www.byzcath.org

Greetings and Blessings, Gordo,

You mention, as I quote your words below, about the RC being ignorant of the East...well, that also was happening "before" Vatican II! When I was in grade school and high school CCD, we were "never" taught about the Eastern Churches!...Oh..such a sin! And, such a "beautiful" Church it is!...so rich and deep with history and traditions..as the RC has eliminated so much down through the years!!....


GOD LOVE YOU!

....Ignatius...

I had a Ukrainian Catholic church 3 doors down from my church growing up and I didn't know what it was. It's not uncommon.

Greetings and Blessings, John K,

You said as I quote here:


And, yes, so very true...but, why does it have to happen when BOTH East and West are forever united by the Holy 7 Sacraments? This should not ever happen, as we ALL should be taught about the "whole" Church..not just "half" of the Lung.

Sorry if I am a bit off topic here, but just trying to place a "period" to the thought...

GOD LOVE YOU!

....Ignatius...

Fr. Deacon, what concerns me (moreso when I was Catholic) is that one can be a poor scholar, but the "red hat" ensures that one will get an audience in the Vatican. I'm afraid that the cardinals distorted view of church history and the priesthood has too sympathetic an audience in Rome. God bless.

Joe

Dr. Eric, it does seem puzzling that persons who are, strictly speaking, laity in the eyes of the Vatican should be allowed to be ordained simply because they assumed some form of pastoral role (without valid orders) in a non-Catholic community. I've never understood the justification for this, especially when there are plenty of full-time positions for lay people in the Roman church. Perhaps, that is the issue though? A protestant clergyman who converts will lose his job. Perhaps, by guaranteeing him a job in the clergy, it will support his conversion? Who knows? God bless.

Joe

Gordo, I agree with you, however, I do think that mandatory celibacy comes close to being heresy. I used to think that it was only a disciplinary mistake being made by the Roman church. But, to be honest, I think that the requirement of celibacy to be a priest is unbiblical. The New Testament lists "being the husband of one wife" as a requirement for presbyters and Bishops. Of course, this was intended to exclude only those married more than once, not celibates (St. Paul was celibate as we all know). However, it does show that in the first century or two of the Church, a married clergy was the norm. It was a biblical norm that a presbyter be a married, older man who knows how to rule his household and that one who is a recent convert should not be put into orders too quickly.

I like your idea of a priesthood made up of mostly older, married men as associate priests, with a celibate priest as pastor. It parallels the Bishop-presbyter model we have. God bless.

Joe

Joe,

If the mandatory celibacy for priesthood is close to heresy, how can mandatory celibacy for the episcopate not be? The same New Testament lists bishops as husbands of one wife, as well as deacons.

I wouldn't call it "heresy", perhaps imprudent and short-sighted, but surely not heresy - although some of the justification might be.

Joe,

I have often wondered about the close association between the concept of "elder" and "presbyter". On a natural level, to be an "elder" within a congregation would seem to me to be a combination of wisdom and experience. Of course, lest we forget St. Paul's exhortation to St. Timothy, "let no one despise your youth", wisdom is not necessarily a matter of age! Jesus Himself was only 30 when He began His active ministry. But I do believe there is wisdom in St. Paul's exhortation concerning the witness of a man's family life as a guide for discerning how he will act in the household of the Church.

If I could identify ages that would seem ideal, assuming one got married in his early 20's, ordain a married man a subdeacon at 25, a deacon at 30 and a presbyter at 38-40. This is only a matter of opinion, and I'm sure that others will differ from me on this.

God bless,

Gordo

Gordo's idea has real merit for emphasizing the benefit of providing the mostly married community with priests who are married and mature in that vocation. To that extent, I agree with it.

However, I would caution against this or any other guideline becoming a hard and fast rule. Without trying to sound trite, and while trying to be humble, I want to emphasize: Vocations really are God's business; and He really does call whomsoever He wishes: some celibate, some married, and either of various ages.

-- John

John,

I agree. I only meant to share it as an"ideal", not a hard and fast rule.

Thanks!

Gordo

Gordo's idea is interesting, but we should also remember that there are many 30-40 year old Priests who are very bright, knowledgeable and fit for the job. If you exclude them completely the community looses out..... But yes, ordaining 20 year olds is a bad idea.

Part of my rationale is that a good 5-10 years of diaconal service in a congregation would be great experience for a man in preparation for the presbyterate - so long as his is not purely a ritual diaconate, but rather a robust pastoral one engaging in nearly all aspects of parish leadership.

Gordo

Dear Gordo,

Vladyka Filevich, formerly of the UGCC Saskatoon Eparchy, ordained a deacon such as you describe. He did it, by the way, WITHOUT asking for anyone's permission!

He didn't see why he shouldn't ordain a married deacon with a solid pastoral background and solid parish experience to the priesthood.

He was interviewed by the Canadian press and he told them that the only "backlash" he was receiving was from Roman Catholic priests all over North America contacting to say, "Good for you, Bishop!"

Alex

Now Spiritdaily is running a blurb about the Messori article:

http://www.spiritdaily.com/

Dear Friends,

I have a question that is sometimes asked of me by priestly candidates who aspire to the married priesthood.

When married priests serve the Divine Liturgy, are they still supposed to refrain from having marital relations with their Presbyteras the night before? (I believe the rubric forbids the priest to even sleep in the same room with his wife in that case).

If so, does this not pose real problems for parish priests who serve the DL daily?

Once had the experience of having a married priest call me to ask what I thought about this. Then his Presbytera called me to ask that I tell her husband to stop being such a prude and that she was not going to put up with it etc. They weren't going to ask another priest or someone who actually knew something about it.

So what is the answer?

Alex