If during the first ten centuries of the catholic church the priests were able to marry and no one questioned their zeal and commitment with the faithful, why is it that today one of the reasons for not allowing the priests matrimony is that they would not be able of a total commitment?

ENRIQUE

-- ENRIQUE ORTIZ (eaortiz@yahoo.com), May 01, 1999

Answers

The world is much more complicated today and there are many more souls for each Priest to care for. This also became Church practice in the 400's.

-- Br. Rich S.F.O. (repsfo@prodigy.net), May 01, 1999.

bro rich:

it is true: the world is more complicated today and the priests have more souls to care for, but does that mean that the married priests in the orthodox church or the married catholic priests in oriental rites are less zealous or care less for their faithful?

ENRIQUE

-- ENRIQUE ORTIZ (eaortiz@yahoo.com), May 03, 1999.

Enrique,

What does the Apostle Paul have to say on this matter?

-- ubipetros (ubi@petros.com), May 05, 1999.

When one is serving the Lord, it is better to do so without facing the pleasures of the flesh, in order to have a sound relationship with the Almighty. However, Paul says that it is better to get married than to suffer from the heat of passion. So some preachermen marry because they cannot withstand this passion.

-- Mucha Matambanadzo (chumielobb@yahoo.com), May 06, 1999.

Very good answer - I like the "both sides" of good research. And sometimes weall, or at least I, need a "helpmate"- which is why Eve was made in the first place.

-- Jamey (jcreel@hcsmail.com), May 06, 1999.

The real beauty of the Latin rite discipline of the celibate priesthood isn't that priests and religious forsake sex because it's bad... celibacy affirms the awesome gift of human sexuality. It simply states the power of giving up an awesome good for the sake of an even higher good - serving as a Priest of the Lord thy God, in persona Christe.

-- ubi petros (ubi@petros.com), May 06, 1999.

Mucha: in your answer you say that it is necessary to renounce the pleasures of the flesh to have *a sound relationship* with God. Does that imply that married priests in the Oriental church (orthodox or catholic) or all the anglican prests that converted to catholicism and were allowed to keep their families have not a *sound relationship*? I wonder.

ENRIQUE

-- ENRIQUE ORTIZ (eaortiz@yahoo.com), May 08, 1999.

This is as much confusion (too me) as what has been said that the only way Jesus could have a Perfect relationship with "His" Father is if He was another person of a godhead.

If it does imply this what ENRIQUE is saying, then what chance do the rest of us have in developing a "relationship" with our Father - God????

-- Jamey (jcreel@hcsmail.com), May 09, 1999.

Looking back at history I feel the shame of the Church in having to turn its back on the fathered children of priests/bishops/cardinals and popes by these pious men.

When in the 11th century it was deemed that celibacy be the elected norm this was to take away the birthright of these children who asked to be acknowledged by their natural fathers. The coffers of the church were not to be depleted as they were for God's work.

Celibacy is not for everyone and we must never forget marraige is a blessed sacrament. Would the priests who are honest in themselves realize this then perhaps they would be happier in the outside world.

Being invovled in finance I see the terrible waste of monies due to the fact of these men not earning it but rather assuming it will always be there. What is my point and connection?

Having resolved the problem of not being responsilbe for a family through edits they are for the most part truly unaware of the emotional content of everyday living. A seperation of dissasociation presents itself which confuses the word to be said.

Any comments would be more then appreciated.

Peace And Well Being.

A Little Brother In Christ,

Jean Bouchard

-- Jean Bouchard (jeanb@cwk.imag.net), May 10, 1999.

Dear Enrique, I don't think that catholic priests should be married because in order to be totally committed to something it has to be only one thing. I think that people forget that priests weren't born priests, they lived a number of years as kids and young men. They are not totally unaware of what happens in families and between lovers. They may also have experience themselves with girlfriends and such. When they CHOOSE to become a Roman Catholic priest, the vow of celibacy is part of the deal. I cannot CHOOSE to be a cop and then refuse to fire a gun or CHOOSE to join the army and then refuse to fight. When you make a choice you have to keep your word or in this case, vow. The choice, ultimately, is up to the young man considering the priesthood. But once he chooses the priesthood, he has to accept all that it entails, not just that of which he approves. Did you ever see "Seventh Heaven" where the minister has a big sermon to give and it is being televised to thousands? His daughter has a medical emergency and he has to choose where to be--with his daughter and family or behind the pulpit giving the televised speech. He chooses to go to the hospital and states that nothing comes before family. Catholic priests do not have this dilemma. Ellen

-- Ellen K. Hornby (dkh@canada.com), September 09, 1999.

I can speak from some experience in this matter. I have been a member of a Lutheran church that had married and unmarried pastors. I can say that the married pastors suffered not only in thier committment in time and energy to the parish, but also the suffering of a lack of family time. I say it should be one or the other. An ummarried clergy is more free to attend to the parish in a sacrificial way. They are not burdened with the cares of the secular world. That is why Paul said it is best not to marry, so all things can be focussed on God and His people.

-- pamela (Rosylace@aol.com), September 09, 1999.

Marriage and Holy Order are not mutualy excusive. A married man can be lawfuly ordered, and an Odained man can be lawfuly married (depending on the rite). However, the Roman Church has, since its beginings, thought that, acording to Paul4s (and Christ4s!) teachings, it is holier to remain unmarried than to marry, exactly because marriage is a sacrament and a very holy thing. So, he who gives up this very holy thing for an even holier thing, perfects himself. Since the beggining, most of the Church4s priests were not married. Although it lasted a long time to become a roman rite requisite, it does not mean that it was not observed before. On the contrary, it became a requisite exactly because it was the usual custom in the western church since centuries ago.

-- Atila (atila@a.b), September 09, 1999.

Atila - One of the most painful thoughts I have on this issue is the fast of bastard children were not spoken of inthe Church until the 1100's when it the edict of non-married priests be the rule due to the children of the then priest asking for their birthrights which was being held in churh coffers. Comments Please.

-- jean bouchard (jeanb@cwk.imag.net), September 10, 1999.

There are no bastard children; only bastard parents.

I didn't actually understand what you were asking, Jean. Could you clarify?

-- David Palm (djpalm64@yahoo.com), September 10, 1999.

DAvid - Historical works have shown to this man in the 11th century there was a severe confrontation between the children of the ordianed priest of the Chruch.

They wanted their birthright of lands. The Church would not let go of it's holding from the then treasuries and came forward a law as I understand it the " children " were not acknowledged due to the new law of priests being unmarried.

St. Francis I understand confronted this issue in his act of saying his Father was in heaven when he turned his back on his earthly father. Am I confused here?

-- jean bouchardRC (jeanb@cwk.imag.net), September 11, 1999.

Dear Jean, Back when people had birthrights, it is true that upon being ordained, any lands belonging to the person being ordained, became property of the Church. I don't know if this was a rule or they were just given as presents. Sometimes, the family would donate land to the Church as an expression of gratitude for their son being ordained. When some of these priests had children, either legitimate or illegitimate, and the child reached the age of majority, they wanted their birthrights back from church holdings. Some of them got the land back, but lots didn't. By refusing to release the lands, the church refused to recognize their birth, thus "bastardizing" them. This was a land title fight and the new issue of priests not bieng allowed to be married was just a lousy excuse to cover up the real reason, which was greed on the part of the church. Ellen

-- Ellen K. Hornby (dkh@canada.com), September 12, 1999.

Ellen - This is also what I have to think. Perhaps others could help on this point.

-- jeanb (jeanb@cwk.imag.net), September 12, 1999.

The reality of the issue of celibacy is this: the church fears that a married clergy would end the contributions of the celibate priest, and these married clergy would become like professionals -as is often said about protestants. As a son of a luthernan pastor, the best answer is that the church has a duty to bring the Gospel to all people -and that includes the eucharist. Without a priest, there can be no Eucharist. If married priest were allowed, they should have the same benefits as priest do now. That would mean that a married priests' income would be low, but they would have basic neccessities. This would make a married priesthood not a profession (as is feared) but a vocation-a calling, and a sacrifice. The church needs to look more carefully at history and learn from it - the reasons for celibacy no longer exist, and in my diocese, no Catholic will be able to have good pastoral care within about 15 years, since the diocese is too large and the catholic population (120,000) is served by only 52 priest (in 15 years, this number will be 25!). The church needs to make its priorities striaght and stop being so xenophobic. Besides, looking at the Eastern Catholics, Orthodox, and even many protestant married clergy, the fears of those who suport celibacy can be offset by making bishops always celibate (as in Orthodoxy) or by allowing those that want married clergy to have them. Finally, the church has lost a lot of people to the Lutheran church because of stupid disciplines like celibacy that alienate those who feel called by God, and also those who see a lot of homesexuals who are priest, yet they see no real good, spiritual priest.

-- Clint Evans (evan1435@uidaho.edu), November 16, 2000.

Priests should be able to marry because they will then have a better understanding about life throughout their experiences with their family. Also the priests could better tend to their community and frequent probelms concerning relationships. Also priests become sexually repressed and look what happend a while back, the harassment and molestation of young innocent children if those priests had wives that could tend to them emotionally and physically then the priests wouldnt have become warped and twisted.

-- Emily Johnson (Emstonka@aol.com), December 09, 2003.

My guess is that the molesters were already warped and twisted. I am not sure that allowing married priests would change that. Take the example of the gay episcipal bishop. He was married with a family and then left for a new lifestyle.

-- James (stinkcat_14@hotmail.com), December 09, 2003.

The discipline of celibacy has been around for a LOOOOONG time. It wasn't just an 11th century invention. The local council of Elvira in Spain held in the 500's included mention of it as an already OLD tradition. St Augustine, who was bishop of Hippo in the late 400's also had a group of celibate priests... and St Ambrose, bishop of Milan in the early 400's was celibate as well.

Then we have plenty of circumstantial evidence that St Peter himself was not married when he was picked to be an apostle... the word used to describe his "mother in law" could also be "step-mother". And since his wife was no where mentioned, nor were any children... the weight of evidence points to the Apostles being celibate as well!

Thus while some married men where allowed to be ordained, there is no tradition, anywhere, to allow ordained men to become married. And while a married clergy has been around for a long time, it was NEVER the norm.

Now you can argue as to why this is so, but I don't think the default PRESUMPTION should be "fear" or economic considerations. The Church has never allowed fear of man or "what the neighbors will think" to decide on other customs or disciplines.

So we must look to the example of Our Lord: celibate, and to the Apostles: celibate, and to the great Church fathers...all celibate... "for the kingdom". That was the motive - and that still is the motive.

-- Joe (joestong@yahoo.com), December 09, 2003.

"if those priests had wives that could tend to them emotionally and physically then the priests wouldnt have become warped and twisted."

Well Emily,

That's a rather curious thing to say, given that 70% of child molestors are married men. Marriage does not "cure" a man who suffers from this disorder. Rather, the disorder is very likely to have negative effects on his marriage. Note also that Protestant clergy are allowed to marry, and the per capita percentage of ministers suffering from this disorder is no different from the rate among priests, which in turn is no different from the rate among men in the population at large.

Also, if priests were allowed to marry, those who were involved in molesting adolescent boys would be precisely the ones who would NOT marry, since they are homosexual.

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), December 09, 2003.

Also, if priests were allowed to marry, those who were involved in molesting adolescent boys would be precisely the ones who would NOT marry, since they are homosexual.

I don't get that , 'cause , what If the kids were also girls ??

For me it's simple , persons who likes to molest kids , they are pure perverting frustrated paedophiles , which really need help to be cured (if it helps) !!

Salut & Cheers from a NON BELIEVER:

-- Laurent LUG (.@...), December 11, 2003.

I believe, if the priest have whole-heartedly guard their chastity right from childhood in total prayer, total dependence on God, and self discipline, then nothing would shake them, even sexual temptations to supernatural proportions, like the Cure of Ars.

The present situation is due to watering down of foundations of spiritual life that are:
A compulsory personal prayer life (not just the breviary)
A extensive spiritual reading and understanding of the Word of God (not just a critical study, which actually demystifies everything spiritual).
A strong disciplined life and watchful in all aspects of both private and public life (emotions, mind, television, magazines, too much familarity with people, luxuries, partying, liberties, etc.)

The seminary in our city, boasts of the most up-to-date teachings, are filled with professors who are just working as professionals. It is hard to find one who considers prayer or the Bible as important aspects of life. They openly scoff in front of the students about the deity of Jesus, the presence of the Holy Spirit, Mary mediatrix of all graces, the Holy Father, the existance of the devil and hell, sacramentals, all the dogmatic doctrines of the Church, the charismatic movement, etc.

Professionally they are very good, but that is all. Their main philosophy is humanism, socialism, and liberation theology. The most hardcore of them, a Jesuit has recently been expelled from the college due to his openly outrageous teachings. Most seminarians also pride in having such views, and that Jesus was just a social reformer. The only seminarians who love to hold on the dogmatic teachings are the ones who have had some exposure to the charismatic movement or the traditionalists, but they too in the following years become weak due continous onslaughts of mordern teachings, peer group pressure, mockery, and intellectual criticism.

They have all the freedom what a layman can only dream of. They have the freedom to go home every week. Friends, relatives, cousins, etc. can visit them whenever they wish. Not a few of them even suffer from depressions and some have even girlfriends, which one of my seminarian friend there confided to me and even pointed to me the person.

What I have noticed in short somethings that make their priestly less active are:
Intellectual debating taking precedence over a prayer life
Psychology over Word of God
Personality development/worldly skits over evangelization/preaching the Word.


-- leslie john (leslie_jn@yahoo.com), December 11, 2003.