www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology Tradition and Celibate Clergy

My sister's parish was served by a married, convert priest. He was very beloved by her family and others. I don't know how "choice" the assignment was. I do know he was welcomed with open arms because he was orthodox in his belief and practice. The problem with Roman Catholics not understanding this beautiful practice has to do with intellectual custom. In the Roman Rite the only people advocating married clergy are in favor of women priests and other unorthodox proposals. Faithful Roman Catholics are naturally uneasy with their proposals. They have a hard time seeing it is possible because they have NO experience with it.

Glory to God! My priest told me this and I have meditated on this. Thank you for reminding me. Him and his wife, the Khouriyeh are an excellent example.

AMM,

Here you go:

https://www.byzcath.org/forums/ubbthreads.php/ubb/showflat/Number/216033/page/6#Post216033

https://www.byzcath.org/forums/ubbthreads.php/ubb/showflat/Number/220408/page/1#Post220408

The last link was very recent in the East & West Forum.

I hope those help.

Dr. Eric

The Dragani article actually addresses my question directly. Thanks.

I don't see that as absolutely true. to support a married clergy does not necessarily entail that you have to support women priests as well. why should those in the Roman Rite be any different on this position than Eastern Catholics or Orthodox?
Much Love,
Jonn

I was actually responding to Theophan. I haven't figured out how to indicate that on the Re:. Of course I wasn't making a generalization that I thought could be "absolutely true".I read his message as a small interest, question, about what goes on in the mind of Roman Catholics who are opposed to married clergy. My answer was basically "intellectual custom" and lack of experience. As I basically married into the Byzantine Rite and am sharing my experience about the Romans, I can only share what I read and saw. Those pushing for married clergy consistently advocated women priests and such. As always I'm sure there is an odd duck or so.

W-a-M:

I'm not sure about the assignment of a married convert priest to a parish. I've been told that they are restricted to non-parish settings like chaplaincies, though with the clergy shortage that is something that is "winked at" in some places.

I was pointing to the politics of the whole issue and how it raises hackles in so many quarters. Guess I'm still on my New Year's resolution for 2007 and unconsciously suggesting it to others: I'm not letting anyone or anything upset me this year; there is nothing that important except the Faith and this issue is not a faith issue but simply a difference of discipline. I've made a commitment to look to the Hand of Providence and let God worry about the details.

It seems that some issues will never be resolved and there will always be someone who doesn't get the official message no matter how hard we try and with how much technology and instant communication we garner.

In Christ,

BOB

Bob,

It seems the majority of married Latins in the US are officially assigned to non-parish roles while unofficially performing the same duties. This is not the case in the UK or Canada.

One example:
A former bishop of the Lutheran church, Joseph Jacobson [wcr.ab.ca] was ordained a Catholic priest in Alberta, he is the pastor of St. John Baptist Cathedral [te-deum.blogspot.com].

Another thought , my other sister's parish is Traditional Latin but when I visit her, we go to a Byzantine Liturgy that is held in the same building but in another space in order to preserve the correct Liturgical atmosphere. That priest was married with children. Maybe my family just runs in unusual circles.

That's cool. Is that Byzantine priest the same who celebrated the Traditional Latin Mass?

If so, what do the TLM parishioners think, are they scandalized ?

The Priest isn't the same. No , I don't believe that they are scandalized. My sister's family came with me once. They thought it was something along the lines of "interesting".I have to say that the music was not nearly as beautiful as my home parish.I will never experience anything on earth as beautiful as the Divine Liturgy.My heart has soared with spiritual consolation and God's love for man at the Liturgy. May it always be so.
In peace,

I can name one experience I am familiar with where a married Catholic priest is definitely NOT considered second class in any sense. I'm growing tired of hearing that again and again and I begin to wonder about it's "urban legend" qualities. Fr. Chrysostom in the Archdiocese of Denver is not only the pastor/administrator of a parish, where he celebrates both a Latin Rite Mass and a Byzantine Russian Divine Liturgy every Sunday but he is also an esteemed member of the faculty of the major seminary of the Archdiocese. Archbishop Chaput, the Latin ordinary, thinks very highly of him. Father was formerly Russian Orthodox and is married with 3 children.

Now that is cool! I think this sentiment is more consistent with what my sister has told me.I hate to go back to the same thought , but all Truth is One.

Wait a second...

Can we bring to light how these two persons, or at least Colchini, were "largely discredited"? If Colchini has made an ostensibly convincing case, it does little/no good to just say "oh it's been refuted" and go on from there. When/how/where/by whom was it refuted? Truly, I'm just curious; I'm not saying I necessarily agree with Colchini since I haven't read her work anyway.

Logos - Alexis

Cochini was refuted both by Fr. Robert Taft, SJ of the Pontifical Oriental Institute and by (Melkite) Patriarch Maximos V Hakim of Antioch.

The whole premise is absurd. We all know that both East and West had married men ordained to the priesthood. The (priest-)monk was always the closest icon of Christ in His person, not the common priest - the non-monastic clergy is a better icon of Christ to His Church.