[quote:14fq2xo5]I guess what I mean if a priest quits and marrys and a law says priest can marry,cant that priest come back into the fold.[/quote:14fq2xo5]

[color=darkred:14fq2xo5]It’s like asking me if my wife leaves me for another man, can she come back to me while still being with the other man.

What do you think?[/color:14fq2xo5]

[quote:mye6a4va]:rolleyes:
Celibacy of Priests

Until Christ came along (Mt 19:12), and then Paul (1 Cor. 7:32-35),
the only state of life known was marriage. The rabbis taught that a
man was only half a man if he wasn’t married by 20. But even in the
Old Testament some of the prophets, like Elijah and Jeremiah, chose
celibacy. By Jesus’ time the great rabbis spoke of the possibility
of “marrying Torah,” that is, dedicating their whole life to the
study of the Word. Paul was one who did, both before and after his
conversion. Jesus is, of course, THE WORD, and infinitely more
deserving of total dedication than the written word.

It should not be surprising, therefore, that Jesus should speak of
some who would remain celibate (“eunuchs”) for the sake of the
Kingdom of God (Mt 19:12). St. Paul not only continued his pre-
conversion celibacy as a Christian but recommended it for those who
would be dedicated to serving God in this world (1 Cor. 7:7, 17, 32-
35). He was speaking to a general audience and so he does not oblige
it. But observe what he says in verse 17, “Only, everyone should
live as the Lord has assigned, just as God called each one. I give
this order in all the churches.” This coincides with the admonition
of Jesus to follow the vocation given by God, whether celibacy (Mt
19:12) or marriage (v.11).

Now Jesus said that if one could accept celibacy for the sake of the
Kingdom one should and Paul says it is the best way for those
dedicated to the Kingdom, and BOTH of them lived this total
dedication to the will of the Father for the salvation of souls.
Given the mentality of the world, both Jewish and Pagan, it was
impossible at the beginning to find mature candidates for the
priesthood who were not already married. Only with the arrival of a
generally Christian milieu, where virginity and celibacy were
honored into adult life, would celibate candidates for Holy Orders
be generally available. Not surprisingly, then, the Church discerned
with time that the gift of celibacy from God (who alone can give
such a gift), together with the desire to serve God and His people,
was an indication of a vocation to the priesthood. THIS has not
always and everywhere been imposed in the Church, but almost
immediately in Church history we find it recommended and even
required in some places. Although Latin Rite Catholic priests for
the last 1000 years have had to be celibate, Eastern Rite Catholic
priests and priests of the Orthodox Churches (not in union with
Rome) do not. However, ALL bishops in both the Catholic and Orthodox
Churches MUST be celibates. They represent Christ to the people in
their dioceses and Christ’s bride is the Church (Eph 5:21-33) not
someone else. So, it is entirely fitting that bishops not marry EVER
and that priests not marry either, though in some traditions it is
allowed PRIOR to ordination.

The fact that the apostles were married says nothing about the
practice, since they were Jewish and followed the practices of their
day, until Christ came along. Tradition affirms that they remained
celibates after they followed Christ.

With the grace of Redemption came the possibility of celibacy and
virginity for the sake of the Kingdom of God for more than the
privileged few. It is a total gift of self to the Lord, fitting for
those whose vocation is dedicated to love and service of God and
neighbor. Unfortunately, it is something the worldly who do not
understand the power of God have difficulty accepting, then as now.[/quote:mye6a4va]

Wonder perhaps ,why not have two priestly orders, a celibate order and a married order with each having differant priestly functions?

If you are a priest, you are a priest. Ordination is an indelible mark upon the soul such that even a priest that has been laicized by the Church (removed from his office as a priest) retains the ability to perform the sacraments (though he is bound by the Church to only provide the last rites in emergencies). To separate the priesthood’s duties amongst married and celibate priests would be injurious to the office of priest, especially in the mind of the laity.

On the other hand, however, we already have such separation. Deacons receive ordination but not the full ordination of the priests (who in turn do not receive the full ordination of the bishops). Deacons are not required to be celibate.

The discipline before Vatican II was that at the ordination to the Sub-diaconate one had to be celebate and remain so. A man was then ordained to the diaconate and the priesthood. Some from the ranks of the priesthood where elevated to the episcopacy, (bishop).

If one was granted a dispensation from clerical vows, they could marry and where no longer required to pray the Office, (now Liturgy of the Hours) every day. If there was a danger of death, and somebody requried absolution, the Church supplies Jurisdiction, (Valid ordination and jurisdiction both requried for a valid absolution.) when no other priest with faculties, (Jurisdiction) can come to the aid of someone in danger of death, (the Ecclesiastical term is In Articulo Mortis). This would be in effect if the priest had been dispensed from his vows, or if the priest was outside of his diocese or province and did not have faculties for the place where the soul was in need.

While ministers who convert to the Catholic Faith have been ordained to the priesthood even though married, (with Papal dispensations) a priest who leaves and marries, is generally not given faculties or permitted to function as a priest (except as noted above) unless the marriage or attempted marriage ends with the death of the spouse. Even then the priest who left to marry is usually not granted faculties to function in public, but only in a cloistered monastic community.

Since Vatican II in the Latin (Western) Rites, (The Ambrosian and Mozarabic rite still exist in the west) only the Indult Orders still have the minor orders and Sub-diaconate. So now practically speaking a transitional deacon, (one who is going to be ordained a priest after the diaconate) is bound to celebacy. A married man who is ordained a premanent deacon may be married before he is ordained, may not re-marry after ordination if his wife dies. His wife also must agree to his ordination. If she dies, or in very rare cases decides to enter a cloistered convent, the deacon may continue his studies and be ordained a priest. In the West before Vatican II it was common for a priest to act as a deacon or sub-deacon at a solemn high mass, as only one priest would celebrate Mass at a time, (Except at ordinations of new priests or consecrations of bishops, where the ordaining bishopand those ordained concelebrated the Mass.)

In the Eastern Rites, marriage may take place before ordination to the diaconate, and priesthood. A deacon or priest who’s wife dies may not re-marry. Only a Celebate man may become a bishop, in rare cases this may be a man who’s wife died before his election to the epscopacy, as most bishops in the east (traditionally) come from monastic communities. In some places in the East, parish priests are married, and Monks and bishops are celebate. It has been a long standing practice in the east for some to remain in Minor Orders or the Diaconate and not advance to the priesthood. In the East concelebration has been a longstanding practice and one functions at the level one is ordained to, so if there are no deacons at hand, only priests, nobody vests as a deacon or functions in that role for the Mass, (Divine Liturgy) the priest(s) simply recite the deacon’s prayers along with his own.

As most priests have their food and housing paid for, and an allowance for a car (since they need one to visit parishoners and make sick calls, emergencies etc.) They recieve a small stipend from the parish, (around $300.00 a month, and stipends for masses, weddings and funerals) but anything that they need to buy, clothing clerical or not, chalice, books, gas, more expensive car than the allowance could afford, comes from the stipends they earn. So it is not as if they get everything paid for. They used to get a big break as many places would either give them a good discount or comp their meals etc. Not so much any more though.

So I guess I’d sum it up, that I think a celebate clergy is preferable, a married clergy is not unthinkable or contrary to the Catholic Faith. But most important, married or not, we will only have holy priests if we pray for them and their vocations, expect them to act in the manner that a priest should act, and let them know that we support the priesthood as a gift from our Lord to the Church which we and they should cherish.