'Seminaries would be full, if celibacy was optional'

[Skip1974]

Found an intersting article with the views of a priest in Ireland, Fr Jackie Robinson

Here's a small extract:

'There is one area of the religious life that he feels is outdated and needs to change.

"I have written and spoken a lot about it in the past, but the issue of celibacy is a bugbear with me, as it is for a lot of other priests. I can see no great need for it in these times. We are losing a lot of vocations because of the rule, which is outdated."

Fr Robinson feels that celibacy should be optional for both men and women who choose to serve God. "The life of a priest can be a very social life, but at the end of the day no matter what we have faced we have to come home to an empty house and that can be difficult."

Pointing out the loneliness that priests and people in religious orders can feel, he recalled one Christmas morning in Castlecomer when he was called to attend a house where a young baby had died from cot death.

"I was called down to the house before 8am mass, and I will never forget what I saw there that morning."

He described it as a nativity scene, with the young husband standing over his wife who was cradling their dead baby in her arms.

"I went back to the house and cried my eyes out after that, and still had to face into the Christmas Masses. We are dealing with all sorts, good and bad, and have no one to share it with," he says.


He makes a very compelling argument for the removal of the vow of celibacy. The whole article is very interesting.

It is entitled 'Seminaries would be full, if celibacy was optional' from a newspaper website called the Offaly Express

 

[Fantine]

I have heard that other denominations have difficulty providing enough ministers for their congregations even though married (and female) ministers are permitted.

I think that there are often more vocations in the third world because becoming a priest or sister is an avenue of upward mobility for poor, talented youths. It enables them to get a world class education at the church's expense and contribute to society in a way that feeds their souls and their minds.

It's interesting that the current uptick in vocations in places like Australia and the US is accompanied by a corresponding lack of job opportunities for college graduates.

Does that mean that seminarians become priests because of what's in it for them? No. I'm sure they would probably be devout laypersons if they chose lay life.

But if I had to choose what would encourage more vocations--ending celibacy or a catastrophic global depression, I'd say the depression would win.

Interestingly, there was a huge surge in vocations in the United States in the 1930's, and the downturn began long before Vatican II.

 

[Anglian]

Interesting, but I wonder.

Coptic monasteries have waiting lists - and celibacy is mandatory.

It is too easy to assume that celibacy is the problem - especially if that is your first assumption.

peace,

Anglian

 

[DesertSky]

I don't believe the OP claim for a minute.

 

[KatherineS]

Interesting, but I wonder.

Coptic monasteries have waiting lists - and celibacy is mandatory.

It is too easy to assume that celibacy is the problem - especially if that is your first assumption.

peace,

Anglian

On the larger issue, I have no firm opinion and like a general, open and respectful discussion.

On this particular observation, I wonder if there is some merit to the Coptic and other Eastern churches' practice of a stark distinction between the monastic vocation and the clerical vocation?

Would having a married priesthood like the Copts do also result in a renewal of monastic life? In the Catholic Eastern churches where clerical celibacy has been imposed on them, it has also resulted in a near colapse of monastic life as well, even though this is a very important part of Eastern spirituality.

The issue is raised that clerical celibacy results in married men not considering the priesthood. But also does clerical celibacy result in men called to celibacy to not consider monastic life?

I think this is something worth pondering.

 

[Rhamiel]

Interesting, but I wonder.

Coptic monasteries have waiting lists - and celibacy is mandatory.

It is too easy to assume that celibacy is the problem - especially if that is your first assumption.

peace,

Anglian

grrrrr, ENVY.... I mean, oh that is nice

On the larger issue, I have no firm opinion and like a general, open and respectful discussion.

On this particular observation, I wonder if there is some merit to the Coptic and other Eastern churches' practice of a stark distinction between the monastic vocation and the clerical vocation?

Would having a married priesthood like the Copts do also result in a renewal of monastic life? In the Catholic Eastern churches where clerical celibacy has been imposed on them, it has also resulted in a near colapse of monastic life as well, even though this is a very important part of Eastern spirituality.

The issue is raised that clerical celibacy results in married men not considering the priesthood. But also does clerical celibacy result in men called to celibacy to not consider monastic life?

I think this is something worth pondering.

but we have had a celibate priesthood for over 1,000 years, and it is only recently that we have had problems with vocations for the priesthood and monastic life
I think people do not really understand how slow religions evolve, this is not like some company, or even a modern state
if we change too much or too quickly, it will shatter, i mean the Church is still reeling over Vatican II with all kinds of crazy ideas over all ends of the spectrum, to add something so masive as a change to a 1,000+ year old tradition, well people would feel like they can not trust the Church at all, who would want to be a priest in something that has no stability? we could change anything over night, not the way you want to be viewed if you want people to join you

 

[SpiritualAntiseptic]

People keep assuming if you made celibacy optional for seminary, you get celibates + married men.

It isn't going to work that way. Celibates will leave seminary and consider returning after they are married. I don't think you are going to get many married men to consider going off to seminary for years.

I believe the issue has little to do with celibacy.

Quite honestly, in reading the article, it seems the author doesn't understand celibacy very well from some of his word choices.

 

[Glorthac]

I have heard that other denominations have difficulty providing enough ministers for their congregations even though married (and female) ministers are permitted.

I think that there are often more vocations in the third world because becoming a priest or sister is an avenue of upward mobility for poor, talented youths. It enables them to get a world class education at the church's expense and contribute to society in a way that feeds their souls and their minds.

It's interesting that the current uptick in vocations in places like Australia and the US is accompanied by a corresponding lack of job opportunities for college graduates.

Does that mean that seminarians become priests because of what's in it for them? No. I'm sure they would probably be devout laypersons if they chose lay life.

But if I had to choose what would encourage more vocations--ending celibacy or a catastrophic global depression, I'd say the depression would win.

Interestingly, there was a huge surge in vocations in the United States in the 1930's, and the downturn began long before Vatican II.

My first to a liberal's words in a long time! As for my two bits, I'm glad celibacy is part of being a priest, that's something that appeals to me about it. Just think, I become a priest, I won't have to worry about getting married anymore! Then no more stress!

 

[JimR-OCDS]

Interesting, but I wonder.

Coptic monasteries have waiting lists - and celibacy is mandatory.

It is too easy to assume that celibacy is the problem - especially if that is your first assumption.

peace,

Anglian

Monasteries can only take in so many postulants at a given time, so they're more restrictive in terms of numbers than a dioceses is. You can't really compare the two.

Jim

 

[Assisi]

Our local seminary IS full.

 

[Rhamiel]

Our local seminary IS full.

woot woot

 

[HandmaidenOfGod]

I don't know, I mean the Orthodox Church allows married men to become priests, and it's not like we've got thousands of men lining up to be priests. (Our seminaries are full; however not all seminarians become priests.)

Serving the Church is harder than just about any job there is. The words "you can please some of the people some of the time, but you can't please all the people all the time" never ring truer than in this position.

Every aspect of your life is scrutinized, the hours are long, the money is short, and often the rewards in this life are few. Not to mention, to find a woman who is willing to be a priest's wife is also difficult. Your wife and how you raise your children are all under a microscope. Should the Bishop decide to move you to another parish at any time, you have to pull your children out of school, she has to find a new job and start all over again. It's a very difficult life.

I don't believe the priesthood is meant to be something that is supposed to appeal to the masses. Yes, we need priests, and yes, it's important to encourage people to go into the vocation, but I don't believe that allowing marriage would cause masses of men to fill the seminaries.

Also, married men can become Deacons in the Catholic Church, so if "marriage" were the only issue, why aren't there tons of men lining up to be Deacons?

Personally, I think we need to focus more on getting young people interested and staying interested in the life of the Church. The world as a whole is turning away from religion. This is disconcerting to me. I believe that as you attract more people to the Church, more will be attracted to the priesthood and monastic life in general.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

HandmaidenOfGod

Also, married men can become Deacons in the Catholic Church, so if "marriage" were the only issue, why aren't there tons of men lining up to be Deacons?

Well in my dioceses there are many men lining up to be deacons. The class I was in had 25.

However, its a grinding five year program, and when you have responsibilities to home and family, the majority including myself, drop out.
My class only ordained 4 of the 25 who started out after five years. Of those four, only two are still serving while the other three retired. Generally, deacons are older men who's children are adults and out of the home.

Personally, I think we need to focus more on getting young people interested and staying interested in the life of the Church. The world as a whole is turning away from religion. This is disconcerting to me. I believe that as you attract more people to the Church, more will be attracted to the priesthood and monastic life in general.

The priesthood is a calling, which comes from God. We can't attract people to the priesthood, only God can call them.

The problem is, so many young men have seen so many priest fail to live up to their vow of celibacy, that they pretty much know they could never do it and so never respond to the call.

Jim

 

[Winter]

Celibacy never seemed to be a problem before. There was always an abundance of priests. Now suddenly, in this day and age, it seems to be a problem. Why?

Perhaps there weren't many vocations or choices during the past couple of centuries, and joining the priesthood was an option. Thus, you had alot of priests joing the vocation. I don't know.

But why today? Why is this a problem today?

 

[JimR-OCDS]

Winter;

Celibacy never seemed to be a problem before. There was always an abundance of priests. Now suddenly, in this day and age, it seems to be a problem. Why?

Celibacy has always been a problem, in fact its been debated for centuries since is mandate.

There were more men entering the seminaries in the past, because families were larger, and also, it was a tradition in Europe and even the US, to have one son enter the priesthood. There was a lot of pressure placed on the son who didn't look like he had a chance of meeting anyone to get married. Same was true of girls. The daughter who didn't look good as a marriage prospect, was often coerced into joining a convent.

The result of course was that we had bitter men as priest and bitter nuns. Both hated their ministries and felt trapped. Leaving in the old days was mortal sin, and you were condemned to hell, but also ostracized by your own family. I'm talking a mere 50 years ago.

But why today? Why is this a problem today?

Because families are smaller and there is so much emphasis in that a young man discerning a vocation, do so freely, we have less men being called.

Jim

 

[Joshua G.]

I think the premise of the OP is wrong regardless of how factual their proposal might be. The question should not be how to fill seminaries. If the western mandate for celibacy were lifted FOR THE PURPOSE of filling seminaries, I think that is a disastrous way to reinstate married clergy. The reasons behind any change matter just as much as the change itself.

The question should only be how to make the churchlife conducive to supporting those holy men and women who are called to special vocations. From there, the question of lifting the ban could be entertained, but I am not suggesting that the answer to that question is obvious. just because a practice has historical precedence does not mean it is best for all times and all cultures.

also:

Just think, I become a priest, I won't have to worry about getting married anymore! Then no more stress!

Same in the ER-CC (and Eastern Orthodox Church as well). Once you become a priest your marital status is frozen. You can't get married after becoming a priest. That decision must be made before, eve, becoming a subdeacon. I think the rules are similar in the WR as well. Once you are a deacon, you have chosen your marital path one way or the other.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

LLOJ subscribes. I once attended a RC Seminary in my junior year of high school. Does that count?

 

[SpiritualAntiseptic]

Celibacy never seemed to be a problem before. There was always an abundance of priests. Now suddenly, in this day and age, it seems to be a problem. Why?

Perhaps there weren't many vocations or choices during the past couple of centuries, and joining the priesthood was an option. Thus, you had alot of priests joing the vocation. I don't know.

But why today? Why is this a problem today?

Society has changed and the Church hasn't changed its approach to vocations. The Church pretty much expects 18 year old men to decide on their own to enter after high school and get ordained 8 years later. Everything is still setup around that model.

Many dioceses are just NOW starting to accept the fact that this isn't going to happen anymore and are trying a few things here and there to change.

 

[DesertSky]

I resent it when I see "the Church hasn't changed" blah blah. It's not the job of the Church to change. Within the Catholic Church, it is the people's responsibility to fall in line.

Also, we had 24 DITs at the beginning of the program. One died and one was transferred. 22 were ordained last month.

 

[SpiritualAntiseptic]

Here are some of the ways you can fix the problem:

- Priests should encourage vocations and spot potentials in the parish
- Nuns should ditch the pins on their vests, get back into habits. They need to spend a little less time in the social justice stuff and have at least a presence in schools
- Young people should be explained vocations at any age. Most teenagers have no idea what a priest does all day.
- There needs to be more focus on college campuses with GOOD priests.
- There needs to be more vocation events- retreats, dinners, etc
- Vocations offices need to be dramatically changed. Priests need to be put in them that have the skills and time for it.

- The mentality of the church needs to change. Bishops should make vocations a major priority. This is the future of the Church.
- They need to accept the fact that doing nothing will accomplish just that
- They need to accept the fact that men in seminary are men and not little boys anymore that went to minor seminary at 13-14 and know nothing of the real world.
- You should not be able to enter seminary until 20 and with 2 years of college
- They need to see single 20-something men, which there are a lot of today, as a major source of potential vocations. Yet, most parishes and diocese offer very little to get them in church, much less to become priests.


I could go on and on, but this is a general list of some of the major problems I see. I don't think people know just how bad the Church is with vocations today because they haven't caught up with the Vatican II era in terms of bringing them IN and keeping them.