I don't think it's something I'll see come to fruition in my lifetime. Yes it's a topic of discussion, so is extending the priesthood to woman. It's something that's debated, but a lot of Catholicism is traditions that have been passed down, priestly celibacy being one of them.
Even if it was pronounced 'permissible' (or whatever they're thinking of doing with it), I don't think many priests would suddenly act on it.
On my part. Obviously I think that clerical celibacy is not necessarily necessary so to speak. Seeing as my dad is a pastor, and my grandpa was a pastor, and his dad was also a pastor I would hope that is obvious. On the matter of woman priests. Well I feel as though that's something that needs to stay as is.
As for "traditions"--priestly celibacy isn't that old. It was a commended practice way back before even Constantine. But it was not a "rule" until something like the 1200's (not all that long before the Reformation, actually, in the grand scheme of things). There is nothing in Scripture that prohibits married pastors/priests. ("The husband of but one wife" is what Paul teaches a Bishop/Episkopos should be in 1st Timothy.") On the other hand, the Church catholic has never had women's ordination--all the way back to Christ's calling the apostles. And *this* practice *is* based squarely on the Scriptures. (E.g., "the husband of but one wife", and the section from 1st Tim. 2 which will be read in churches tomorrow.) It is an "apostolic tradition" in the fullest sense--the apostolic authority of Christ Himself. As for the apostles' own practice--Peter was married. (Jesus heals his mother-in-law in Mark 1.) I've also heard a pretty good defense of the idea that Paul was himself a widower. (To be sure, both of these men may not still have had a wife when Christ called them to be apostles.)
I don't think it's something I'll see come to fruition in my lifetime. Yes it's a topic of discussion, so is extending the priesthood to woman. It's something that's debated, but a lot of Catholicism is traditions that have been passed down, priestly celibacy being one of them.
ReplyDeleteEven if it was pronounced 'permissible' (or whatever they're thinking of doing with it), I don't think many priests would suddenly act on it.
On my part. Obviously I think that clerical celibacy is not necessarily necessary so to speak. Seeing as my dad is a pastor, and my grandpa was a pastor, and his dad was also a pastor I would hope that is obvious. On the matter of woman priests. Well I feel as though that's something that needs to stay as is.
ReplyDeleteAs for "traditions"--priestly celibacy isn't that old. It was a commended practice way back before even Constantine. But it was not a "rule" until something like the 1200's (not all that long before the Reformation, actually, in the grand scheme of things). There is nothing in Scripture that prohibits married pastors/priests. ("The husband of but one wife" is what Paul teaches a Bishop/Episkopos should be in 1st Timothy.") On the other hand, the Church catholic has never had women's ordination--all the way back to Christ's calling the apostles. And *this* practice *is* based squarely on the Scriptures. (E.g., "the husband of but one wife", and the section from 1st Tim. 2 which will be read in churches tomorrow.) It is an "apostolic tradition" in the fullest sense--the apostolic authority of Christ Himself. As for the apostles' own practice--Peter was married. (Jesus heals his mother-in-law in Mark 1.) I've also heard a pretty good defense of the idea that Paul was himself a widower. (To be sure, both of these men may not still have had a wife when Christ called them to be apostles.)
ReplyDelete