"In Defense of *Mandated* Celibacy" v. "In Defense of Celibacy"

There is a difference between saying/writing "In defense of celibacy" v. "In defense of mandated celibacy."

Defenders should really state what they are essentially defending: The obligatory character of priestly celibacy that has existed in the Latin Church since the 12th Century.

If one were to re-title any books, articles, talks and blogs called "In Defense of Celibacy," many if not most would need to be re-titled, "In Defense of Mandated Celibacy."

Married Priests Not an Attack on Celibacy

Advocates of married priests -- or rather advocates for the greater increase of married priests in the Latin rite by opening up the priesthood once again to baptized cradle Catholics -- are not seeking to reform celibacy as celibacy.  Celibacy has existed since the beginning of the Church.  Rather, advocates of married priests are reforming the current mandated celibacy or obligatory celibacy requirement.  Nowhere does the Church officially teach in her 2,000 year history that celibacy is "essential" or "ontological" to the priesthood.  

There may be some link to the priesthood, but that is the closest case one can make.  Otherwise, there would be no married men in the priesthood.  And there are married men in the priesthood.  God and His Church has allowed it.  The love (agape) of the Heart of Christ is the essence of the priesthood (not celibacy).  Celibacy is one way to live the love (agape) of the Heart of the Christ in the priesthood.

And while there is an indelible character conferred upon ordination, indelibility does not mean celibacy is required.  Celibacy is not essential to sacred ordination.  As the revered Fathers of the Second Vatican Council taught, celibacy is "not demanded by the very nature of the priesthood, as is apparent from the practice of the early Church" (PO 16).   

One Pathway Forward

The reform in the current canonical language of the Latin Church can be done by way of dispensation.  This is the current evolution of the Church's legislation of the mandated character of celibacy.  For instance, dispensations from Canon 1047 could allow a Viri Probati pathway to ordain married men in the Latin Rite priesthood.  

Cardinal Gracias of India, a canon lawyer, highlighted that married men can be canonically dispensed from the Latin celibacy requirement, while Cardinal Czerny of the Holy See acknowledged that decisions toward opening the priesthood to married men can be made by Church authority.  Cardinal Schönborn, general editor of the Catechism, proposed to select married priests from the ranks of married deacons.  Other cardinals, regional bishops conferences and individual bishops have called for married priests, especially since the Second Vatican Council.

There may be other pathways forward. Dispensation is just one way as the Church is currently constituted, given the rows and rows of hedges placed around enforcing mandated celibacy since the 12th Century.  In a sense, defenders of mandated celibacy are making a mere canonical defense of mandated celibacy.

While Catechism 1579 states that men are "normally" chosen "with the exception of permanent deacons" from among men who live a celibate life to the Latin priesthood, this is addressable so that it respects both the Catechism and Canon Law.  That is actually the current modern norm.  It is the current norm because since the 12th Century, it evolved to its current norm.  Married priests was not the exception to the rule as we see today.  The ancient norm prior to the 12th Century was noncontinent married priests existing alongside celibate priests.

As Cardinal Jimeno said during the 2019 Amazon Synod, at no time was celibacy called into question.  Celibacy is in the Scriptures and in the early Church, but *mandated* celibacy is neither in Scripture/Tradition nor in the early Church.  In fact, again, married priests working together with celibate priests was the "norm".  The revival or restoration of married priests in the Latin Church is not an attack on celibacy but a return to the ancient tradition of the Church.  And if one loves tradition and seeks to restore it, then one must love the ancient tradition of married Catholic priests.

Thus, let's call the position of the defenders of priestly celibacy what it really is: A defense of the canonical, 12th Century mandated practice.  It is only 812 years old when it was in absolute legal force before the modern Popes (starting with Pius XII) allowed married priests to return to the Latin Rite.

Celibacy for the Sake of the Kingdom is Not Just for Priests

As advocates of a greater role for married priests in the Latin Church, we defend celibacy, too, and are for celibacy.  It is one of the beautiful ways one can serve God's Kingdom.  Many people, those who are not priests (Catechism 922 & Catechism 1618ff), have given all for the sake of the Kingdom of God.  "Esteem of virginity for the sake of the kingdom and the Christian understanding of marriage are inseparable, and they reinforce each other" (Catechism 1620).  Mt. 19:12 isn't just for Catholic priests the way defenders of mandated celibacy make their case to be.  Our Lord and St. Paul did not mandate celibacy for the priesthood.

So let's be crystal clear then: When defenders say that they are for celibacy, they are really saying, in essence, that they are for defending mandated celibacy for the priesthood.  

There is a big difference between saying/writing "In defense of celibacy" v. "In defense of mandated celibacy" or "I defend celibacy" versus "I defend mandated celibacy."  Defenders should really state what they are essentially defending: The obligatory character of priestly celibacy that has existed in the Latin Church since the 12th Century.

Get ready for some major re-titling.

A celibate Apostle (John) & a married Apostle (Peter) stand side by side at the empty tomb.

 Christos Anesti (Χριστός ἀνέστη) (Christ is Risen!):

A celibate Apostle (John) & a married Apostle (Peter) stand side by side at the empty tomb.

Official Title: "The Disciples Peter and John Running to the Sepulchre on the Morning of the Resurrection" by Eugene Burnand (c. 1898)

Source: https://www.meisterdrucke.uk/fine-art-prints/Eugene-Burnand/40391/The-Disciples-Peter-and-John-Running-to-the-Sepulchre-on-the-Morning-of-the-Resurrection,-c.1898-.html

Posted on @Synod_va Twitter Page: "Veni Sancte Spiritus! Your Holiness/Eminences/Excellencies, Brothers & Sisters, please remember the requests for the ordination of married deacons to the priesthood of Jesus Christ, if bishops ask it for their Dioceses. Grazie mille. Our Lady, Queen of the Clergy, pray for us."

Posted on @Synod_va Twitter Page:

Veni Sancte Spiritus!

Your Holiness/Eminences/Excellencies, Brothers & Sisters, please remember the requests for the ordination of married deacons to the priesthood of Jesus Christ, if bishops ask it for their Dioceses.

Grazie mille.

Our Lady, Queen of the Clergy, pray for us.

In response to request for prayer from:

 

In response to the following request 

"Join us in prayer for the experts starting the reflection that will lead to the drafting of the working document for the Synodal Assembly of October 2023, asking for the guidance, wisdom and inspiration of the Holy Spirit. #PrayerRequest #Synod #InstrumentumLaboris #PeopleofGod"

Melkite Patriarch, Council Father, to Pope Paul VI Advocating For Married Latin Rite Priests During the Second Vatican Council: "But perhaps the time has come when, through the will of the Church..the Eastern tradition [of married priests] might be useful to the universal Church"; "The Catholic West does not yet seem disposed to make such a radical change in discipline, but one will go slowly with all the necessary prudence, after the experience of the married deacons authorized by the Council" (1965).

Maximos IV Sayegh, Father at Second Vatican Council, Patriarch of Melkite Greek Catholic Church, 1947-67.  Cardinal.  Worked for Catholic & Eastern Orthodox Churches unity. 

Text intended for Council Fathers (not delivered) 

& 

Letter to Paul VI advocating for married Latin rite priests (delivered)

***

Excerpt from Text for Council Fathers (not delivered):

"Christian East has also preserved, for the good of the universal Church, a parallel tradition that is founded quite as much on Scripture, the Apostles, and the Fathers. And this tradition, at the moment and in the countries where the Church deems it appropriate, can be invoked in order to support a turning point in history that will perhaps be made necessary by the changing circumstances of time, place, and persons.

.....

While justifying the Eastern tradition, I cannot but admire the lofty morality of the parallel tradition of the West. But perhaps the time has come when, through the will of the Church, and wherever it may chose, the Eastern tradition might be useful to the universal Church.

I conclude: granted that our thinking is not yet sufficiently mature for definitive decisions, we propose the creation of a post-conciliar commission for the study of this serious problem that concerns in the highest degree the very life of the Church. We believe that a pure and simple return to the ancient and authentic tradition of the Church would be welcomed both by informed lay Christians and by the clergy open to the realities of life. This will bring peace of soul and freedom of conscience."

-Text above intended for Council Fathers but was sent to Pope Paul VI instead.  

-----

Excerpt from Patriarch letter below to Paul VI which was sent along with text above:

"The Catholic West does not yet seem disposed to make such a radical change in discipline, but one will go slowly with all the necessary prudence, after the experience of the married deacons authorized by the Council.

All that I ask of Your Holiness, in order to obey a serious imperative of my conscience, is that the door not be systematically & irreversibly closed.

With this trust, I humbly kiss Your hands, imploring Your paternal & apostolic blessing."

*Pope Paul VI created His Eminent Beatitude Maximos IV Sayegh a Cardinal in Feb. 1965. Patriarch eventually accepted.

Source: https://melkite.org/faith/faith-worship/chapter-8#Priesthood_and_Celibacy

---

This blog originally posted on Oct 26, 2019 here:

https://marriedpriesthood.blogspot.com/2019/10/melkite-patriarch-to-pope-paul-vi.html?m=1 

"I think we’ve exhausted the [continence] topic, and people are now resorting to petty personal squabbling. Enough." - Deacon Greg Kandra from "The Deacon's Bench" (2012)

 

Source (The Deacon's Bench): https://www.patheos.com/blogs/deaconsbench/2012/05/married-deacons-its-okay-you-can-have-sex-with-your-wives/

"I think we’ve exhausted the topic, and people are now resorting to petty personal squabbling.  Enough." - Deacon Greg Kandra

Matter addressed ad infinitum in the early 2000s by an earlier generation of national deacon leaders.  Thank you!  Saltpepper still not needed.

Also, see Deacon David A. Lopez, Ph.D., for basic summary of old conversation (Sioux City Deacon Formation): https://siouxcitydeacon.blogspot.com/2011/01/diaconal-continence-and-canon-277.html

What's new since then (2012) is that theological and historical foundations which served as Dr. Peters's theological sources (+Stickler et al) have been rebutted, thanks to the East with a history of noncontinent married priesthood going to the Apostolic era.

The discipline of celibacy-continence, mandated beginning in the 4th Century, is no longer being expected for Latin Rite married clerics since Pius XII in the 20th Century. 

______________________________________

Memorandum 

To: All Bishops 

From: 

Most Reverend Robert J. Carlson Chairman, Committee on Clergy, Consecrated Life and Vocations

Most Reverend Timothy P. Broglio Chairman, Committee on Canonical Affairs and Church Governance 

Date: January 31, 2012 

Re: Married Permanent Deacons and the Canonical Obligation to Observe Perfect and Perpetual Continence

Your Eminence/Excellency,

In recent months, published opinions have appeared in scholarly journals and on Internet blogs that have raised questions about the observance of diaconal continence by married permanent deacons in the Latin Catholic Church. The opinions have suggested that the clerical obligation to observe “perfect and perpetual continence for the sake of the kingdom of heaven” (c. 277, §1 CIC) remains binding upon married permanent deacons, despite the dispensation provided to them in canon law from the obligation to observe celibacy (c. 1042, 1° CIC).

In response to repeated requests for an authoritative clarification on this matter, the Committee on Clergy, Consecrated Life and Vocations and the Committee on Canonical Affairs and Church Governance requested the assistance of the USCCB President in seeking a clarification from the Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts.

Earlier this week, we were informed that Cardinal-designate Francesco Coccopalmerio, President of the Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts, with Bishop Juan Ignacio Arrieta, Secretary, has forwarded to Cardinal-designate Timothy M. Dolan the Pontifical Council’s observations on the matter (Prot. N. 13095/2011). The observations, which were formulated in consultation with the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, clarify that married permanent deacons are not bound to observe perfect and perpetual continence, as long as their marriage lasts.

Should you have any questions about this response, please contact Reverend W. Shawn McKnight, Executive Director of the Secretariat of Clergy, Consecrated Life, and Vocations. In addition, please feel free to share this response with those within your diocesan curia who will find it helpful.

_____________________________________

Pontificium Consilium De Legum Textibus Citta del Vaticano, 4 marzo 2011 N. 12959/2011

(Unofficial Translation) Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts

Dear Sir,

We have received a fax of your kind letter of February 20th, 2011. In it you proposed a dubium with this reasoning: "However an issue has arisen where an aspirant to the Permanent Deaconate who is a married man has declared he will not practice 'perfect and perpetual continence' in accordance with Canon 277. He says he has been told that men in the diocese have been given a general dispensation from this requirement."

In regard to this matter I am happy to offer the following clarifications:

The obligation of celibacy applies to all clerics, including permanent deacons who are not married prior to ordination (cf. c. 1037).

Permanent deacons who are married prior to ordination do not have the obli- gation of celibacy (and therefore of continence) during the marriage. They have the obligation of celibacy in case of widowhood (cf. c. 1087).

This is why canon 277 is not included in the list in canon 288.

Finally, the dispensation from the impediment of canon 1087 does not apply to the diocesan bishop. He can, instead, given the case in question, transmit the request for a dispensation to the Holy See. The dispensation can be requested only of the Holy See by a permanent married deacon who has been widowed and will be eventually granted only if the petitioner admits one of three reasons: the great and proven usefulness of the deacon's ministry to the diocese to which he is attached; the presence of children of a tender age requiring maternal care; the presence of elderly parents or in-laws requiring assistance (cf. Congregation for Divine Worship & Discipline of the Sacraments, Circular Letter of June 6, 1997).

+Francesco Coccopalmerio 

President

 

Viri Probati (2005): Italian Website Asks Pope for Viri Probati (Ordained Married Elderly Men to Work Alongside Ordained Younger Celibate Men)

 http://www.viriprobati.it/

Excerpt from TRANSLATION of www.viriprobati.it into English (please pardon the formatting issues):

Why this site

This site is a modest study but the result of long reflections, studies and interviews with expert people and priests who welcomed the principles set out despite the perplexities due to the times of the Church. It is useful that this study stimulates the reflection of other prepared people and competent: priests, theologians, simple faithful, etc. to perfect what is exposed in the vision of a Church closer to the primitive model often reported by the Magisterium.
As you can see, the inspiring principles of the celibacy of priests in general but the roles and state of life of ministers ordained in the two fundamental conditions for the existence of the Church: true elderly priests also married for local life and young ministers celibate apostles of the itinerant Kingdom for the loving and continuous visit of the Churches and the re-evangelization of the world.

LETTER to the SYNOD of the BISHOVI 2005

04-10-05

To Archbishop Nikola Eterovic,
Secretary General of the Synod of Bishops
00120 Vatican City RM


I am sending you a letter with this letter which I beg you to come to the reflections of the Bishops and therefore half of yours to the Holy Father in that he offers, in my opinion, to the vocational crisis, a serious reflection on the need to extend the presbyteral ministry to the elderly by revisiting theologically passages of the Holy Scripture and tradition of which I speak in the letter. After reflection, prayer and contacts with prepared priests I believe that such a significant topic in the Eucharist cannot be overlooked.
I believe in his charity and benevolence to receive a welcome response.

Devoutly in Christ
Oliviero Gulot


1st Letter to His Holiness Benedict XVI

attached to the previous Synod of Bishops with hope of delivery


04/10/05

To His Holiness
Benedict XVI
Vatican City
00100 ROME RM


Holiness,
I am a family man and grandfather with a priest son. Allow me to write them without presumption and in all humility because an inner zeal for the Church has tormented me for years for the lack of vocations and priests, who will prove dramatic as of now and even more in a few years. If, as you said recently, there are no magical solutions to the problem, certainly the Lord is not deaf to ours prayers and, perhaps, the scribes of the Kingdom of Heaven choosing? new and ancient things ” could find a solution reflecting on the realities of our times, where we often witness uncomfortable situations, if not in crisis, of many priests left alone and of communities without their constant presence.I believe not to be alone to beg you so that with the grace of your great theological knowledge and experience reconsider a better suitability of this ministry than in the words of the S. Writing, neglect over time and unjustly relegated as if they were contingent facts, they inform of a ministry born with the elderly ( presbyters ) but now, practically, proposed only to young people.
These are the main questions that times seem to suggest:
- respecting the Tradition and the call to excellence of the priesthood of young "eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven ", generous and enthusiastic, it is not fair to think that they deserve much more than usual educational substitute service with young people in the parishes?
- the term presbyter is not a reminder, first of all, of wisdom in piety and experience of the elderly with family? When the first communities "breaked bread in houses" who, if not the boss family or an elderly person did this? Not ignoring the call of the apostle Paul: ".. if one he cannot direct his family as he will be able to take care of the Church of God "they were therefore put in charge of the Communities themselves.
- then, why not extend the ministry to prepared and solid faith elders? Of course they were not missing ministers then! Why should they miss us today? In the Middle Ages, the Church did not resolve serious ones then problems ordering "viri probati"?
There is no wrong to the celibacy of young people with a ministry redundant to the elderly. We have in ours community many pious and intellectually prepared people who need only a short, even if indispensable, specific study in the ministry. Furthermore economically independent of the Church because chosen over sixty years and cared for by wives or children.
Your Holiness, these things have been exposed to several prepared priests and scholars and nobody has placed reservations except on the times; indeed, some also appreciated them because they would improve the relationship with people and, in my opinion, allowed young celibate priests to devote themselves to true evangelization in the ministry of "episcopo-inspector" necessary, in this case, for the sure increase in attendance and vitality in the Church.

Forgive me if I dared to write to you, but I hope the present can reach you through those people that are of help and overcome, so, every just and responsible control, I can, for benevolence, receive a welcome feedback.

I offer my prayers for the Lord to enlighten you and always support you in the guidance of the Church. I devoutly greet you. 

His in Christ.
Oliviero Gulot

@peterdavids (2020): "If [celibacy-continence] were essential to Holy Orders, then both the Pastoral Provision of Pope St John Paul II and the Personal Ordinariates of Pope Benedict XVI would have been problematic...Unification with the Orthodox as a whole would be a lost cause." w/my Commentary

Here is an excellent commentary on Henry Karlson's article on Paphnutius below from @peterdavids.  Sounds like he is an Ordinariate priest with Eastern Rite faculties. Wow!  Talk about catholicity.

I highlighted the part that caught my eye the most.  As usual, like most Ordinariate priests, of course, he will not disparage the Latin celibacy norm.  He will not bite the hand that feeds him, so to speak, which is different when a baptized and confirmed Latin Rite Catholic reflects on mandated celibacy as the modern norm. 

I hate to phrase it like this, but if those who insist on celibacy-continence for married deacons and married priests where they "have to" refrain from conjugal rights with their wives, then Father's analysis applies: "Unification with the Orthodox as a whole would be a lost cause" and attracting Anglican/Episcopalian priests would also be "problematic" and thus not draw Anglicans, Episcopalians et al. to the Ordinariate and home to the Catholic Church.  The Ontologicalists are those who say, "Well, married priests, okay, but they *have to* be continent."  To insist on celibacy-continence as essential or ontological to the priesthood and diaconate is like another embarrassing Ed Peters debacle after 2005 that married Latin rite permanent deacons had to endure.  Well, that was short-lived, from 2005 to at least the 2009 Ordinariate creation where celibacy-continence was not expected of converts to the Catholic priesthood.  No one, no one among the married Anglican/Episcopalian clergy, among the married Orthodox clergy, among the married Latin Rite clergy (i.e., permanent deacons) would in their right mind want to embrace continence of their own choosing which is just another disingenuous, backdoor sneaking in of celibacy for married clergy as ontological and then calling it apostolic tradition after making a "bit of a stretch" argument which only goes back to Pope Siricius in 385 A.D.

If God does will Viri Probati married priests to return to the Latin Rite, then it was necessary for these debates to emerge so that the truth of the priesthood may shine all the more brightly for a Church united according to the mind of Christ.   Thank goodness that Henry Karlson and Fr. Davids see through the Ontologicalists.

That SOME married priests had to be continent in the first centuries does not mean ALL married priests had to be continent in the first centuries.

That SOME local bishops legislated continence for married priests does not mean ALL bishops universally required continence for married priests.

That SOME Jewish priests were continent in the Old Law does not mean that ALL Christian priests need to be continent in the New Law.  The celibacy-continence debates in the Church today are similar to the heated circumcision debates of the early Church. 

The very fact that celibacy-continence is debatable and not a closed theological issue shows that it is not universally held Apostolic Tradition for all time and for all places.

A non-continent married priesthood is immemorial tradition.

Married priests are the ancient Latin norm.  Mandated celibacy-continence is the modern Latin norm. 

As Henry Karlson wrote, the disciplines of celibacy-continence "were not universal" (2020).

Mike Lewis wrote, "+Sarah's writing might tap into some venerable ideas, but from a practical/disciplinary standpoint, they're of little relevance to the current situation" (2020).

As Sandro Magister stated, the continence is "no longer being asked" (2019) in West and East.

It makes those who insist on celibacy-continence among married clergy "look foolish."  

As Dr. David Howard observes, they "fight for a discipline like it's Dogma" (2021).

Discipline does not determine theology.  Theology determines discipline.

So forward.  Forward to a fuller expression of the Priesthood of Jesus Christ understood as Celibate and Married.

Just as the Church is both Virgin & Mother, so too Christ is both Celibate & Married.

As Fr. Davids wrote, "If [celibacy-continence] were essential to Holy Orders, then both the Pastoral Provision of Pope St John Paul II and the Personal Ordinariates of Pope Benedict XVI would have been problematic...Unification with the Orthodox as a whole would be a lost cause."

Source: Peter Davids's (@peterdavids) commentary on https://www.patheos.com/blogs/henrykarlson/2020/01/clerical-celibacy-not-essential-to-orders/ (citation cut and downloaded on 04/01/2023)

Interesting, and true. If it were essential to Holy Orders, then both the Pastoral Provision of Pope St John Paul II and the Personal Ordinariates of Pope Benedict XVI would have been problematic, for both allowed married non-Catholic clergy to come into the Catholic Church and be ordained as priests. Likewise the various Orthodox communities who have unified with Rome (I have faculties in the Byzantine Catholic Church, for instance, although ordained in the Latin Rite) who have an unbroken tradition of ordaining men who were married previous to their ordination (although bishops must be celibates) would be illegitimate. Unification with the Orthodox as a whole would be a lost cause. Finally, not only do we have the historical discussion above, but the fact (at least according to St Paul) that Peter and "the other apostles" were married and their wives traveled with them. Thus it was not essential for them. But, given that, I and many, perhaps all, other married Ordinariate clergy I have talked with, am/are strong supporters of the discipline that normally priests should be celibate. While thankful for the provision made for us who came late to this vocation, we realize (and in my case and others with whom I have talked, our wives as well) that to be a married Catholic priest means being married to two "women," the Church and one's wife. Paul wisely points to the stresses that that would create in 1 Cor 7. We had to count the cost and then live with the cost afterwards. When Cardinal DiNardo, in the recessional after he ordained me, stopped by my wife's pew, kissed her on both cheeks, and said, "Thank you for giving your husband to the Church." He expressed what we would later live. I live in thankfulness for the unusual privilege that I have and I would not change my response to God's call to ordination in the Catholic Church even if I could. But I also advise those who might qualify under the pastoral provision or the Personal Ordinariates to look seriously and soberly at what ordination in the Catholic Church would mean and, together with their wives, to count the cost. And, when the conversation comes up with my celibate brother priests, I encourage them to be thankful for the blessing of their celibacy, that they heard the call as Catholics and early enough that they could respond within the discipline of celibacy, despite its admitted hardships. I am glad that with disciplines (versus with something that is the essence of a sacrament) there can be exceptions, relatively rare though they are, but I am thankful that the normal discipline arose, both because of the historical problems it addressed when it became the norm in the Latin West, and because of the practical blessings that it brings.

Synod on Eucharist in 2005: 4 of 12 Bishop Working Groups Called For Study on Viri Probati Married Priests; Papable Cardinal Scola of Venice Reported Request for Viri Probati to Pope w/Reply From Now Papable Cardinal Tagle of Manila Who Said, "We should face squarely the issue of the shortage of priests."

https://marriedpriesthood.blogspot.com/2019/12/cardinal-tagle-we-should-face-squarely.html?m=1

---

Excerpt:

Cardinal Angelo Scola of Venice, Italy, the relator (meaning roughly “moderator”) for the synod, started the celibacy discussion in his 52-page Relatio ante disceptationem, a synthesis of comments from around the world sent in prior to the synod.

Without identifying which bishops supported the measure, Scola reported that some synod participants had “put forward the request to ordain married faithful of proven faith and virtue, the so-called viri probati.’ ”

Scola himself expressed reservations about a change in the celibacy requirement, but drew a quick response from Bishop Luis Antonio G. Tagle of Imus, Philippines. “In the absence of the priest, there is no Eucharist. We should face squarely the issue of the shortage of priests,” he said.

Source: http://natcath.org/NCR_Online/archives2/2005d/101405/101405p.php (21 Dec. 2019)

---

Excerpt: 

This effort builds on our earlier work at the International Synod on the Eucharist in 2005 where the priest shortage dominated the agenda and four of twelve bishop small groups asked for further study of married priests.

Source: https://www.futurechurch.org/future-of-priestly-ministry/optional-celibacy (27 May 2020)

Former Anglican priest convert to Catholic Faith and U.S. Army Maj. Ken Bolin, brigade chaplain for the 4th Brigade Combat Team (Airborne), 25th Infantry Division, gives his first blessing as an ordained married Catholic priest to Anchorage Archbishop Robert Schwietz at Our Lady of Guadalupe Parish March 7th

 

Former Anglican priest and U.S. Army Maj. Ken Bolin, brigade chaplain for the 4th Brigade Combat Team (Airborne), 25th Infantry Division, gives his first blessing as an ordained priest to Anchorage Archbishop Robert Schwietz at Our Lady of Guadalupe Parish March 7th. As an ordained priest, Bolin is authorized to celebrate both the standard Roman Missal Mass as well as the adapted Anglican Mass. Bolin is the newest of five married Catholic priests to currently serve in the chaplain corps on active duty in the U.S. Army. (Photo by U.S. Army Sgt. Eric-James Estrada) Unit: 4th Brigade Combat Team, 25th Infantry Division Public Affairs

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clerical_marriage (31 Jan. 2023)

Why the Blog Silence? Why the Blog Silence from 2020-2023? (Quo Vadis, Domine?)

Why the silence?  

Why the silence between 2020-2023 on this blog?  Three years.  Silence.

Because we needed discernment.  

Authentic discernment.  

Not politicking and in-fighting among the People of God.  

Not parliamentary procedure and emotional ad hominems.  As the Latin Rite studies the Viri Probati, we needed time after the local Amazon Synod.

Time.

To discern.

To pray.

To understand.

To listen to His sweet voice.

Your voice, Lord.

Not the devil's voice.

Is this what He wants for His Church?

Viri Probati, Lord?

Restore tested older men?

Come, Holy Spirit!

It's not to say that Pastoral Provision priests or Ordinariate Priests were not tested, Viri Probati.  They were.  Axios!  They were found worthy.  Tested men on a different pathway to the holy priesthood of Jesus Christ.

Tested.

By Benedict XVI.

By John Paul II.

By Paul VI.

By John XXIII and by the Second Vatican Council.

By Pius XII.

It ain't just a Francis thing, folks!

In the 20th Century, the world's bishops in union with the Successor of Peter in solemn Council voted to ***honor*** married clergy! 

In Prebyterorum Ordinis.

Recognized.  Validated.  

Not tolerated.

By the Successor of Peter, John XXIII & Paul VI, and the 2,000+ Successors of the Apostles honored married men in Holy Orders.  

What Catholic can argue with the Pope and 2,000+ Bishops in union with him in solemn Council?

20th Century Popes and even Latin Rite Bishops recognized married men in Holy Orders!

And without expectation of perpetual continence!

To esteem married men in Holy Orders after over eight centuries of mandated celibacy in Latin Rite. 

Recognizing married clergy in the Latin Rite.  Like the diaconate for married men.  Over 2/3 of world's bishops restored the rank for Viri Probati.

A hermeneutic of continuity.  The modern world.  And the ancient world.

An unbroken succession.

To the Apostles.

To Melchizedek.

Melchizedek, a married king-priest.

Blessed day! 

Married priests in the Latin Rite perhaps opening up another pathway for full Communion between the Catholic and Orthodox Churches.

A moment of history.

Our time.

Where Latin Rite Catholics do not disparage married men in Holy Orders.  Finally. 

Not second class clergy.  Finally.

Yet honoring celibacy which has a place in the Latin Church. But not at the expense of denigrating married priests in the Latin Rite.

A moment of history.  That's why the Council happened.

In part perhaps. 

For two lungs of the Mystical Body of Christ to breath again.

That the world may believe.

And separated brethren in the West were given a pathway home to Rome.  To Apostolic Tradition.  To the priesthood that comes to us from the Twelve Apostles.

They were separated Protestant & Anglican brethren.  Now, they are our Fathers in Christ.  They are welcome.  They are most welcome.  And we love you, Fathers.  Welcome home.  Your home.  Our home. Where you belong.  Where your ordained ministry was tested.  And approved.  Tested men.  Proven men.  Like the East.

But now, Latin Rite Catholics.  Cradle Catholics.  Baptized as infants.  Confirmed in our youth.  We respectfully ask the Successor of Peter.

The Cardinals and Bishops who are Successors of the Apostles. 

For Viri Probati.

We respectfully ask.

We respectfully ask for married Catholic priests in the Latin Rite.

A pathway.

The Viri Probati pathway?

The simplex priests pathway?

Another pathway?

Perhaps start with married deacons?  There are 40,000 thousands of them.  Already Viri Probati. Start with some or many fruitful ones.  Already tested for diaconate.  Apprentice them for the priesthood.  

Married priests have to serve time as deacons first anyways. And celibate ones had to serve as deacons first.  Before priesthood ordination, all priests have to serve in diaconate ordination first anyways.

So select some.  Call some.  Or many.  As married priests.

Simple priests.  

Viri Probati priests.

From married diaconate...

...to the married priesthood.

No need to salary them.  

Like the deacons.  No salary.  But ministry.

Freely they received.

Freely they give.

They are successful with careers already.  

Many hold advanced degrees.  

Are retired.  Are executives.  Are leaders.  Are followers.  Are workers.  At the lower level of the hierarchy.

With successes and failures in life.

Life experience.  Some with great grandchildren.

They cover their own health insurance and retirement.  Not a financial drain on the local Diocese.

SCANDALS are less than 1% among the married deacons.  Divorce rate is less than 1% among the married deacons.

But most importantly, they are tested.  Older men.  

Like the early Apostolic age and the early Church.

Ressourcement..

Elders.

Fathers in Christ.

Thousands entered the permanent diaconate with no intention of pursuing the priesthood.  None.

But now.  If God wills.  

Through His Church, call some.  Or many.  Case by case.  Up to the local bishop.  Up to the regional bishops?  Up to the Holy See?  Up to the Supreme Pontiff.  

Motu Prioprio? Apostolic Constitution?

Perhaps entitle it "Viri Probati".

But none of the married deacons expected it.

40,000 deacons.  Already Viri Probati.

Choose viri probati married deacons to be viri probati married priests.

Add many or some fruitful deacons to the Order of Presbyter.

Permanent: Not intending to be priests.

From permanent deacon.

To transitional deacon.  

Some of them.

Their probation period.  As a married transitional deacon.

To prepare them as Viri Probati priests.

Married. 

Tested.

Proven.

Not 18 year old seminarians.  

But mature, older men.  Elders. 

In the person of Christ the Servant.

They bring Christ's servanthood.

Who came to serve and not be served.

Real servanthood.

Real sweat and blood.

With the poor.

The neglected.

Widows.

Orphans.

Like the first deacons they served.

And also today the deacons serve the widows and orphans who need the Eucharist.

Who need absolution of their sins.

Who need Holy anointing and Last Rites.

And family life they bring.

From the Dalmatic of Justice.

From the Order of Deacon.  Levite.

To the Order of Priest.  To the Chausible of the Sacred Presbyterate. 

To the person of Christ the Head.

In persona Christi.

To save souls.

If a married man is not a deacon, and he desires the priesthood, them let him serve in the diaconate.  For a time.

1 year?

3 years? 5 years? More?  Up to the bishop.

But let him be fruitful in the diaconate first.

As Cardinal Schonborn said: Permanent diaconate is like a "laboratory".

Tested.

Under a microscope.

Under a microscope even before admission to deacon formation.

Under a microscope during 5-6 years of deacon formation.

Under a microscope after ordination.

Look for your married priests in this laboratory of tests, pokes and prods, and microscopes.

No need to reinvent the wheel.  Start with the married deacons.

And discern.

Viri Probati.

And then they come with wives.  They come with tested family life.

Wives, the feminine element.

Surpassing the petrine element.

Holiness is superior to the priesthood.

Mothers.

Mothers of the parish.

Wives of deacons.

Wives of men in Holy Orders.

The image of the Church married to Jesus.

The conversations are taking place once again. 

In 2023.

Just like in 2020.

And in those 3 years, what did those against married priests in the Latin Rite say?

We learned.

We listened.

We studied.

The best case was put forward against married priests in the Latin Rite.

But the position against restoring married priests were not strong enough.

Is that it?

Is that all you have?

Even with all that, the Church by virtue of the power of the keys...

can dispense.

Nothing new. 

Nothing substantial against a restored married priesthood in the Latin Rite today.

Same as 2019.  Same as 2023.

<<<yawn>>>

The Ontologicalist Error, the position that celibacy-continence is essential to the priesthood, we found bordered on heresy. 

And how bitter they seemed.  Unhappy.

But others came out and supported married priests.

What was new is that married priests are possible once again in the Latin Rite.

We learned.  We discerned.

It's not Modernism.  It's not a Protestant thing.  It's not caving in to the secular world.

Married priests isn't just a liberal issue.  It's not just a conservative issue.

It's a Catholic issue.

Feed the flock!

So restore married priests in the Latin Rite?  

Restored...

...restored alongside celibate priests whom we love dearly.  

Who lived 812 years of mandated celibacy in the West.   From Lateran II in 1139 AD to Pius XII in 1952 AD.  

In the Roman Rite.

Celibacy/continence.  We learned.  Not of the essence of the priesthood.

As for Apostolic Tradition.  Needed in both West and East to be so.

What can change?

What can be dispensed by authority of the Church?

What cannot be dispensed by authority of the Church?

Capital T.  Sacred Tradition. - Cannot dispense.  Example: Priesthood for males.

Little t.  Like the traditions of the Church. - Can dispense.  Example: Celibacy/Continence.

Mandated celibacy in the West.  Lord, do you want us to continue in the current way?

You who give us shepherds to feed us?

You who feed the flock through Peter?

To feed us Your Body and Blood?

Feed us with your holy priests!

Lord, grant us married priests we beseech Thee.

But if You don't want it, Lord, destroy our efforts.

Accepto.

Is this what You want in the Latin Rite?

Souls.

The salvation of souls.

The salvation of souls is the supreme law of the Church.

Is there a way forward?

...

So yes.

Silence.

Silence for 3 years.

Discernment.

Prayer.  

And now action.

Your Holiness/Eminences/Excellencies, we ask you:

By virtue of your power to bind and loose.

Dispense married deacons.

Use Canon 1047.

Or any other relevant canon.

Or ecclesial decree.

Respecting celibacy as the Latin Rite modern norm.

Reaffirm dispensation from celibacy and thereby continence.

Discern after suitable formation.

Train.

Teach.

Prepare.

Taking into account the good of the Faithful.

The presence of a just and reasonable cause.

And given the circumstances of each case.

Call.

A portion of your married sons tested and proven in the Order of Deacon.

To lay upon their unworthy heads.

Your sacred and anointed hands.

The hands of Christ the High Priest.

And admit them.

With the sacred prayer of the Church.

Anoint them.

Bless them.

And send them.

To God's people.

To a broken world.

To married and family life torn asunder by the evil one.

To the priesthood torn asunder by the evil one.

To a restored tradition.

To the ancient norm of the married priesthood of Jesus Christ.

Jesus Christ the Married Bridegroom.

Lover of His wife, the Church.

A great mystery!

And ordain these sons of Levite.

To the Order of Presbyter.

In Jesus' name.

We pray.

Amen.

Mary, Queen of the Clergy, pray for us!

Quo vadis, Domine?

 

Viri Probati: A Moderate Pathway for Married Priests (Latin Rite)

 

Copyright (c) 2023 marriedpriests.com 

(marriedclergyR&D)

All Rights Reserved

Permission granted to the general public to use this theoretical framework model with credit to marriedpriests.com