One question, why when people talk about married priest they are against already ordained ones getting married? Is there a theological problem with that or something?
Priests have been barred from entering marriage since the first century.
I haven’t heard any serious proposals to allow this to change.
Per the RCC, priestly celibacy (as in not ordaining married men) is purely a matter of discipline, and not validity/sacramentality/whatever. VII explicitly affirmed the validity of the ordination of married men.
Oh ok, I didn’t know that. However, what I want I don’t understand is why? Why married men can be ordained but ordained men can’t marry?
I’m confused. Do you mean in your Eastern church?
Because priests weren’t barred from marriage until about 1100 in the Latin church to my knowledge.
It’s my understanding that there were even Popes running around with wives and children before that time.
Although I do get a little confused reading that in some cases priests were allowed to marry but weren’t supposed to have sex with their wives after marrying them.
You’ll need a better theologian than I for that one :). (not for the practical issues, but the theology).
Nope, all of them.
That’s the ban on ordination for married men (although it had been rare for a couple of centuries by that point). There was never a time they could marry after ordination.
More mistresses than wived , and it didn’t stop then, either.
Married men haven’t been accepted for the episcopate since the second century, both east and west. They had to be monastic or widowed.
This wasn’t about validity, but a practical issue: there was a problem with the sons inheriting church property.
There is, however, at least one oriental church in which the patriarch’s son is generally named patriarch . . .
Ah okay, gotcha. You’re just talking about the ban on marriage AFTER ordination.