Posted on 01/24/2002 1:17:39 PM PST by cathway
Has the Time Come to Consider Making Celibacy Truly Optional
In the Western Church?
In the wake of so many scandals which have brought such shame to the Church ---and so much pain to victims---all over the globe in recent years, more Catholics are beginning to wonder out loud whether the time has not come to end mandatory celibacy in the west, and, as with our sister churches in the East, consider allowing married men (1) into the ranks of the priesthood if they are already married when they present themselves for ordination, per precedent in Church history. The choice of that venerable calling, celibacy, would then be truly voluntary and thus presumably more secure, and, as also in the East, bishops would be drawn exclusively from those celibate ranks as in the ancient tradition.
Certain facts should be faced. Sexual pressure in our age of instant communications and multi-media is ubiquitous. William F. Buckley recently said that irreverent sexual imagery in advertizing and pornography (whether there is a difference can be debated) has indeed become "the creepy wallpaper of our lives". In light of the ubiquity of sexual pressures it is becoming harder and harder for men to choose celibacy for life. It also becomes easier for men who are not truly capable of it to end up embarrassing the Church and hurting others if and when they fall.
There are many truly orthodox and committed married men who may very well beat seminary doors down if given the opportunity to serve as priests (again, previously married only). Who knows but that this might mean the very death of neo-modernism and retro-liberalism, and an end to the vocations crisis at the same time.
Married men, understanding the needs of family life, I think, would be more apt to be more sensitive and sympathetic to the need for the Natural and moral laws in society, especially today, and louder advocates for the whole of the Church's social teachings in our day. They would not be preoccupied with their own sexual tensions and thus less likely to make an agenda for "acceptance" of "sexual diversity," as is heard too often today. Certainly there will be all the predictable problems which family life will generate, but it will solve more serious problems, I believe, than it will create. People at least naturally empathize with family problems.
Only the Church can decide (is already deciding in certain circumstances as we see with certain Lutheran ministers who convert). Good Catholics will not agitate in any rebellious way for such an option---much less engage the issue polemically ala Luther---but await all Church decisions with docility. But we can humbly propose such a solution and let the Church know that we understand the times have changed, and that we can accept such disciplinary changes---even with relief--- for the good of the Church, if she so decides.
Regarding the practice of mandatory celibacy in the West, the late Fr. John J. Hardon wrote:
Early Church discipline on clerical celibacy varied in the East and West and sometimes from province to province. During the first three centuries, although practiced by a considerable number of the clergy, it was not of general obligation throughout the Church. The requirement for all the clergy of Spain at the Council of Elvira about the year 305 marked the beginning of official divergence in the practice of Eastern and Western Christianity.In 315, two local councils in Galatia and Cappadocia forbade priests to marry. At the First Council of Nicea, a vigorous discussion took place over the proposal to forbid married bishops, priests, and deacons to live with their wives. Paphnutius, a bishop of Upper Egypt, settled the dispute by persuading the Council to follow the ancient tradition that prohibited marriage after ordination.
Gradually the law of celibacy in the Western Church became more definite and strict. A council held at Rome under Pope Siricius in 386 and two councils held at Carthage a little later imposed continence on all bishops, priests, and deacons. This decree was enforced to a certain extent throughout the West and was strongly favoured by such Fathers of the Church as Augustine and Jerome...
It was not until the eleventh century, however, that clerical celibacy became effectively obligatory. Significantly, it was part of a general reformation of the Church after centuries of conflict and turmoil...With the death of Gregory VII, the tide had turned. From then on, in spite of severe pressures to relax the law, the Western Church has not wavered in its celibate requirements for the clergy. ---The Catholic Catechism: A Contemporary Catechism of the Teachings of the Catholic Church. (New York: Doubleday and Company Inc, 1975)
I think the age of Gregory is over; and that the Church ought to consider calling a Synod one day with a view to reconsidering this matter. Can the Church afford not to?
(1) Exclusively heterosexual, monogamous marriages, of course, per the Natural Law and tradition. That we even have to add this shows the times.
Obviously a bachelor!
I didn't choose celibacy. It chose me.
While the author is correct that the early Church did not require celibacy, it was certainly not for the reason that seems to be advanced here - sexual imagery is ubiquitous and men are weak. I've heard that argument advanced to rationalize adultery, too, usually just before the sound of a frying pan striking a cranium...
This, as I see it, is not an argument for abolishing celibacy. St. Paul says "better to marry than to burn with lust". And Paul said that when celibacy was in fact an option, according to Hardon.
I'm unaware of any Christian denomination that refuses to let single men serve as pastors, priests, or in any other clerical capacity.
The exegesis of that verse that you give is untenable. It would disqualify both Jesus and Paul from the ministry.
Ministers were meant to marry because he is a man, designed by God to have desires to reproduce.
You ought to take that up with Jesus, then. To whom was he referring when he spoke of those who were "eunuchs for the sake of the Kingdom of Heaven"?
The modernists are least honest about building a new church, a new religion, founded on Vatican II. The conservatives keep claiming that Vatican II has been misinterpreted and is supposedly wholly consonant with the Catholic faith as it has been handed down from the apostles. They've been held hostage by the Vatican II establishment for so long that some of them have developed Stockholm syndrome.
Since the conservatives caved on so many issues, such as liturgical reform and ecumenism, it's no surprise that they caved on this one.
If a priest or nun should choose to have relations with a consenting adult, that is their own business.They made a vow and if they break it they have to live with it.
The problem comes from priests who prey on boys! They should be treated like pedophiles because they prefer children over adults.
The priest in MA is a perfect example. If he was a librarian or a teacher he would still prefer young boys.
Don't change religious traditions because of a perverted sickness. Get rid of the problem quickly and permanently.
If this priest in MA is not put away till hell freezes over, he will do it again and again.
See NCR Report on Sexual Abuse in Africa
One need not agree with every point in this story to see the problem.
The experiment with married episcopal priests who've converted has, from all appearances, been an overwhelming success.
It would be nice if the American Catholic Church didn't have to take whatever comes along (as long as the guy's single) for this sacred ministry.
One reason ordinary priests of a diocese were required to be celibate (i.e., unmarried) was to prevent them from passing church livings and property onto family members.
Members of religious orders were (and are) required to take vows of Celibacy AND Chastity. Maidenly modesty forbids further public exposition of the point.
When married Lutheran and Anglican clergy become Catholic priests, they are of course, allowed to keep their wives.
This rationale for celibacy no longer exists.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.