www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology Ordination of Married Men in the Ruthenian Church

Dear friends,

The following is a series of purely speculative questions. We cannot know the future until it has become the present. Nonetheless, it would be fascinating for me to hear your thoughts on this difficult subject. Who knows, perhaps some of you have a special insight into the situation that you can contribute.

Here are the questions:

1. Will the Ruthenian Catholic Church ever ordain married men to the priesthood in the United States?

2. If so, in what time frame? Five years from now, ten years from now, a century from now?

3. Will younger men be accepted as candidates for the married priesthood (as is done in the Orthodox Churches), or only older retirees?

4. Will married men be sent to study for the priesthood at SS. Cyril and Methodius Seminary? The seminary's formation program would have to be significantly restructured to accomodate married men with families.

5. Will the married priesthood be a possibility for any married man who is a member of the Ruthenian Church, or only for those with a Rusyn last name (in order to deflect possible tension with Roman bishops)?

5. Are Roman Catholic bishops placing pressure on the Ruthenian Church not to restore this tradition?

6. Would the ordination of married men to the priesthood help to alleviate the current priest shortage that is afflicting our eparchies?

I appreciate your thoughts on this matter. This past Sunday my pastor, informing the parish of the death of Msgr. Levkulic, mentioned that the Archeparchy of Pittsburgh is in dire need of more priests. Thus, this topic is once again on my mind.

Thanks,
Anthony

[ 01-22-2002: Message edited by: Dragani ]

Dear Brother in Christ, Anthony,

Since today is Tuesday, and I've heard of "St Anthony's Tuesdays," may he intercede for you!

My own view is that it is inevitable that the Ruthenian and Ukrainian Catholic Churches receive the right to ordain married men to the priesthood in North America.

1) Ecumenical pressure. When our good Orthodox friends (don't you just love them?) bring this up with Rome as an indication of "No, you really won't respect our traditions as you say you will," then Rome faces a dilemma.

2) I believe that pressures re; priest shortages in the Roman Church will soon force our Latin brothers to rethink this whole issue.

3) Rome will never say "no" to a Protestant married clergyman who wants to convert and become a Catholic priest, married and all. If the argument was, "No Byzantine Catholic married priests because this makes our Roman clergy whine" applied, doesn't this also apply to the Latin Rite married clergy converts? And how many married Latin deacons can you have around the altar before the same issue comes up as well?

4) As for our future bishops, I think that some of them may break ranks and start to act as if they really are hierarchy of a Particular Church. This has already happened with a former Bishop of Saskatchewan who ordained a married deacon to the priesthood. And, lo and behold, the sky didn't fall in, the Church is still around, and the end appears no where in sight . . .

5) The ethnic homeland of Ukrainians and Ruthenians is really bursting at the seams with married priests (and religious). I hate to say it, but if we had stronger ties to the homeland (Slava Ukrayini!) then their experience would have a positive impact on our Church in North America in this respect.

6) Frankly, the argument has been used before that people in our Churches are scandalized by married priests, that is to say, even having them in Church. And where are our petitions to the contrary? Remember what happened in Chicago when the Bishop there told his people everyone wanted the new calendar. The people did a poll of their own and found that very few did. The result? Sts Volodymyr and Olha parish which is, to this day, still independent of their bishop and which has (omigosh!), yes, married priests.

Alex

Anthony,

I will tell you what for me in a universal understanding of Ruthenain Catholics I know outside this forum. The posing of your question makes me doubt my answer. However, I wonder if my circle of friends is not that broad as you an dothers on this forum seem to not have this understanding.

I've understood it to be common knowledge that since the particular law of the Ruthenian effect, mature, married deacons are acceptable candidates and that this will be the practice for the next generation.

That aside, it is my impression (I'm moving now from what I thought to be common knowledge to general impression) that pragmatic items relating to implementation (place and type of study, assignment, etc.) are yet to be fully worked out.

I also understand that the Metropolia has real issues as to the ability to materially support a significant increase in the number of pastors. Hence, one example that gets thrown out alot are military retirees (age 40, full pension).

Lastly, while I think some conservative Roman Catholic organizations have difficulties with the Ruthenian married priesthood, the bishops are not a problem or have been told to not a problem. Additionally, they have been reassured that we will only be ordianing our own people to the priesthood, and this is the major (or only) reason for the review of candidates by the Holy See.

K.

P.S. Alex,

I actually know a former Methodist minister who wished to be ordained a RC priest, but was turned down. I don't think anyone questioned his qualifications and in fact today works in a Chancery office in which he has been promoted twice.

K.

[ 01-22-2002: Message edited by: Kurt ]

Well, if a Latin serving the Melkite Church can hazard a guess...

I suspect that the Ruthenian Church will, indeed, ordain married me. I don't see this as a problem with the Latin bishops who are beginning to understand that the Eastern Catholics are not in competition with them, and are generally quite supportive of them.

This will not help the problem with the shortage of priests. In discussing the priesthood with both Latin and Eastern Catholics the issue of celibacy really isn't all that significant. The issues of "job location", assignment, advancement, job satisfaction, etc. all seem to be more important to them. The fact that many of our priests do not reflect the joyfulness of the priesthood is a major stumbling block. And, of course, with the workload they have, there is no doubt that this is a problem.

Edward, deacon, sinner, who is not a priesthood candidate

My priest says any married man who has been a deacon for five years and an Eastern Christian for forty years will be considered.

Olga Nimchek

Bless me a sinner, Reverend Father Deacon!

Our bishop emeritus once told me he much prefers married priests since he never has any "problems" with them.

And, he said, how could he when the married priest is under the "direct supervision of his own personal Patriarch and Metropolitan at home?"

God bless,

Alex

Hah! But the "somtime bishop of Toronto and Eastern Canada" never has problems with anyone!

I will answer your questions, Dragani, but from the Ukrainian Catholic Church's present situation in Canada, which is slightly different.

Firstly, bishops in Canada are ordaining married me to the priesthood, and are not affraid to do it out in the open. Even bishops, such as Metropolitan Michael, who never disobey Rome, are doing it. They realize that it is inveitable.

In the seminary in Ottawa, there are a few candidates who have families and are in their 30s. Neither of them is of Ukrainian background but they will be ordained.

Last year, there were 4 deacons from Winnipeg at the seminary. All of them were married, retired men in their 60s with families. They came back for one year to update their degrees and this past summer they were ordained to the priesthood by the Metropolitan. It was beautiful to see -- men who had waited their whole lives for this, and finally it is allowed in these times. Glory to God!

Unfortuneatly, the situation is different in the United States. As opposed to the Canadian Conference of Bishops, the American Conference actually does not want married priests. I guess it all started out with (St.) Alexis Toth and his conflict with the Catholic bishop of Mineapolis (or wherever). In Canada, the Conference actually stated that it had no problems with married priests in the Eastern Churches.

Dear Anthony,

(Did you see Daniil's early comment in his last post? Will he make a great married priest one day or what?).

I have a question for you, Defender of the Faith, that was put to me some time ago by a married priest.

He asked about the rules governing married priests not sleeping with their presbyteras the night before serving the Liturgy, not even in the same room, according to the church rules.

If a priest celebrates the Liturgy daily, why should he be married? (His comment, not mine).

Alex

source, please?

Hi,

I think there will be married Priests.5 yrs sounds plausable. The new Met.if enthroned this year will have had enough time to make it happen by then. I think alot of long distance learning will be involved coupled with retreats with and without wives and families.Not to be uncharitable but we have to stop worrying about what the Roman Church thinks of what we are doing. I do believe the powers that be are concerned about divorce rates when it comes to younger couples. I don't believe they will ordain anyone maybe under 40 for sometime to come. There should be guide lines set in place now for many things, for instance; We talk about the Priest's wife here.The modern day Priest's wife may have a career. One in which she doesn't want to leave. So what happens when they have to relocate? Also,
salary, it has to be one to sustain a family.
OK now you have the unmarried Priest. The Church will have give equal consideration to all Priests. The relocation and salaries have to be equal across the board married or unmarried. Are guidelines being draw up for these types of things? You can't discriminate based on whether or not someone is married.In the secular world I believe its illegal. A concern I have is once we have married Priests, after awhile will the tide turn? Will unmarried men considering the Priesthood be pressured into joining an order? Since I do believe it will be a slow process, I think the Bishops should speak to the congregrations who will be the first to have married Priests in order for a smooth transition.I don't mean a letter or 15 minutes at Church on a Sunday. I mean speak to people personally especially those who vocally resist it with the focus on how important their cooperation is. That they are needed to make this work.I think if they were spoken to on a one to one basis there would be less problems when the time comes and it will. Anthony I sense concern from you but if you look at the history of our Church it has survived some very difficult times. As long as we have folks like you who love and care about the Church we(the Church) will do just fine.
When the time comes we will be counting on you to help ease the Priest shortage.

Nicky's Baba

[ 01-23-2002: Message edited by: Nicky's Baba ]

GLORY TO JESUS CHRIST!
GLORY TO HIM FOREVER!

I'm very curious as to the role the deacon candidates will play in all this. Will they be ordained and then "given" to their parish to be the priest? Will they be on the transfer list as are other priests?

I thought there was an "un-written" rule that a priest was never sent to his home parish??

My parish does have a deacon candidate. There are a significant number of parishoners who are not thrilled with the prospect of him becoming a deacon much less a priest. The thought of him becoming our parish priest will cause a number of them to leave the parish for sister Byzantine and Ukrainian Catholic parishes. Others will join the Orthodox churches that they live closer to.

I think they would start bringing priests from Europe first!

just my humble thoughts....

the least servant of the servants of God....

mark

Hi, Anthony,

Its Daniel Harrison. Thanks for posting this
was helpfull.

Ukrainian Catholic Bishop Basil Losten of Stamford, Connecticut has ordained two married men a year ago already. Our Metropolitan Stefan Soroka comes from the Winnipeg Archeparchy which has already ordained married men and he has publicly gone on record as stating he will ordain any worthy candidates, married or celibate.

The mother church in Ukraine ordains married men openly and regularly.

The Ruthenian Church in the United States is a different entity canonically than the Ukrainian Catholic Church.

As a patriarchal particular church, the Ukrainian Catholics have more room canonically to operate in this regard. The Synod will likely support and defend any such canonical action taken by a bishop of the Synod.

The Ruthenians, being only a metropolitan church sui juris, are far more dependent on the Eastern Congregation as they have no higher instance of appeal than the Metropolitan, then it has to go to Rome. I think for this reason alone, it will take longer for the Ruthenian/Byzantine Catholic eparchies to ordain married men to the priesthood as the Ukrainian Catholic eparchies (at least one) in the US and several in Canada are doing.

Time frame wise, it is already happened and continues to be happening with the Ukrainian Catholics. With the Ruthenians, it is hard to say, five years minimum probably as there are only four men in the Seminary in Pittsburgh, all celibate. Even if a married man received permission and started formation looking towards ordination there's a few years in formation right there.

In the Ukrainian Catholic Church we already have married men, including some already ordained to the diaconate, nearing completion of priestly studies so we will have some more ordinations of married men in the near future.

And I don't think name is a big issue, my pastor's name is MacKinnon and he's married. He even works in the conservative Lincoln, Nebraska diocese with one of our parishes there and we don't have any troubles at all, in fact most of the Latin priests there are very welcoming. And in terms of age, that will eventually need to be settled through the particular law of each church sui iuris.

[ 08-07-2002: Message edited by: Diak ]

[ 08-07-2002: Message edited by: Diak ]