Children of Catholic priests...
DiscussãoCatholic Tradition
Aderi ao LibraryThing para poder publicar.
Este tópico está presentemente marcado como "adormecido"—a última mensagem tem mais de 90 dias. Pode acordar o tópico publicando uma resposta.
2margd
Rarely, and more happily, RC priests have adopted kids, e.g., https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Clements.
(Not sure if it was Clement, but I remember reading funny account of priest in our area juggling responsibilities of work and adoptive parenthood--single dad, y'know...)
(Not sure if it was Clement, but I remember reading funny account of priest in our area juggling responsibilities of work and adoptive parenthood--single dad, y'know...)
3Guanhumara
>2 margd: I thought the point of the vow of celibacy was to love all equally and not have another human being whose welfare you prioritised above all others?
(I know there is also the issue of sexual abstinence before consecration of the Host, combined with daily celebration of the Eucharist, but those are matters of order, not dogma.)
(I know there is also the issue of sexual abstinence before consecration of the Host, combined with daily celebration of the Eucharist, but those are matters of order, not dogma.)
4margd
I think Clement adoptions were approved as part of his mission to improve adoption rates for African-Americans, especially foster kids? African-Americans adopt at a higher rate than their white counterparts, but usually relatives. Unfortunately, kids of color are disproportionately represented in the foster system...
5Guanhumara
I can certainly see the merit in the act, but surely its approval smashes all justification for requiring priests to be unmarried?
One's duty to put one's own child's welfare ahead of all other considerations is even stronger than one's obligations towards one's spouse. And an adopted child's claim on their parent is no less than a natural one's.
One's duty to put one's own child's welfare ahead of all other considerations is even stronger than one's obligations towards one's spouse. And an adopted child's claim on their parent is no less than a natural one's.
7eschator83
John, I see no value in this thread at all. If you are so unhappy, leave the Church. This is heresy. And it's not even a book.
Why are you doing this?
Keeping mute on your opinion doesn't justify or excuse the malice of your spreading slander.
Why are you doing this?
Keeping mute on your opinion doesn't justify or excuse the malice of your spreading slander.
8margd
Whuh??
Shame on RC authorities that cause pain in the blameless child: in the adoption community, children's natural desire to meet their biological relatives is always fraught with risk. A-parents tell them that the bio parent couldn't care for ANY baby (i.e., not about you, dear child). Children think that the bio mom, say, was a princess, or worse, a bad person, when they are probably neither. We always assume that the bio-parent wonders about the child, though--in my family we always toast the bio-mom on the children's birthdays. Very unlikely my children will ever be able to track down their parents, but if they could, I would hope that they would be received better than this!
Shame on RC authorities that cause pain in the blameless child: in the adoption community, children's natural desire to meet their biological relatives is always fraught with risk. A-parents tell them that the bio parent couldn't care for ANY baby (i.e., not about you, dear child). Children think that the bio mom, say, was a princess, or worse, a bad person, when they are probably neither. We always assume that the bio-parent wonders about the child, though--in my family we always toast the bio-mom on the children's birthdays. Very unlikely my children will ever be able to track down their parents, but if they could, I would hope that they would be received better than this!
9John5918
>7 eschator83: If you are so unhappy, leave the Church.
Why should you think I am unhappy? I am very happy in the church, thank you, and have no intention of leaving.
This is heresy.
How exactly is this heresy? It's a conversation about a sad reality, which is that many of our purportedly-celibate priests have fathered children, and that many of those children have not received the love, care and attention which any child deserves from its parents.
Why are you doing this?
Perhaps because I think this is one of many issues within our church which deserves to be discussed openly - there is a real problem related to children of Catholic priests, and it's now coming to light. This LT group is a forum where Catholics and others can discuss issues of interest within our church. Surely Catholics should be interested? Or should we hush it up and pretend it doesn't exist, as we did for so long when some of our Catholic priests were raping children?
spreading slander.
Slander involves malicious intent, calumny, falsehoods, defamation, not a discussion of an existing, factual issue. Or are you trying to say that this is all a falsehood, and that the problem of children of Catholic priests doesn't exist?
Edited to add: Incidentally, if you read the first article cited you'll see that, "A commission created by Pope Francis to tackle clerical sexual abuse will develop guidelines on how dioceses should respond to the issue of the children of priests." Can it be a slanderous heresy to discuss a topic which is currently being officially discussed by a Vatican commission? Should the members of that commission leave the church?
Why should you think I am unhappy? I am very happy in the church, thank you, and have no intention of leaving.
This is heresy.
How exactly is this heresy? It's a conversation about a sad reality, which is that many of our purportedly-celibate priests have fathered children, and that many of those children have not received the love, care and attention which any child deserves from its parents.
Why are you doing this?
Perhaps because I think this is one of many issues within our church which deserves to be discussed openly - there is a real problem related to children of Catholic priests, and it's now coming to light. This LT group is a forum where Catholics and others can discuss issues of interest within our church. Surely Catholics should be interested? Or should we hush it up and pretend it doesn't exist, as we did for so long when some of our Catholic priests were raping children?
spreading slander.
Slander involves malicious intent, calumny, falsehoods, defamation, not a discussion of an existing, factual issue. Or are you trying to say that this is all a falsehood, and that the problem of children of Catholic priests doesn't exist?
Edited to add: Incidentally, if you read the first article cited you'll see that, "A commission created by Pope Francis to tackle clerical sexual abuse will develop guidelines on how dioceses should respond to the issue of the children of priests." Can it be a slanderous heresy to discuss a topic which is currently being officially discussed by a Vatican commission? Should the members of that commission leave the church?
10timspalding
eschator83's response is illustrative of much that is wrong with the church today.
Think there's a very real question what to do when a priest strays from his vow, and when it results in a child.
Should they be laicized and that's that? We all know priests are sinners. Obviously a priest who habitually beds women would be an abomination. But would it be the end of the world if a priest had an acknowledged natural child conceived out of wedlock some time before?
The point can't be focus and attention and so forth. After all, there are non-Latin rite priests, and former Episcopals and so forth who have wives and children. Is the point just scandal? I don't buy that the sin itself is a disqualification.
I'd go for something like this:
1. If you have a child, it must be reported soon and honestly, or you lose all rights to return to ministry.
2. You are immediately removed from ministry and payroll. Go do something else, guy.
3. You are investigated, to see just how serious was your sin. (Living with your cleaning lady for ten years? Bad. A rapid-fire affair after years of continence? Okay.)
4. If after some years (at least five, I think), the priest would like to be readmitted to ministry, it's possible, after an investigation. Both priests who married and priests who didn't marry would have to be eligible.
I thought the point of the vow of celibacy was to love all equally and not have another human being whose welfare you prioritised above all others?
Even after they're ordained, secular priests have mothers and fathers and so forth, and devote lots of time, attention and love to them. Indeed, if a priest didn't do what he could to take care of his parents, it would be a grave sin.
Think there's a very real question what to do when a priest strays from his vow, and when it results in a child.
Should they be laicized and that's that? We all know priests are sinners. Obviously a priest who habitually beds women would be an abomination. But would it be the end of the world if a priest had an acknowledged natural child conceived out of wedlock some time before?
The point can't be focus and attention and so forth. After all, there are non-Latin rite priests, and former Episcopals and so forth who have wives and children. Is the point just scandal? I don't buy that the sin itself is a disqualification.
I'd go for something like this:
1. If you have a child, it must be reported soon and honestly, or you lose all rights to return to ministry.
2. You are immediately removed from ministry and payroll. Go do something else, guy.
3. You are investigated, to see just how serious was your sin. (Living with your cleaning lady for ten years? Bad. A rapid-fire affair after years of continence? Okay.)
4. If after some years (at least five, I think), the priest would like to be readmitted to ministry, it's possible, after an investigation. Both priests who married and priests who didn't marry would have to be eligible.
I thought the point of the vow of celibacy was to love all equally and not have another human being whose welfare you prioritised above all others?
Even after they're ordained, secular priests have mothers and fathers and so forth, and devote lots of time, attention and love to them. Indeed, if a priest didn't do what he could to take care of his parents, it would be a grave sin.
11Guanhumara
>10 timspalding: I did not say "not care about specific others", I spoke of prioritization.
Nowhere did I suggest that a priest should not love and care for his parents. But no parent expects their child to attend to them above all other obligations.
A mother who spends Christmas alone whilst their son works understands the importance of what he is doing; the child just misses their father.
Nowhere did I suggest that a priest should not love and care for his parents. But no parent expects their child to attend to them above all other obligations.
A mother who spends Christmas alone whilst their son works understands the importance of what he is doing; the child just misses their father.
12lilithcat
>11 Guanhumara:
But no parent expects their child to attend to them above all other obligations.
Ha. There are plenty of parents who expect that. Even if the kid is a rocket scientist: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lKL1tNv__kU
But no parent expects their child to attend to them above all other obligations.
Ha. There are plenty of parents who expect that. Even if the kid is a rocket scientist: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lKL1tNv__kU
13John5918
>5 Guanhumara: its approval smashes all justification for requiring priests to be unmarried
The Latin Rite Roman Catholic Church has already "smashed" the requirement for priests to be unmarried by ordaining thousands of married men who were former Anglican priests. Pope Francis has also encouraged bishops' conferences to explore the ordination of married men. And then of course there is the Eastern Rite which has always had married Catholic priests.
Celibacy, if freely chosen, can be a healthy and lifegiving option which does allow a person to devote more of him/herself to her/his ministry - I deliberately include the word "her" because of course it is not only priests who choose celibacy. However the myth that it should be a requirement of priesthood has already been dispelled by the recent praxis of our own church, to say nothing of the experience of other denominations, and particularly the Orthodox Church whose doctrine, theology and praxis is so close to ours.
The Latin Rite Roman Catholic Church has already "smashed" the requirement for priests to be unmarried by ordaining thousands of married men who were former Anglican priests. Pope Francis has also encouraged bishops' conferences to explore the ordination of married men. And then of course there is the Eastern Rite which has always had married Catholic priests.
Celibacy, if freely chosen, can be a healthy and lifegiving option which does allow a person to devote more of him/herself to her/his ministry - I deliberately include the word "her" because of course it is not only priests who choose celibacy. However the myth that it should be a requirement of priesthood has already been dispelled by the recent praxis of our own church, to say nothing of the experience of other denominations, and particularly the Orthodox Church whose doctrine, theology and praxis is so close to ours.
14Guanhumara
>13 John5918: I never claimed that the Church required all priests to be unmarried! Nevertheless, at present, celibacy is for some a requirement, not a choice.
I find the Orthodox approach interesting: a married man may be ordained, but a priest may not marry. And, of course, bishops are required to be celibate.
It seems to be that model that the Catholic church is moving towards. I admit that I have never understood the justification for admitting married men to the priesthood only if they have been previously ordained in another denomination.
In practice, did those ordinations include men with young children?
I find the Orthodox approach interesting: a married man may be ordained, but a priest may not marry. And, of course, bishops are required to be celibate.
It seems to be that model that the Catholic church is moving towards. I admit that I have never understood the justification for admitting married men to the priesthood only if they have been previously ordained in another denomination.
In practice, did those ordinations include men with young children?
Adira para publicar
