Priests and Marriage

[jackofallgeeks]

I'm curious what, if any, opinions you guys have on Married Priests. I have to admit that there's some validity to the "if they could marry, more men would become priests" line, except for a few points. Most directly, anyone who's had to work two different positions at work knows that doing so degrades your work in both areas; that's the strongest argument against married priests that I've found. Trying to be both husband and priest, neither of which is 'easy' nor should be secondary, is far from ideal. Part of me also thinks that perhaps men who would otherwise be priests have the wrong priorities: why would being able to marry change things? What does that say about how you're treating this? I might argue that it's men buying into what society tells them they need to be happy. Life isn't easy, and every path in life has it's challenges and difficulties.

Anyone have input, either for or against?

Comments

[starlight1184.livejournal.com]

I myself have never ever understood why Catholic priests have not been able to marry. I think that they are leaving a vast resource of very religious very willing men who would be a great influx of priests for the church. Every year since I was in 1st grade, I've heard speeches from aging nuns and priests who ask us to pray for vocations, who talk about the diminishing numbers of people who are willing to enter into ministry positions. But why aren't they tapping into the numbers of people who ARE willing?

As far as your arguement about holding down two different jobs, so to speak, I honestly think it's silly to think that a husband would be any less devoted to his calling as a priest. My dad is able to hold down the jobs of husband, father, and real estate agent. Yes, he's tired. Yes, he has days where it's a lot... but he's done a damn good job in all areas in my opinion. And even found time to be VERY active in our parish, his children's schooling, and his friends (as you know, he is EVERYONE's friend). So I can't see how a priest acting as husband, father, and priest would be any different. I also believe that other religions have found married pastor's perfectly suitable to being the shepherd for their people. My roommate and good friend here is a pastor's daughter and comes from a much more involved parish than I grew up in. I have to say I would think that being a husband and/or father would add to (not detract from) a priests ability to minister to his parish.

There's my two cents... or so...

[jackofallgeeks.livejournal.com]

Well, like I said, I kind of feel that anyone who's not becoming a priest because they want to get married, or have a career, or whatever else, doesn't have the sort of priorities I really expect from a Priest. I know that I want to have a family, and if I ever were to consider the priesthood (I haven't not thought about it), it would be after my children were grown -- which is a possibility. I've met lots of priests recently who had 'regular' lives before becoming what's called a 'late vocation.' You say they are willing, but they're only conditionally willing, and i'm not sure that's "good enough," for lack of a better word. I wouldn't want to marry a girl who was "conditionally willing" to raise a family. That comparison opens up the response of "well, no one's ever unconditionally willing to do anything, it's always conditional," but I stand by it. It's the level of conditionality (is that a word) that concerns me.

You make a good point about your dad; the same could be argued about most people's fathers. At the same time, though, the difference I see right off is that, with little variation, what your dad does is always and ever geared toward supporting his wife and daughters. I don't think you can have that sort of favoritism if you're a priest; having a family detracts from the attentions you can give to your community.

As for protestant ministers and the like, I think there's first and foremost a distinct difference in the community of a protestant church as opposed to that of a Catholic church. And decide as you will if it's a good thing or not, but a protestant church, as I've found it, is always more of an even field, everyone pulling their own. The minister's position isn't quite the same as the priest's, who is a much more focused leader of the church community. there's something to be said for everyone pulling their own, but it's also beneficial to have someone there to pull when you can't.

Both of those, the attention you can give your community and the leadership you can assume, are points that have been made to priest friends of mine by protestant ministers, so... -shrugs- It's not just coming from me, I guess, is my point.

I agree that being a father and husband can add a valuable perspective on ministering to the community; as noted, I know priests who were once married and they definitely have a perspective on things that other priests don't. At the same time, there's something to be said about the unique perspective that celibate priests have, too. I think you and I can definitely agree that it's the diversity of perspectives that make this world a half-decent place to live in; the fact that I seem to surround myself with people who disagree with me is testament to that ( :p ). But considering that there's nothing barring men from becoming priests after having raised a family, I really don't see any compelling reason for the Church to change it's definition of what a priest is or what it requires.

(As a personal addendum to you, Rachel, I really like discussing these sorts of things with you, and while I'm afraid my tone and opinions may all-too-often give you the impression that I'm just poking holes in all your arguments, I really wish fewer of our discussions ended in "well, we'll just agree to disagree;" I accept and agree that you and I disagree, I just wish our conversations didn't stop on that point. OK, I'm done now.)

[dikaiosunh.livejournal.com]

I've always found the celibacy issue for Catholic priests interesting, in contrast to Judaism, where Rabbis are *required* to be married. I think which is "better" has to do to a large extent with what you see the role of the position being. The reasoning I've always heard about Rabbis being married is that the primary role of the Rabbi is to be a spiritual counselor, and for that he needs to be able to really "get" the issues that his congregation will be facing - one of them being marriage, of course. (Of course, my Rabbi is bisexual, been married twice - once to a woman who is now a man, been a social worker, run a show venue, and lived on several different continents and on the streets, so maybe he's taking the "have experience with almost any situation that may face your congregants" idea a bit too far...).

To the extent that priests are expected to be counselors, I've always thought that it must hamper their abilities to be celibate. But priests have a "metaphysical" role in Catholicism that Rabbis don't have - Rabbis are just scholars, they're not invested with a supernatural relationship with the divine. To the extent that this more supernatural role dominates thinking about the priesthood, I can see why you might want to mark out a special relationship with G-d, more like an ascetic. I'm not sure I see the force of the "two jobs" argument, if only because anyone who has kids is going to be doing two jobs, and surely we can't all be failing our non-parent duties, or we'd have starved to death by now...

I'm sure there are also historical reasons behind the strictures. Judaism has never had as strong an ascetic tradition as Christianity (and there's less of a rejection-of-the-world strand in general). And my understanding was that some of the asceticism in Christianity came from the fact that early followers of the faith expected the end of the world to be coming quite soon, and so were thinking more in terms of an intense, eschatological religion, rather than a global institution that would last 2000-some-odd years. If everyone had taken the lines about forsaking families and riches and following Jesus literally, all of Christianity would've ended up like the Albigensians or the Shakers.

[bsgnome.livejournal.com]

Let me stretch my theological lobe first ... *snap* ... ah, neck cramp. Ok, hold on a moment ... *pop* ... ok, ready.

The Priest acts in the place of Christ, as Father and Shepherd of His People. The weaker argument is the "two jobs" problem--every priest I have ever spoken to agrees on this point. The primary reson for celibate priests is to more fully be an imitator of Christ. Often you will see, in Scripture and spiritual writings, the Church referred to as the Bride of Christ, just so, the Priest must wed himself to the Church. She is his wife, and the Laity are his children. In everything he does, the Priest must present himself to the Laity as an example of Christ.

And there's not much more to it beyond that.

[elwenlassriel.livejournal.com]

Part of the calling to the priesthood is that they are marrying the church because they are in the place of Christ, the bridegroom, giving their whole life in service of the church, the bride. The vocation of a religious, devout married man is to raise religious devout children, as well as to devout is whole life to them and his wife. Part of this is having a job to support them and the like. The calling of a priest is to serve the church and be a spiritual father to all of its people. It’s not simply a job, just as being a husband and father isn’t an occupation. These two very important vocations cannot coexist because they are contradictory. One cannon both give their whole being to their family and their whole being to the service of the church, for we only have but one being to give.

(I know these are all kind of random thoughts, I simply don’t have the time or energy to make a coherent argument)