www.byzcath.org Forums News & Events Church News Vatican stops suspending married men ordained for Eastern churches

Dear Friends,

I think the point is well-made here that celibacy can only succeed within the proper support network - a network that can be absent from the lives of celibate priests in today's circumstances.

The Orthodox Church has always affirmed this with its general principle of "Married priests for the parish, celibate priests for the monastery."

But I have a question to our Eastern experts with respect to "crypto-celibacy" applied to even married priests in the Eastern Churches.

The rule for married priests, as stated in their horologion, is that, prior to the celebration of the Divine Liturgy, they are not to even sleep IN THE SAME ROOM with their wives.

If they do, they commit a grave sin.

Could our Eastern experts explain this rule?

So even if the Eastern Church allows for married priests, it would seem it, too, defers to that "aura" associated with celibacy that our most esteemed, admired and deeply appreciated Cantor Joseph Thur, Esquire, referred to above in his erudite and excellent posts!

Or else a married priest could not celebrate the Liturgy on a daily basis . . .

Alex

The "daily Mass" issue is a good point.

Was the rule of 'no sex during fasting' only applied to married clergy? or like many 'traditions' did it only become a clerical rule since most, if not all, married laity eventually ignored it?

Joe

Joe, I think you answered your own question. Several of the priests I have queried about this in various SCOBA jurisdictions just ignore this rule, or have had it mitigated by various bishops.

My ROCOR priest friend adheres to it, but he only celebrates Divine Liturgies on Sundays and great feasts. The rule came from a time when the Divine Liturgy was only celebrated infrequently, basically on Sundays and major feasts.

I don't think in economia it can be reasonably extended to a married parish priest who celebrates a daily Divine Liturgy. Until the 18th century in most lands with Greek Catholic parishes only the monasteries had regular Divine Liturgies, and hence the abstinence was understood since they lived chaste and celibate lives. The occurrance of daily Divine Liturgies in parishes outside of monasteries is a uniquely Greek Catholic phenomena.

Dear Cantor Joseph,

Yes, the Old Believers of Russia still have the rule of "no sex please, we're Orthodox" on Tuesday and Thursday evenings and over the weekend that is taken from the Canons of St John II, Metropolitan of Kyiv. This applies to BOTH clergy and laity.

But even if this rule is mitigated, as our Esteemed Diak said, the point is that even the East regards sexual relations as an impediment to serving the Divine Liturgy.

And why is that so?

A priest friend of mine who got ordained in Ukraine came back and his Presbytera got him to call me to ask about this.

I didn't know what to say and this was in my pre-Forum days.

I suggested to him that he meditate on some specified scriptural points when he was with his Presbytera.

That seemed to satisfy them both . . .

Alex

I don't want to make a big issue about this, but my only concern within this topic is that some people seem to think that, because celibacy has caused problems for some (not all!) priests, the answer is to abolish it and only ordain married men.

Sure, that will take care of the problems associated with celibacy, but marriage comes with its own set of problems. And the idea that marriage will end the problem of sexual temptation among priests ... well, ever hear of a little thing called "adultery"? Just check the L.A. sports pages this past week for an example! .

Maybe my main question is, why does it have to be "either/or" (celibate priests OR married priests)? Can't it be "both/and"?

I really think we will have to be careful that this thread is NOT turned into one about the celibate Roman Priesthood.

After all the tradition [ actually should it be Tradition ? ] is for the Eastern Priesthood to be married though I don't think , from what I have heard, that celibacy was ever forbidden.

Since the Holy Father has 'suggested' that you return to your roots and enough documentary proof seems to be there - then just go and do it.

Is anyone really going to notice ? I mean there are so many married priests about now - who knows if they are Eastern or Latin.

Anhelyna --being lopsided again

Dear Diak,

Thanks for your response. I'm not sure that I meant in my writing what you read there.

Actually, I think that the battle to preserve compulsory celibacy for non- monastic clergy is rowing upstream also.

What I wrote, I wrote simply to agree with Joe that training for such clergymen today in the midst of cumpulsory celibacy in the Latin Church and the Metroplitan Church of Pittsburgh is a problem that needs to be addressed for the men involved today.

I agree that one year as an on-site deacon won't address the problem significantly, it seems to me. But against the backdrop of our history with celibacy and the glacial pace of change in this area, I was pointing out that at least there had been some movement for change.

I don't see a major shift in the discipline of celibacy in the West in the near future. Of course, I have been known to be blind-sided. Look at what happened with the renewal of our Liturgical Life and theology as a result of Vatican II! The Spirit has this way of doing things without consulting me!

Actually, my friends say that I could have written what you said about celibacy among non-monastic clergy in much of your posting and they would not have known the difference! :rolleyes:

Of course, given the difference in the relationship between monastics and "secular" clergy in the West, I think that our practices will be different from those of the East if and when our Church returns to the practice of allowing a married clergy.

With Theist Gal, though, I don't believe that mandatory marriage for non-monastic clergy in our Church is the answer, either. Our tradition of a celibate clergy is long standing and a madate for the opposite won't stand, in my opinion.

I hope that what I've said here will help to clarify what I was saying above. Until the change from mandatory celibacy to optional celibacy comes, assuming that it will and that's not certain, we've got to find some way to help young men to learn a more healthy way of dealing with celibacy as they live outside of a monastic community.

Steve

Dear Dolly,

No one is going to force anyone to marry against their wishes, to be sure!

I certainly hope no one is suggesting that celibacy leads to sexual perversion - that is simply not true.

We Ukies have celibate priests serving our parishes - one of them is getting consecrated a bishop tomorrow.

We are flexible on the issue - why isn't your Church?

I watch EWTN and I've heard your bishops talk about the "homosexualization" of the RC seminaries in the U.S.

What is that all about? And why is it occurring if indeed it is?

And why do RC bishops and Rome in general just frown on married priests?

Is there no place for married priests in the Latin Church?

RC laity sometimes jump up and down on me for suggesting this - it is their "tradition" and what-not.

Celibate priests are not perverts. But they do need support systems to live as they should. And without such support, they can fail in their vocation.

And is a call to the Priesthood the SAME as a call to celibacy?

I think the Church needs both celibate and married priests.

We already have both. Why don't you?

Alex

Dear Alex,

I'd guess the simplest answer to your questions about why your Church does one thing and ours does not is that we're different Churches!

Neither greater nor lessor! Different!

Come to think of it, we do have married clergy!

Steve

Dear Alex,

I agree! And said so a couple of pages back, but was told by someone else that he felt celibacy should be ABOLISHED, which is what I was objecting to.

I agree - there should be room for BOTH.

Love,
Theist Doll :-)

We certainly don't like it when the Latin Church makes us adopt a practice that is outside our tradition, in fact it seems we spend a lot of time here complaining about that... :rolleyes:

The Latin Church will herself have to answer this question. And it seems she is, albeit in her usual slow and methodic way. It seems the "test ground" with the Episcopalian and Lutheran pastors who were ordained as priests in the Latin Church over the last 20 years or so have been extremely successful.

I have a good friend who was a former Lutheran pastor with seven kids whom his Latin bishop has used as the "clean-up man" in several parishes that were in bad shape liturgically, spiritually, and financially. In every case he turned the parish around. Being a father and a small-business owner before and during seminary gave him certain practical background experience in dealing with the parish situations that seemingly few of the celibate priests had.

Ultimately it will be the Latin Church who herself decides. But we are here to give them lots of advice from the eastern side of the fence...

Perhaps, but I still think there is room -- and a need -- for the single-hearted priest who devotes his life completely to Christ and the Church. Having known a few "saints" like that, I guess I've been spoiled!

Not that there's anything wrong with a priest being married. Just that IMHO we must continue to have single, celibate people in *every* profession (not just the priesthood!), to show this sex-saturated world that it IS possible to live that way. Difficult, but possible!

TG,

The same argument can be made about having good chaste clerical marriages. That marriage IS the natural home for sex. Considering the divorce rate and the tendancy to postpone marriage later ...

Joe

So once again, Joe ... let's have both, rather than one or the other - both celibate and married priests, rather than only one or the other. What's wrong with that? Not everyone is meant for marriage.

(Though I'm still available, if anyone's ... oops, never mind! wrong audience! )

TG,

I agree to the above statement. As for the last, we have to get you a Theist Guy. As my wife would say, "We gotta get that girl a beau."

Joe