by Roman M.T. Cholij, published in Eastern Churches Journal, Summer 1997
In the article, Cholij breaks with his previous views and upholds the right of Eastern Churches to have a married clergy without papal interference. Previously, he had held to a view that Rome had the authority to approve or deny the Eastern tradition as it was considered to have been developed improperly while the Eastern Churches were in schism. Therefore, he had believed, Rome could either tolerate the Eastern tradition or legitimately forbid it. **Many who cite Cholij’s earlier writings on mandatory priestly celibacy are not aware of his change of views. **The reversal of his view can be seen here:
From pp. 49-50:
Thus the ecclesiological
suppositions of the times when the decrees prohibiting married
clergy were issued must be seen to have been defective. It should
also be stated that the constitutional rights of a Church sui iuris cannot
be removed by an administrative decree of a Congregation of the
Roman Curia. If a married clergy is such a right (which is what the
Eastern Churches do consider it to be, and which the Vatican Council
seems to implicitly affirm), as opposed to a privilege granted by Rome,
then there is serious objection to the lawfulness of any action which
restricts exercise of this right. 53
thinking since the time of writing my J.C.D. dissertation, subsequently published
as Clerical Celibacy in East and West, esp. pp. 179-192. A similar view is
expressed in my article entitled “Celibacy, Married Clergy and the Oriental Code”
(see note 2). Since writing this early work I have also been fortunate to have had
the opportunity to do further studies: five years of research work in Eastern
Christian Studies at the University of Oxford under the tutorship and supervision
of Dr. Kallistos Ware of Pembroke College.
No comments:
Post a Comment