www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology Ordaining married men? I'm confused.

Dear friends,

In another thread Monk Elias wrote:

"Of course our Church affirms its historic right to ordain married men to the priesthood, what remains is suitable men (who have been suitably educated, formed for the ministry) to present themselves."

I think that there is much confusion on this point. Two friends of mine recently left our seminary. Why? Because they think that they are being called to the married life. They were under the impression that they could not become Byzantine Catholic priests if they got married. Perhaps they were mistaken.

What I (and many others) would like is a clear statement of the situation. If a married man were to apply to the seminary for priestly formation, would he be accepted by a Bishop? Currently, all of the married fellows that I know are under the impression that they would be turned away.

Of course, there are many rumors floating around - especially regarding the departure of Father Deacon Valerian, who was just ordained as a married priest in the Ukrainian jurisdiction. It would be really nice if our bishops would publicly address this topic.

I am urging everyone to join us, beginning on November 14, in forty days of intense prayer for the restoration of the married priesthood in our Church.

God bless,
Anthony

Dragani,

I too am a bit confused on this issue. I was under the impression that the following was the "rule of thumb" A man who is married can enter the priesthood. A man who is a priest cannot get married. A married priest can never be a bishop.

I too would love some clarification on this. To my knowledge I know of only one Byzantine Rite married priest. He happens to be within the Melkite tradition and I know he was married before his ordination.

Yours in Christ,

Jeff

Some basic understandings are necessary, and Jeff has nicely summarized them. A man, once ordained, cannot marry. A married man can be ordained. In the Latin Church there is a very precise terminology for this: Orders is an impediment to marriage, marriage is not an impediment to orders.

Now, having said that, there are some problems here in the United States. First, let me say that I am not Ruthenian so if I get this wrong I ask that someone correct me. My understanding is that Metropolitan Judson has issued "particular law" that permits the ordination of married men to the priesthood. Each case will be separately examined for suitability. This issue does not arise for ordination to the diaconate.

The primary reason for individual examination is to prevent any possiblity of a Latin "jumping ship" so as to be ordained. A not entirely unlikely possibility.

There are several married priests in the United States today. Some are Latin Catholics who were Lutheran ministers or Anglican priests who qualified under a fairly restrictive exception to the Latin rules. There is a married Chaldean priest of my acquaintence in Southern California. I bleieve there are two or three married Melkite priests.

It is possible to be married and ordained a priest, but the road is difficult and each bishop will have to deal with the situation as it arises.

Edward, deacon and sinner

I am confused too...

I am surrounded by a good number of married Eastern Catholic priests... there seems to be no problem - not even among latin catholics. A plus when you live in a multicultural community like Toronto. How did they get to be ordained in the first place? Their churches are smaller than ours, how come they are able to manage financially? I don't understand why the US eparchies are not having them? If this is so important in your tradition, don't you think it is high time to restore it (not only in paper but in reality as well)

The closest problem that was brought to my attention by a parishioner, if you would call that a problem, was when one Eastern Catholic priest, who was married, resided at the rectory of a Latin Catholic Parish while his church was being built. The associate pastor left the priesthood to get married and could no longer come back while this married Eastern Catholic priest could go on with his ministry. But when I explained to the parishioner the different disciplines in the church, the parishioner went home satisfied. If the reason for not ordaining men to the priesthood in the US is because of scandal (imagined or otherwise), why don't we all embark on a massive information and education campaign that will also include Latin Catholics. Majority of Latin Catholics, I would think, are open minded. With the proper catechesis, appreciation of the different traditions will ensue. We are so ignorant of each other that our ignorance is preventing us from appreciating and treasuring our rich diversity.

Dear Fr Mark,

Of course the main difference between the married Eastern Catholic priest and the Roman assistant pastor who left to get married is that the Eastern man married before ordination. If the assistant were Eastern, he�d be in the same bind (unless he got some kind of dispensation) since according to the Orthodox rule also observed by Catholicism in the Eastern Catholic Churches and by dispensation in the Roman, �a married man can become a priest but a priest can�t get married�.

<A HREF="http://oldworldrus.com">Old World Rus�</A>

Concerning the ordination of married men to the presbyterate in the Byzantine Ruthenian Church: the history of the question is long, involved, and rather sad. To summarize briefly, when the Rusyn began arriving in America at the end of the 19th century, they promptly wrote to the Bishop of Presov for a suitable priest. He, naturally, sent a married parish priest. Since there was no Greek Catholic hierarchy in the US, this priest presented himself before the local Latin ordinary and was not only refused faculties, but practically tossed out on his ear. Dispite this, more and more Greek Catholic priests entered the country, and began tending their flocks, without the blessing of the local Latin priest. Matters came to a head in the 1890s, when Fr. Alexis Toth, a widower, went to Bishop John Ireland to ask for faculties in the Diocese of Minneapolis. Ireland refused to grant these, using the most coarse language, and as a result, Fr. Toth decamped for the Russian Orthodox North American Mission with about 150,000 of his followers. The Vatican granted the Ruthenians an apostolic vicar to buffer them from the Latin bishops, and also issued an Apostolic Letter, Ea Semper, that not only banned the ordination of married men in the United States, but also proscribed infant communion and the adminstration of chrismation at the time of baptism. Needless to say, this was not well received, and was widely ignored. Gradually, the Ruthenians got better established, and were eventually rewarded with a bishop of their own. But in 1929, amidst repeated complaints about married priests from the Latin bishops, the Vatican issued a "constitution" for the Greek Catholics, Cum Data Fuerit. This resulted in yet another schism, with about 80,000 Ruthenians going off to form their own "Diocese" under the Ecumenical Patriarchate. In 1930, the ban in Cum Data Fuerit was extended to Canada, and then to Australia and New Zealand.

Despite this, all jurisdictions except the Ruthenians evaded the proscription by sending their married seminarians abroad for ordination, or by recruiting priests from abroad. The Ruthenians, however, having been badly scalded by the two schisms, obeyed the letter and the spirit--mainly, I think, as a way of distinguishing themselves from those who bolted to Orthodoxy (it was a nasty divorce).

With the issuance of the new Code of Canons for the Oriental Churches, the opinion of most canonists was that both Ea Semper and Cum Data Fuerit were dead letters. The Code says that it supersedes all "special norms", and also that priests must serve anywhere they are needed, without any conditions being set.

About three years ago, the Ruthenian Metropolitan Church promulgated a "particular code" that would flesh out the more general Code of Canons for the Oriental Churches. This was sent to Rome for approval (though I really don't think that Rome has any right to approve the canons of a particular Church), and in due course it was approved. The key provision of this code was a canon that said marriage was not an impediment to ordination to the presbyterate. Period.

News of this leaked prematurely, and from there, stories differ as to what happened. The result was that Rome asked Metroplitan Judson to delay promulgation of the particular code for further "reveiew". Metropolitan Judson at that point should have said, politely, "Get stuffed", but he didn't. Two years later, the revised particular code was issued with a canon that said marriage was no impediment, but that all cases would be reviewed for "suitability" by Rome. Which is, of course, arrant nonsense. If Rome cannot keep track of candidates for episcopal ordination, how can it expect to know what is going on in a small seminary in the backwoods of Pennsylvania. Obviously, this is a pro forma review, or it is nothing at all.

I wonder whether Anthony's friends had a conversation with Father Petro or Fr. Petras concerning their vocations. Certainly it would be interesting to see what would have happened had they married and continued their preparation for the priesthood. It would have been very difficult, I think, for two devout and honest men like Frs. Petras and Petro to refuse to recommend them for ordination if they were indeed qualified. And that would have presented our God-loving bishops with a real problem, wouldn't it?

Because, you see, the impediment lies not with Rome but with our own hierarchs, who, sad to say, have one eye firmly fixed on the bottom line, and the other on administrative convenience. They LIKE celibate priests. You don't have to pay them. You can move them around like pieces on a chess board. And you don't have to explain them to your Latin counterparts when the NCCB meets.

But, inevitably, they will have to confront reality. As will the faithful, who might have to fork over some real money into the collection plate (never knew a Rusyn yet who didn't have the first nickel he earned), so that they might pay the priest a living wage. They might also have to learn that the priest isn't there to be their personal hanky-holder for every one of life's disappointments, and that they will have to do some of teh running of the parish themselves. But they, too, will come to terms with reality, and married priests will happen--sooner, rather than later.

If the Orthodox can deal with it, we can deal with it, too.

Dear Father Deacon,

>>>There are several married priests in the United States today. <<<

The number is actually more than 100 in the Latin rite, and a couple of dozen in the Eastern rites, all but a handful of the latter being ordained abroad.

There is some discussion going on about my "case". My understanding is the same as Stuart K.

Dan Lauffer

Dear Servant of God, Dan

Slava Isusu Christu !

This is just my opinion which is sometimes classified as useless and worthless , but I would think that a married candidate whose family is "complete" and who's children are grown, would have a better chance at ordination than a candidate who plans to start a family in the future.

Yosko Prokopchak
O' God, be merciful to me a sinner"

"The good of clerical celibacy outweighs the loss of a few Greek souls."

- Archbishop John Ireland

Deacon Valerian jumped ship and got ordained by the Ukrainians? Is this true? Why? (well there can only be about three reasons, but which one?)

Likewise! I've heard nothing! We are talking about the same Deacon (now Father, I guess) Valerian???

WHA HAPPEN' ??????

Sharon


Sharon Mech, SFO
Cantor & sinner
sharon@cmhc.com

SLAVA ISUSU CHRISTU!
SLAVA NA VIKI BOHU!

According to the parishioners of St.Michael's Ukrainian Catholic church in Baltimore,MD where Fr.Valerian's father is pastor, Fr. Valerian was ordained in Slovakia the weekend of Oct 13-15.

My family in Presov have told me that there was indeed an ordination is village outside of Presov but didn't know who was ordained.

Fr. Valerian's First Divine Liturgy was celebrated at St.Michael's in Baltimore on Saturday Oct.21 and it was fantastic. There was also a wonderful banquet following the Liturgy.

The sources also said that Fr.Valerian was offered a "nice" monthly salary from the Canadian Ukrainian Catholic church.

Will try to gets of the Divine Liturgy if anyone is interested.

It's a shame that this young man and his family were "forced" to go to Canada in order to support themselves and their children. He has a degree from the Russicum in Rome.

Will our clergy soon become like professional sports stars and going to the church that offers them the best salary?

With the lack of vocations, how long will it be before we begin bringing priests from Europe again?

Just some thoughts......

the ikon writer
mark

Mention was made that Father taught at Pittsburg. What did he teach. Has his position there been filled?

Dan Lauffer

>>>Will our clergy soon become like professional sports stars and going to the church that offers them the best
salary?<<<

The Catholic Church, quite rightly, teaches that the journeyman is worth his pay. It demands that workers be given a "living wage" with which they can support their families, not in luxury, but without hardship. In the United States, the celibate clergy have allowed the Church to get by on the cheap, paying a pastor somewhere between $10,000 and $15,000 a year. Now, suppose a married priest. Will we demand that his wife work? I hope not. Her primary job is being wife and mother--the former to the priest, the latter to her own children, and to the entire parish. Suppose she has children. Let us hope that she has many, thereby setting an example for the entire parish, too. Shouldn't the Church at least pay them something above the poverty level? What about school? Shouldn't the priest and his wife be able to put something away for the education of their childnre? What about health care? What about retirement?

As the Orthodox well know, sustaining a married clergy is not a cheap proposition, and our bishops know this. For which reason, most prefer celibates. In a recent interview, Bishop Stephen of Philadelphia said as much, and Bishop Basil offered a rather mealy-mouthed endorsement of that statement. Which is why I am surprised to see them accepting a married priest into the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church.

Note, by the way, that Fr. Valerian was ordained outside the US--this is not so much a breakthrough as a return to the tradition of evading the purpose of Cum Data Fuerit. Real bishops ordain priests without regard for where they live.