absolute, those truths are. Celibacy is bound up with the Theological meaning of the Sacrament of Holy Orders, otherwise the discipline is just an arbitrary custom or decision someone made way back in times past. But that is not the case. It expresses something of the truth of what it means to be a priest and what the priesthood represents in the world as an eschatological sign and a man who is "in persona Christi". Do not devalue celibacy by acting as though it is merely an arbitrary rule. It is a deep and profound expression of the nature of Christ's ministerial priesthood, and if this sign were lost, the meaning of the priesthood would be clouded. Edited January 23, 2004 by Laudate_Dominum Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hyperdulia again Posted January 23, 2004 Share Posted January 23, 2004 Yes and quite frankly both a celibate and a married clergy have their benefits and it is for this reason that both are allowed in the Universal Church. It is not wise to defend one discipline of the Church by downplaying another, it makes her look schizophrenic. The Church has the right to change any disciplinary rule she wants to, in fact the Holy Father can do so unilaterally and arbitrarily if he sees fit. I care not. This part of the Church's authority and any use she makes of that authority is fine with me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DojoGrant Posted January 23, 2004 Share Posted January 23, 2004 How'd you know about the elusive Starkvegas? You been here before? I'm not "from" here; I'm from Arkansas. But I go to school at MSU and have an apartment in 'Vegas. St. Joseph is the parish that I joined the Church in, and its why I felt moved to serve the Jackson, MS diocese. How are you familiar with Starkville? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hyperdulia again Posted January 23, 2004 Share Posted January 23, 2004 I lost a year there once. I lived in Canterbury. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winchester Posted January 23, 2004 Share Posted January 23, 2004 It would be like having two brides. he he that would be amesome dancing banana gif not put in becuase that would be too much Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now