Is the RC Church rethinking celibacy?

aloyisious

I read today that the Pope's new Secretary of State talked about priests and marriage. The gist of the report was that priestly celibacy was NOT a matter fixed by infallible doctrine. The Pope, according to one Irish newspaper today, has also thought about the subject of priestly celibacy, though nothing has been decided by either him or the church.

Maybe it's a sign that earthshaking times lie ahead for the church from this Jesuit, with him opening a debate on what's been a fundamental point of difference between the various Christian churches.

Benny_Cake

John Allen has a report on it here:

http://ncronline.org/blogs/ncr-today/parolin-celibacy-democracy

In short, clerical celibacy has never been a dogma of the Catholic church, only a discipline. Church representatives have always been careful to draw that distinction.

Of course, married priests in eastern Catholic churches have always been accepted to the priesthood.

Faith2013

There are already several thousand married priests in the Catholic Church. There are several churchs in communion with Rome who recognise the Pope and therefore are Catholic. Its the ROMAN rite Church that has celibacy.

So yes it can be changed, However there also has been a long tradition of Celibacy.

robp

Its not immediately clear that anyone is rethinking anything.

Galwayguy35

Theres really only one reason celibacy was introduced and it was to stop the church losing it's land ownership to families that clergymen would have when they married, think it happened around the 12th century.

It's a silly rule and should be got rid of.

Faith2013

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

Theres really only one reason celibacy was introduced and it was to stop the church losing it's land ownership to families that clergymen would have when they married, think it happened around the 12th century.

It's a silly rule and should be got rid of.

You should read a little more, it was not just that factor. you have sons becoming priests to inherit the church, they didn't OWN, but pretty much kept it, and so many priests were in reality not that motivated to be real priests.

A friend of my in a married catholic Priest in the eastern rite, and he had a whole other set of problems, his wife has to dress in a certain way, she can't go to parties etc.. Also if a wife leaves her husband then he has to leave the priesthood.

As regards celibacy there is a very long tradition of celibate monks and priests, this goes back to the early days. However there were married priest in the early church and there always have been in the church.

I think what will probably happen is that permanent married deacons will be allowed to be ordained to serve. There are many good deacons who would administer for free and be a priest just to help the community. what we can't go back to is using the priesthood as a career and not as a vocation.

robp

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

Theres really only one reason celibacy was introduced and it was to stop the church losing it's land ownership to families that clergymen would have when they married, think it happened around the 12th century.

If that was the case, then why has obligatory celibacy continued to the present time when other churches with married clergy have had not this inheritance problem. There are many reasons why celibacy was introduced and maintained. It occurs in many denominations and religions in some form or other.

Galwayguy35

Yeah well a lot of good men have left the priesthood because they couldn't cope with the thought of never having a wife and kids as the years passed, a man doesn't lose the need for companionship and sex when he puts on the collar.

Manach

Whilst debate is welcome, my opinion that celibacy has been one of the marks of service that the priests undertake in their mission for the Church. Saying that, I believe the Eastern Churches have had roles for married semi-laity within their ranks, and such a development of deacons might meet some of the future challenges to ease the burden on priests.

Faith2013

Manach wrote: »

Whilst debate is welcome, my opinion that celibacy has been one of the marks of service that the priests undertake in their mission for the Church. Saying that, I believe the Eastern Churches have had roles for married semi-laity within their ranks, and such a development of deacons might meet some of the future challenges to ease the burden on priests.

The eastern Church's have married priests. The Ukraine has many married priests who are as much Catholic as an Irish Priest. Married priests is very much a part of the Church, has been from the beginning.

There is place for Married priests and Celibate in the Church,,,its the ROMAN rite that needs to be reformed.

Celibacy also has an important part in the Church, esp in Religious life. But the Church needs to return to its origins in this, and Married priests is an integral part of the Church.

Blue Magic

Reality remains that Celibacy is a relatively new concept (only a few hundred years back in some brainstorm of Vatican Council). The first pope - Peter I think - was married. Pope Clement IV in the 1200s was also married and he had two daughters - before he took "holy orders" and became pope.

Definitely feeds the unnatural process of paedophilia. Makes weirdos out of once normal men. Every man has nature's need to ejaculate. Simple as!

1 Corinthians 9:5 - "Don’t we have the right to take a believing wife along with us, as do the other apostles and the Lord’s brothers and Cephas?"

Look at priest ordained in Cork last year only. He is a curate in a neighbouring parish to my own. Had three daughters and became a widower some years. He is a fine man, a man of the people who has lived the lives of regular people and understands what it is to raise a family. He has more a right than all the other priests I know of put together to stand up after the Gospel on Saturday eve/ Sunday morning and preach to us than any of the other non-livers

Manach

I differ on the above poster's definition of reality. To most historians, the middle-Medieval period is sufficiently part of the the historical past and the concept of Church celibatity fit into the need to make it a more service oriented institution. The bald statement that such leads to pedophilia flys in the face of both recent research and even a cursory glance at existing case law shows both the overwhelming sources of such abuse being much closer to the familial circle and close relative. By re-gurgitating such 'definite' nostrums, the continous poor service of the state sector is ignored in both care and support in the public mind.

Lapis lazuli

This hardy perennial has been coming up every year, with every Pope, for as long as I can remember.

It's not a doctrine, but a disciple that can come and go as the Church sees fit.

I've no preference either way for married or unmarried Clergy. I prefer to leave such decisions up to Pope Francis.

What I do know, is that it's not the straightforward matter some people often assume it is.

The requirement of clerical celibacy had to be brought into the Latin Church from the 4th century on, after much shenanigans by some clergy, from multiple affairs by cardinals, bishops, priests, wives, and mistresses, to nepotism, corruption, and fighting over property and positions in the Church.

As the abuse crisis highlighted all too well, some Irish Bishops were shown to be appallingly bad managers of certain single priests, never mind married priests and their families. I would have concerns that the structure, management, and care skills required for managing clergy and their families, are not still there, and if they are, are not well refined. I'd imagine Pope Francis is all too aware of this.

Married clergy and their families do seem to be well managed and looked after by the COI Bishops, but the COI has a much stricter and less forgiving tradition of discipline than the RCC. COI clergy who step out of line in any way, or preach alternative doctrines to the COI, don't last long.

Some people see married clergy as a panacea for curing all problems in the RCC, but it hasn't worked that way in other denominations. The Anglicans have permit married clergy and female clergy, and yet even after this, the numbers of Anglicans has now reached an all time low, and is continuing to plummet. Many in England are actually leaving to join the RCC, as they are not sure what the Anglican Church stands for anymore.

As I said I've no preference either way, but I find the above important concerns and considerations are not often taken into account.

Overall, I believe the best thing people who care for the church can do, is to pray for Pope Francis and the Church and to support him in his decisions and guidance come what may.