The Byzantine Forum
Newest Members
EasternChristian19, James OConnor, biblicalhope, Ishmael, bluecollardpink
6,161 Registered Users
Who's Online Now
0 members (), 1,799 guests, and 106 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Photos
St. Sharbel Maronite Mission El Paso
St. Sharbel Maronite Mission El Paso
by orthodoxsinner2, September 30
Holy Saturday from Kirkland Lake
Holy Saturday from Kirkland Lake
by Veronica.H, April 24
Byzantine Catholic Outreach of Iowa
Exterior of Holy Angels Byzantine Catholic Parish
Church of St Cyril of Turau & All Patron Saints of Belarus
Forum Statistics
Forums26
Topics35,508
Posts417,509
Members6,161
Most Online3,380
Dec 29th, 2019
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 1 of 5 1 2 3 4 5
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,264
Member
Member
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,264
Quote
Messori: Married priests no remedy for �vocations crisis�

Madrid, Jan 18, 2007 / 02:11 pm (CNA).- The renowned Italian journalist Vittorio Messori published an article recently in which he blasted one of the most popular myths of the day: that married priests would solve the �crisis of vocations.�

Reprinted by the Spanish daily �La Razon,� Messori�s article notes, �The Protestant, Orthodox and Jewish communities are all undergoing similar �crisis of vocations�, if not greater, than that of the Catholic Church, despite the fact that their pastors, priests and rabbis can marry.�

�Marriage, therefore, would not be the remedy for the shortage of priests,� Messori continued. �Nor would it be the remedy for the sexual disorders in certain religious environments, beginning with pedophilia. Most of all because pedophilia manifests homosexual impulses (boys are more often victims than girls) and having a wife would therefore not be an adequate solution. And moreover, as the statistics confirm, because the vast majority of abuse takes place in the home, between parents and children and uncles and nephews, this would not be remedy for such situations.�

Messori underscores in his article that �sexual continence� is not some imposition by the Church, but rather the result of a free choice that has its origins in the early Church and that has been practiced for centuries both in the West and the East. It is not a dogma, he noted, but rather �an aspect of Tradition that should be treated with the reverence due to that which is considered to be of apostolic times.�

�In the early Church, the vast majority of the clergy was made up of older men who assumed holy orders, left behind their wives, who gave their consent, and entrusted their families to the community. From that moment they were called to live in perfect continence, no longer living at home but rather in church buildings,� Messori asserted, citing a study by Cardinal Alfons Stickler, the former Vatican librarian and archivist.

Cardinal Stickler�s research proved that priestly celibacy was never considered a novelty and that it has always been an indisputable part of early Church tradition, and it demolishes the theory that �clerical celibacy can only be traced back to 1139, to the Second Lateran Council.�

�And what of the Eastern Churches, where only monks and bishops are obliged to embrace celibacy, while priests and deacons can marry, as long as it is the first and only marriage and takes place before ordination?� Messori asked. �All of the documents show that for many centuries, the abstinence practiced in the West was discussed in those communities and the exceptions that are cited today are actually based on fraudulent sources.�

Messori explained that �only in 691, at the Council of Trullano, was the practice of today�s Orthodox established. But there was an explicit capitulation: the Church in the East did not have the hierarchal organization of the West and it lacked means for repressing abuses, which were increasingly more numerous. And not only that: subject to the Byzantine emperor, the Church in the East gave in to politicians who claimed that a clergy �with family� was more easily controlled. The attempt was made to salvage the principle, imposing sexual continence at least during the period in which priests were exercising their ministry and saying Mass, while aspiring to chastity for bishops and monks. No doubt it was a forced situation, not ideal at all, as many complained and as many still complain about in the East. It�s curious that some today consider that to be desirable for the West also.�

No one would assert that "lifting the ban" would fully remedy the vocation crisis in the Latin Church, which ultimately and fundamentally is a spiritual crisis.

But it would no doubt help!

Messori seems quite willing to denigrate the Eastern practice (declared venerable by no less than the recent ecumenical council of Vatican II and by papal magisterium... I guess that matters not to him or to Cardinal Stickler) but fails to cite conciliar texts from the past that call for celibacy for the diaconate. Where are the calls for a restoration of THAT "venerable" tradition? I guarantee that if the Latins implemented (or reintroduced) such a policy of ordinaing only celibate deacons the great flood of men entering diaconate would dwindle into less than a trickle.

The fact of the celibate diaconate in the conciliar tradition is, to quote that master theologian (yuk yuk) Al Gore "an inconvenient truth" for the Latins who are very vocal critics of a married priesthood in the East, while praising the ordination of married men to the diaconate in their own church. The Latins remain convinced that they are the true Catholics and that even their clerical disciplines deserve veneration as dogma by both East and West.

Messori and Cardinal Stickler should respect the teachings of Vatican II and the papal magisterium since the council . We Eastern Catholics - and the Orthodox - tried to take the Catholic Church at its word when it called all of our traditions venerable.

Gordo

Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,133
Member
Member
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,133
It is very hard for me to stay civil when I hear attacks on married clergy coming from Rome. I guess the "VENERABLE, JUST AND NOBLE" way they handled their "little problem" with certain celebrate Priests gives them the right to judge the practices of the Eastern Church.

There can be no full communion between the CANONICAL Orthodox and the Roman Catholics until all these sorts of attacks are stopped, and Rome takes a good hard look at itself before criticizing others.

Until than it would serve our Eastern Catholic brothers well to come in to full Communion with a Canonical Orthodox Bishop. In the eyes of Latin celibate clergy, Easter Catholics will always be second rate....... Thats how it has always been, and no land knows this better than my native Ukraine where the rights of Ukrainian Catholic Clergy have come under attack by Latins all to often.



Last edited by Borislav; 01/19/07 01:15 AM.
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 4,518
Catholic Gyoza
Member
Catholic Gyoza
Member
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 4,518
Not only that, brother Gordo, but they do ordain married men to the priesthood. Just not "Cradle Catholics." mad (As has been discussed here before.)

Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 490
Likes: 1
G
Member
Member
G Offline
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 490
Likes: 1
Just out of curiousity, how does an article by an Italian journalist constitute an attack on Eastern practices by Rome, or by "the Latins"?

I'm all for a celibate OR married clergy, whichever the Latin tradition decides on, though I don't think either choice should be demeaned; there are valid reasons for both, IMO. If I were to become a priest, I would want to be a Religious anyway, so for me the question is moot wink

Some Latins attack Eastern traditions, and some Easterns, both Catholic and Orthodox, attack Latin traditions. I just don't see how an article by one fellow indicates an attack by Rome.

Peace and God bless!

Last edited by Ghosty; 01/19/07 04:14 AM.
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,264
Member
Member
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,264
It isn't an attack from Rome in any official sense...

Although one could say that the private theological writings of CARDINAL Stickler, while they do not constitute anything "official" offer a window into the mindset of some members of the Latin hierarchy...but certainly not all, as recetly evidenced by Cardinal Schonborn who said the Latin church should consider ordaining older deacons who were men of virtue...basically second-career priests. (This obviously has some foundation in Scripture, since St. Paul indicates that the church can witness the potential fruitfulness of a man's episcopate by how he has run his household, implying someone who is older.)

But I agree with Borislav - such attacks on Eastern traditions - even in the private writings of Cardinals of Rome (often cited by celibate-only apologists on the Latin side) and well known and respected Catholic journalists serve only to undermine relations between East and West. I'm all for scholarly research, but as I indicated above, Rome seems to play loose with some canons herself regarding the celibacy of the diaconate (and the priesthood for convert clergy)...which should silent the celibate-only apologists, or at least give them pause when they fire their own canons at us. Which is another way of saying that the Latins should look at the stick-lers in their own eyes before trying to remove our own! grin

Gordo

Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,346
Likes: 1
D
Jessup B.C. Deacon
Member
Jessup B.C. Deacon
Member
D Offline
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,346
Likes: 1
One thing must be kept in mind. Despite who did or said what in history, the present Canon Law for Catholic Eastern Churches (CCEO), calls for respect for the instituton of married priesthood in the Eastern Churches. Whenever the likes of Messori and Stickler begin with their pontificating (I actually like both of them on some other issues)on this issue, just wave your copy of the CCEO (which was signed and promulgated by JPII himself)in their faces!

Dn. Robert

Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,264
Member
Member
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,264
Not to mention Vatican II!

Amen, Father Deacon.

Gordo

Joined: Aug 1998
Posts: 4,337
Likes: 24
Moderator
Member
Moderator
Member
Joined: Aug 1998
Posts: 4,337
Likes: 24
Cardinal Stickeler's shoddy and illusionary scholarship on said subject has been exposed and refuted both by a Ukrainian priest, sorry can't remember the name, whose work he cites even though the latter retracted his assertations and our own Dr. Anthony Dragani in an issue of Eastern Churches Journal sorry can't remember the number. The Red Hat is no guarentee of unbiased or good scholarship.

Fr. Deacon Lance


My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,264
Member
Member
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,264
Father Deacon Lance,

Are you referring to Fr. Roman Cholij and his "Clerical Celibacy in East and West"?

I'm curious - where did Father Roman publish his retractions? Incidentally, the forward was written by none other than Cardinal Alfons Stickler.

Gordo

Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 4,268
A
Member
Member
A Offline
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 4,268
Priestly celibacy is practiced, and valued, by both the East and the West.

Both require bishops to be celibate and both allow deacons to be married or celibate.

The only difference is in the priesthood: the West maintains a strict priestly celibacy, with defined exceptions, while the East maintains an optional priestly celibacy.

Both traditions can co-exist with each other.

Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,564
Likes: 1
F
Member
Member
F Offline
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,564
Likes: 1
Father Roman Cholij published his recantation in Eastern Churches Journal. Being, as I am, both a friend of Father Roman's and the editor of Eastern Churches Journal, I should know!

The original author cited in the thread reveals his unreliability in his mention of the "Turllano" Council. There is no such place. He is (wittingly or half-wittingly) referring to the Council in Trullo.

One distinct problem with the "arguments" of such dubious writers as Cardinal Stickler is their appeal to a tendentious reading of the Western tradition - which required continence, not only for the priest, not only for the deacon, but even for the sub-deacon and acolyte (because one never knows when one may be called upon to do an emergency Baptism!) and also required continence for the laity as a preparation for Holy Communion. Since the Church for the past century has been encouraging the practice of daily reception of Holy Communion, it should be obvious that this pseudo-tradition cannot hold (I have several friends who have large families and who are accustomed to attend Mass and receive Holy Communion on a daily basis).

What this comes down to is the unsubstantiated assertion that there is a radical contradiction between the lawful use of marriage and the other Sacraments - this is traditional, all right, but the tradition in question is Manichaean, and traces back to the idea of some Greek philosophers that the body is inherently and irredemably wicked, that the body is the prison of the soul, and that the proper goal for an "enlightened" purpose to seek release from the body. Sounds like a suicide cult to me.

Fr. Serge

Joined: Aug 1998
Posts: 4,337
Likes: 24
Moderator
Member
Moderator
Member
Joined: Aug 1998
Posts: 4,337
Likes: 24
Fr. Serge,

Thanks for the name and citation. Perhaps Dr. Dragani published his refutation elsewhere, I'll have to ask him.

Fr. Deacon Lance


My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
Joined: Aug 1998
Posts: 4,337
Likes: 24
Moderator
Member
Moderator
Member
Joined: Aug 1998
Posts: 4,337
Likes: 24
Amadeus,

The can co-exist but only if each side is honest, and there is a segment of the Latin Church that does not deal with this question honestly. They read what they want into the Councils and ignores what refutes them. St. Paphnutios, a monk, defended the right of married priests to continue in marital relations with their wives at Nicea I, when the West, throug sought to entice the East to accept their own customs. This alone disproves the lie they put forward that the tradition in the East was celibacy until Trullo.

Fr. Deacon Lance


My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 501
O
Member
Member
O Offline
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 501
Quote
Both require bishops to be celibate and both allow deacons to be married or celibate.

While the above is true without doubt, we must also keep in mind that in the eastern Slavic tradition until recently, the majority of bishops were widowers who entered monasteries after the death of their wives and/or after the death of their wives and their children were grown up.This is also a venerable tradition.

Wew tend to forget how many women died in childbirth in previous centuries.

Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 4,518
Catholic Gyoza
Member
Catholic Gyoza
Member
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 4,518
Originally Posted by Fr. Deacon Lance
Fr. Serge,

Thanks for the name and citation. Perhaps Dr. Dragani published his refutation elsewhere, I'll have to ask him.

Fr. Deacon Lance

Father Deacon Lance,

Ask and ye shall receive:

http://www.east2west.org/Celibacy.htm

Man, did I go round and round with some Ultramontanists on Jimmy Akin's blog over manditory celibacy for priests East and West. eek mad

Page 1 of 5 1 2 3 4 5

Moderated by  Irish Melkite 

Link Copied to Clipboard
The Byzantine Forum provides message boards for discussions focusing on Eastern Christianity (though discussions of other topics are welcome). The views expressed herein are those of the participants and may or may not reflect the teachings of the Byzantine Catholic or any other Church. The Byzantine Forum and the www.byzcath.org site exist to help build up the Church but are unofficial, have no connection with any Church entity, and should not be looked to as a source for official information for any Church. All posts become property of byzcath.org. Contents copyright - 1996-2024 (Forum 1998-2024). All rights reserved.
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 8.0.0