FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: New Vatican secretary of state: celibacy open for discussion?
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
Pope Francis' No. 2: Clerical celibacy is open to discussion
Quote:"Celibacy is not an institution but look, it is also true that you can discuss (it) because as you say this is not a dogma, a dogma of the church," Archbishop Pietro Parolin said … He added that while it was not dogma, clerical celibacy was a deeply entrenched Catholic tradition.
Celibacy (in the sense of complete sexual abstinence after receiving Holy Orders) has been practiced since apostolic times. Thus, couldn't a pope define a dogma saying celibacy is one essential aspect of the priesthood?
(09-11-2013, 03:51 PM)Geremia Wrote: [ -> ]Pope Francis' No. 2: Clerical celibacy is open to discussion
Quote:"Celibacy is not an institution but look, it is also true that you can discuss (it) because as you say this is not a dogma, a dogma of the church," Archbishop Pietro Parolin said … He added that while it was not dogma, clerical celibacy was a deeply entrenched Catholic tradition.
Celibacy (in the sense of complete sexual abstinence after receiving Holy Orders) has been practiced since apostolic times. Thus, couldn't a pope define a dogma saying celibacy is one essential aspect of the priesthood?

Married clergy have also existed since apostolic times.  So no, the Pope could never define as dogma a celibate clergy as being essential to the priesthood.  It is not a matter of faith and morals, it is a mere discipline.  The Eastern Churches after all, maintain a married clergy.
Here we go again.
(09-11-2013, 04:06 PM)dark lancer Wrote: [ -> ]Here we go again.

Exactly. Then Comes the Protestant voice of reason the spuriously says that having married priest would've eliminated the abuse.
No, if there is a change to celibacy it will not be as a reaction to the sex abuse scandal but for other reasons.

And yes here we go again. Celibacy is a discipline not a dogma.
(09-11-2013, 03:51 PM)Geremia Wrote: [ -> ]Pope Francis' No. 2: Clerical celibacy is open to discussion
Quote:"Celibacy is not an institution but look, it is also true that you can discuss (it) because as you say this is not a dogma, a dogma of the church," Archbishop Pietro Parolin said … He added that while it was not dogma, clerical celibacy was a deeply entrenched Catholic tradition.
Celibacy (in the sense of complete sexual abstinence after receiving Holy Orders) has been practiced since apostolic times. Thus, couldn't a pope define a dogma saying celibacy is one essential aspect of the priesthood?

Only if you wish to ignore the Eastern Catholic Tradition and also lose the former Anglicans who have been ordained priests as married men.  As already noted above, celibacy is a discipline, an august one, but a discipline nonetheless, and not a dogma.  The Secretary of State is quite right that this is something which can be discussed openly.  I believe it is fair to question the prudence of doing so as it might lead people to the wrong idea that this is a problem or that a change is under serious consideration, but he is not objectively wrong in what he said. 
Geremia, where did you get this quote? Do you know the context? Is it that the new Secretary is now being asked about this, or favors allowing married priests (Latin rite)?

I don't know all the doctrine on this. It would seem that celibacy, since it is a higher form of chastity, does purify the priest more for his sacred functions, especially to ascend the altar and offer the Holy Sacrifice.

When trads or conservatives insist on priestly celibacy for doctrinal reasons, there might be something to it. I'm not sure exactly.
I clicked on the link-- didn't realize it was a link.

Hmm, the article still begs the question, why this comment now from the new Sec of State. Media spin? A sign change is in the air?  Huh?
(09-11-2013, 04:25 PM)Ursus Wrote: [ -> ]
(09-11-2013, 04:06 PM)dark lancer Wrote: [ -> ]Here we go again.

Exactly. Then Comes the Protestant voice of reason the spuriously says that having married priest would've eliminated the abuse.

Voice of reason, eh? Seems they should study the psychology of pedophilia. They'll find that a marriage has no bearing on that count. Fools.

I don't have a problem with married clergy, but I do think it would be prudent to have married clergy whose children are grown.
The responsibility of being a father to both family and parish means one of them is getting the short end of the stick. Plus, a young married priest with a few little kids isn't going to be able to relate to a couple married for 15-20 years. He's barely got his toes wet.

I'm not opposed to celibate clergy either. I don't think married priests should be exorcists, though. A family means much fertile ground for the devil to play in.
(09-11-2013, 05:29 PM)Sant Anselmo Wrote: [ -> ]Only if you wish to ignore the Eastern Catholic Tradition and also lose the former Anglicans who have been ordained priests as married men.
I defined "celibacy" (at least for this thread) to mean "complete sexual abstinence after receiving Holy Orders." The Eastern, Western, Anglicans converts, married deacons, and all other clergy are expected to practice 100% sexual abstinence after receiving Holy Orders. Once they have received major orders, never has the Church allowed them to marry or remarry. This has been true since apostolic times.
(09-11-2013, 05:29 PM)Sant Anselmo Wrote: [ -> ]As already noted above, celibacy is a discipline, an august one, but a discipline nonetheless, and not a dogma.
It appears to be more than just a discipline if it has been law (ius first, then, ca. 4th century, lex) since apostolic times.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21