New Vatican leader raises celibacy question

[Valmy]

Yeah folks. That's what I meant when I wrote the Bible was fiction. The Pharaos and Jericho. 

Well it is those bits that make it credible to people.

[grumbler]

Yeah folks. That's what I meant when I wrote the Bible was fiction. The Pharaos and Jericho.   

Please don't try to weasel out of the failed troll.  Just take your lumps, learn your lessons, and wait for the bridge traffic to resume.   

[derspiess]

Tamas's compelling argument has caused me to question my faith

[Tamas]

Yeah folks. That's what I meant when I wrote the Bible was fiction. The Pharaos and Jericho. 

Well it is those bits that make it credible to people.

Scientologists mention real stuff as well like their hatred of psychology. Does that prove that Xenu exists? Puhleaze.

[The Brain]

Gabriellu exists though, right?

[dps]

Yeah folks. That's what I meant when I wrote the Bible was fiction. The Pharaos and Jericho. 

Well it is those bits that make it credible to people.

Scientologists mention real stuff as well like their hatred of psychology.

I'm pretty sure that their hatred of psychology is real. 

[OttoVonBismarck]

@meri Ordination != priesthood. Further, many ordained men can marry. Since Vatican II when the Order of Deacons was restored you've had quite a good many ordained married men. In the Catholic church there is no such thing as "lay deacons" although some people misunderstand what it means to be a deacon.

When you become a deacon you go through the sacrament of ordination, performed by a Bishop. They are also considered parts of the clergy, but not part of the priesthood. There are three degrees of ordination: deacon, presbyter, and bishop. Only the latter two are considered part of the priesthood. Before Vatican II the deacon position only existed to cover individuals who were working toward becoming priests, as a temporary rank before being ordained to the full priesthood. Something that did actually happen at the Council of Nicea was the diaconate was closed to all but aspiring priests, a situation that persisted until Vatican II when it was reopened to persons not intending to be raised to the priesthood.

Married priests is a very different matter, both politically and in terms of Church teachings than women priests. Eastern Catholic Churches (Churches that are in full communion with the Pope but do not follow the Latin Rite) as has been mentioned does allow for married priests. However, unlike non-Catholic Christian denominations where the religious leaders being married is common place or even expected that isn't the case with Eastern Catholics. Due to their semi-autonomous nature, some of the twenty odd Eastern Catholic Church groups have adopted complete priest celibacy and for them there is no real difference in the practice from the Latin Rite.

For the rest, there are two classes of priest: monastic and non-monastic. Monastic priests take a vow of celibacy, and cannot be married, period. Additionally, unlike in the Latin Rite, the monastic path is almost exclusively the path to higher church leadership in Eastern Catholic Churches, monastic priests almost exclusively are the priests raised to bishop. Of the non-monastic priests, celibacy is valued, favored, and emphasized as a great virtue--but not required. Because of that combined with the fact the bishops are monastic priests and already pretty committed to celibacy you have a situation where married priests in these churches are quite rare. Especially because, even for the non-monastic priests who can their marriage has to predate their being ordained to the diaconate (not before being ordained as priests, but before being created deacons during their training.)

All the Bishop was really saying on the issue of married priests if you read the full interview is it's a matter where there can be different opinions. I could see the Pope perhaps adopting more liberal policies on allowing men, married prior to ordination, to become priests. I would be surprised if we ever permitted already ordained men to marry.

It's also worth mentioning the Anglicans are "special", the Eastern Catholics are their own rite, their own dog and pony show so to speak with their own rules. Anglicans coming in basically have a special arrangement. Unlike Eastern Catholics, they are considered Latin Rite Catholics and expected to practice as Latin Rite Catholics. But where certain Anglican traditions conflict in certain ways with the Latin Rite, they are permitted to continue their old practice. The most notable example is marriage, so Anglican clergy who are married and convert to Catholicism can remain married, and unlike the Eastern Catholics they are full Latin Rite priests.

Also worth mentioning, we do not view Anglican ordination as valid at all. So Anglican clergy have to be ordained again to be Catholic Priests. Before being ordained as priests if they are married they actually have to request the Pope directly, on a case-by-case basis, to grant a dispensation allowing for it. It is not an automatic process, and no one who isn't celibate can ever be raised to bishop (not that a great many of people become bishops in general.)

So that's basically the story on married priests.

Women priests have been rejected in basically the strongest possible terms we have for rejecting stuff as a church. The Church rejects as a matter of history that there have been any significant numbers of ordained women in the past. Where the Church acknowledges women in the distant past have been ordained, it views them as members of heretical sects and not validly ordained.

In the modern era, Popes have reaffirmed in strong terms that women may not be ordained, and that any person participating in an ordination of a woman is considered excommunicated Latae sententiae.

In the Catechism women ordination is specifically rejected (Art. 6 1577):

1577 "Only a baptized man (vir) validly receives sacred ordination."66 The Lord Jesus chose men (viri) to form the college of the twelve apostles, and the apostles did the same when they chose collaborators to succeed them in their ministry.67 The college of bishops, with whom the priests are united in the priesthood, makes the college of the twelve an ever-present and ever-active reality until Christ's return. the Church recognizes herself to be bound by this choice made by the Lord himself. For this reason the ordination of women is not possible.68

Canon 1024 also explicitly mentions only baptized males can receive the sacrament of ordination.

If it was solely a matter of canon law it would be one thing. However this matter goes even further.

Core  to the teaching is that Jesus, after a night of prayer, selected the male apostles. To ordain females would (as the Church teaches it) be saying that mortal men have superior judgment to Christ, and are free to disregard his example. For this reason a male only priesthood is seen as a matter of true divine law. Previous Popes when investigating the issue have literally said "the Church lacks the authority to ordain women, as it directly contradicts the actions of Christ."

The only possible loophole for female ordination would be differentiating between ordination as a presbyter and a deacon. For it is currently only stated that ordination to the presbyter or episcopate (bishop) rank is male only as a matter of doctrine. So the only impediment to ordination as a deacon is canon law (which is still a significant impediment).

[CountDeMoney]

Core  to the teaching is that Jesus, after a night of prayer, selected the male apostles. To ordain females would (as the Church teaches it) be saying that mortal men have superior judgment to Christ, and are free to disregard his example. For this reason a male only priesthood is seen as a matter of true divine law. Previous Popes when investigating the issue have literally said "the Church lacks the authority to ordain women, as it directly contradicts the actions of Christ."

This.  No chicks in the Holy Honeycomb Hideout, dammit.

[Razgovory]

Tamas's compelling argument has caused me to question my faith

My faith in Eastern Europeans is shattered.

[mongers]

So what do you guys think of the next Hobbit movie? I am not sure if the beard length of the dwarves was a doctrine, or something like a custom, that is free to be changed by the filmmakers.

Hobbits are fantasy.  Not allowing priests to marry has consequences for real people.

For some people believing in hobbits has very real world consequences.   

[Tonitrus]

As usual, Languish is missing one key issue in this debate.

If priests are allowed to marry, does this mean that nuns become accessable as well? 

[CountDeMoney]

If priests are allowed to marry, does this mean that nuns become accessable as well? 

[crazy canuck]

So what do you guys think of the next Hobbit movie? I am not sure if the beard length of the dwarves was a doctrine, or something like a custom, that is free to be changed by the filmmakers.

Hobbits are fantasy.  Not allowing priests to marry has consequences for real people.

For some people believing in hobbits has very real world consequences.   

[merithyn]

I love how Otto will come into a thread and throw up a wall of text restating the last 20+ posts as if it's now true because he has now said it.

[jimmy olsen]

He did go into a lot more detail than they did.