St. Luke the Evangelist did NOT explicitly use the word "priest" or "clergy" in Luke 18:28-30

St. Luke the Evangelist did NOT explicitly use the word "priest" or "clergy" in Luke 18:28-30.

(Luke 18:28-30 is where Jesus told Peter that anyone who has left house, wife, parents for the sake of the Kingdom will be repaid many times over in this life & in the world to come, after Jesus taught).

The full context of the Bible passage was *directly* about material possessions and monetary wealth. The passage was *not directly* about priests.

Shift in 20th Century Church's More Positive View of Sex Contributed to Return of Married Latin Priests in 20th & 21st Centuries (Sex in Christian Marriage Not Viewed as Ritually Impure in Catholic Thinking)

 

Posted on X.

Father is asking the right question. Bravo!

Some early Fathers argued for celibacy b/c they viewed sex as ritual impurity - even in marriage(!). Church today does not view sex in Christian marriage as impure. This shift paved the return of married Latin priests in the 20th Century.

Fr. Dwight Longenecker

@dlongenecker1

·

Oct 29, 2023

Replying to @matthewpao1

Do you think it likely that the call for married people to live in perfect continence may have been influenced by Manicheanism--that the flesh is impure and that sex is therefore objectively "dirty" and sinful?

"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.

Cardinal Czerny of the Holy See acknowledged that decisions toward opening the priesthood to married men can be made by Church authority.  

Cardinal Schönborn of Austria, 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.  In a sense, they are being good canon lawyers, but the theology of the Church has allowed married priests as an authentic part of the Catholic Church.

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

 

Translations of 1 Cor. 9:5: Douay Rheims v. RSV (Protestant) v. RSVCE (Catholic Ignatius Press) v. NAB

Source of 2 Greek translation: https://biblehub.com/text/1_corinthians/9-5.htm

γυναῖκα gynaika

a wife,

ἀδελφὴν adelphēn

a sister,

An excerpt from the First Letter of St. Paul to the Corinthians:

Douay Rheims: "Have we not power to carry about a woman [gynaika], a sister [adelphen], as well as the rest of the apostles ..."

Revised Standard Version (Protestant RSV): "Do we not have the right to be accompanied by a wife [gynaika],[a] as the other apostles and the brothers of the Lord and Cephas?"

Revised Standard Version Catholic Edition (RSVCE Ignatius Press):

"Do we not have the right to be accompanied by a wife,[a][b] as the other apostles and the brethren[c] of the Lord and Cephas?"

New American Bible Catholic liturgical use version in Ordinary Form of Roman Rite: "Do we not have the right to take along a Christian wife [gynaika], as do the rest of the apostles, ..."

__________

Footnotes for RSVCE

1. 1 Corinthians 9:5 Greek woman, sister
2. 9.5 wife: Greek, a “woman,” a “sister.” This could mean either a woman who is a Christian or a wife who is a Christian. There were pious women who ministered to the apostles (Lk 8.3). As many of the apostles must have been married, they may have been ministered to by their wives, though it is possible they had left their wives in answer to the Lord’s command [Editorial comment: Huh?  The Lord did "not command" the Apostles to leave wives.  This is a semi-laughable footnote.] to leave all (Lk 18.28-29).
3. 9.5 brethren: See note on Mt 12.46.

-------

Source for following Greek translation: https://www.abarim-publications.com/Interlinear-New-Testament/1-Corinthians/1-Corinthians-9-parsed.html

Have we not power to lead about a sister, a wife, as well as other apostles, and [as] the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas?

μη

not

conjunction

ουκ

not

conjunction

εχομεν

we have

verb
pres-act-ind
1st-p pl

εξουσιαν

authority

noun
acc-si-fem

αδελφην

sister

noun
acc-si-fem

γυναικα

woman

noun
acc-si-fem

περιαγειν

to bring around

verb
pres-act-inf

ως

as

adverb

και

and

conjunction

οι

the

def art
nom-pl-mas

λοιποι

other

adjective
nom-pl-mas

αποστολοι

apostles

noun
nom-pl-mas

και

and

conjunction

οι

the

def art
nom-pl-mas

αδελφοι

brothers

noun
nom-pl-mas

του

of the

def art
gen-si-mas

κυριου

of lord

noun
gen-si-mas

και

and

conjunction

κηφας

Cephas

noun (name)
nom-si-mas