www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology Married Clergy

Good Afternoon:

I just read this off the web site of the Melkite Catholic Church. Is there a similar move to ordain married men by the Byzantine Catholic Church in the U.S?

Regards,

Andy

--------------------------------------------------

Married Clergy

On Saturday, December 20, 1996, Bishop John Elya ordained the first married American priest for the American Melkite Church. The church has traditionally had married clergy in other parts of the world, but within the United States the clergy had remained unmarried due to a 1929 Vatican decision that married clergy would be restricted to the patriarchal territories. This 1929 "ban" was imposed so that the mixture of married and celibate would not be "confusing" to American Catholics. In recent years, Canadian Eastern Catholic (Ukrainian) bishops have ordained some married men without the approval or disapproval of Rome - although these ordinations have caused some negative comments from the more conservative members of the Eastern Congregation.

There are have been married Melkite clergy in America over the past two decades, but these men have been in the New World on temporary assignments or they were ordained in the old country and then came to Canada. Father Andre St. Germain is believed to be the first openly ordained Melkite priest in America for the American Eparchy.

Father St. Germain lives with his wife in Manchester, New Hampshire and is currently the economos (treasurer) of the eparchy.

Not only the Melkites but two Ukrainian Catholic eparchies in the USA have ordained married men in the last five years.

As we have seen by the example of the Melkites and the Ukranians we absolutely have the right (as we really always have) to ordain married men to the priesthood. Let us pray that our own hierarachs shall do as their brother bishops have and embrace those who wish to be married and ordained to the priesthood. We cannot truly be equal to all other rites within the Catholc Church if we ourselves do not believe that we can make our own decisions. We must no longer fear being true to our own traditions and rights and continue to act like a child who has been chastised when it did nothing wrong. This is not to say married priesthood lies at the heart of our identity as Byzantine Catholics, but rather it is but one of the many traditions and rights that we (we being the people sitting in the pews, not just priests and bishops) must embrace and demand. Let us pray that we quickly return to OUR traditons as they are meant to be.

S'nami boh,
Christopher

Just to be the devil's advocate here...
Byzantine catholic's in this country, whether on not they like it, have been Americanized and the American culture is an infused element of our personas. This being the case, the issue of a married clery in the USA is not so simple. It is foreign to us. The combination of a married vocation with that of a priest. The expectations and demagogery that is expected of our priests would be very strenuous on an American family, deeply seated in materialism and a need for material comforts etc. The amount of self denial and spiritual turmoil that goes with such a vocation, very few are able to comment on. Just a thought.

The bottom line to your comment is if God ordains for there to be married clergy in the United States, HE will already have the way worked out for those families of which He would call the father to the priesthood.

So don't worry, be happy, just rejoice, and watch the Holy Spirit work.

Rose

Dear Athanasius,

"Just to be the devil's advocate here. . ."

You mean you moonlight as a Vatican official?

Alex

Dear Alex:

No, the Vatican expressly forbids "moonlighting."

The job of a "devil's advocate" requires a "full-time" commitment.

For certain curial officials, it's their "day," and only, job.

AmdG

Athanasius,

You're pulling our chain, right?

Let me first say that I do not know the hierarchs personally or what they actually think. My comments here are purely speculative but I want to address the practical difficulties.

I am going to assume for the time being (for arguments sake) that the hierarchy of the BCC is generally in favor of a return to optional celibacy. I think the Vatican is already aware of this and is ignoring the situation because they believe they can do so and get away with it.

If that is so (big if) is it possible that the reason the BCC jurusdiction does not or can not move forward on this is because there is no unified home church in Europe or Asia that can be leveraged or enlisted on this issue? It seems to me that the Carpatho-Rusyn churches in Europe do not have the same presence or status as a national church, crossing national borders and without a Patriarch-figure. After all, this would be an act of defiance of standing rules, without a parent church to lend support (moral support and practical support and all that implies) the position of the BCC may not be as strong.

Am I seeing this situation all wrong?

On the other hand might it be that there are just not enough candidates for the priesthood in the jurisdiction that might require this kind of action. We'd need to have fully trained priest-candidates already married and waiting in the wings so to speak. I don't know the situation at the seminary.

Just some thoughts.

Michael, sinner

Dear Amado,

Actually, I once moonlighted as a Vatican researcher in preparation for the papal visit there . . .

I didn't get to wear any special robes or anything - but I did wear a big pectorale throughout that period!

Ciao!

Alex