And he did leave once he did not agree with the rules anymore.
Once he had another “calling”.
Still, it doesn’t make sense to not allow priests to marry…and then, accept priests who are already married.
Where is the reasoning there?
If the point for the celibacy is for a priest to be “pure” like Jesus…or to be able to focus all his energies on the church and not family…or because the church is the symbolic “wife” of the priest, so to speak…it doesn’t make sense to allow married priests who are coming from another religion.
Personally, I think it’s great to allow the already-married priest with children to be a priest in the Catholic church.
But if you are going to do that, then it makes sense to allow the others to marry as well, if they want to.
If the church accepts that Fr Stephen Day had a change of heart/vocation, and wants to move from being a husband and non-Catholic priest to being a Catholic priest, thereby having both husband-priest as a shared-vocation…then why not accept the same heart/vocation evolution in reverse?
Why not accept the change that a Catholic priest like Fr Philip Gay has when he feels the calling to also have a shared vocation of husband-priest?
They are both wanting to love and live the same way and “serve God” the same way…but just one of them is allowed to do it–just because his timing was different.
Weirdly, it’s almost as if the Catholic priest is being “punished” for starting out Catholic from day one…while the former-Anglican priest gets to bypass the rules and is “rewarded” for choosing Catholicism much, much later in life.
You’d think it might go the other way around.