Posted on 03/08/2010 9:49:58 AM PST by NYer
.Deacon John Burns, a seminarian from the Archdiocese of Milwaukee, center, attends a theological conference on priestly celibacy at the Pontifical University of the Holy Cross in Rome March 4. Burns and several other seminarians from the Pontifical North American College attended the two-day conference. (CNS photo/Paul Haring
VATICAN CITY -- Exceptions to celibacy for priests in the Roman Catholic Church can be puzzling, including for young priests enthusiastic about their vocation.
The Pontifical University of the Holy Cross, run by Opus Dei in Rome, held a theological conference on priestly celibacy March 4-5 and while no one challenged mandatory celibacy, there were repeated questions about the exceptions made in some of the Eastern Catholic churches and for clergy coming from the Anglican Communion.
"If celibacy is so tied theologically and spiritually to priestly identity, why the exceptions?" the questioners asked.
Speakers at the conference, attended mostly by priests and seminarians, acknowledged the confusion caused by the exceptions and by the frequent statement that celibacy is a discipline, not a dogma, and so conceivably could change.
"In the eyes of many, the church hierarchy and especially the Apostolic See seem to hold contradictory positions on priestly celibacy," said Father Laurent Touze, a professor of spiritual theology and author of a book on the future of priestly celibacy.
"On the one hand, there is a firm insistence on the non-negotiability of celibacy," he said, while at the same time there are granted "exceptions to celibacy," including Pope Benedict XVI's provisions in late 2009 for ordaining as Catholic priests married former Anglican ministers.
Many people think, "If these exceptions are possible, why not abolish a frequently contested discipline and at least make it optional," Father Touze said.
For Father Touze, the answer lies in the spiritual and theological meaning of priesthood.
Priests are called by God to imitate Christ, the bridegroom, by dedicating themselves totally to God and to serving his people, he said. And they are called to stand in Christ's place at the Eucharist, pouring themselves out for the salvation of others, he said.
The conference also looked at another factor that often creates confusion regarding celibacy: the debate over the practice of the early church and the widespread assumption that celibacy for priests was a fourth-century invention of the church.
Father Stefan Heid, a professor at Rome's Pontifical Institute of Sacred Archeology and author of "Celibacy," a historical study, said Pope Siricius was insisting on a practice embraced by the Twelve Apostles and followed in the early church when he decreed in 385 that all clergy must live lives of perfect chastity.
"Popes do not invent anything," Father Heid said. "Siricius would have been made to look ridiculous suddenly imposing on thousands of clergy something that hadn't existed up to then."
Instead, the priest said his research led him to believe the pope's decree was a formal reaffirmation of church practice at a time when it was coming under attack.
Father Heid said that like the apostles, married men who became priests in the early church lived completely chaste lives after ordination. He described those who have tried to suggest Jesus himself was married, perhaps to Mary Magdalene, as romance novelists masquerading as biblical scholars.
Archbishop Angelo Amato, prefect of the Congregation for Saints' Causes and former secretary of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, said Jesus' perfect chastity touches "the most intimate and sacred nucleus of his human existence: his love."
The Bible does not speak explicitly about Jesus' celibacy, he said, which could be why so few theologians have reflected on priestly celibacy as an imitation of Christ rather than simply as a way of giving up everything for Christ as religious do.
"In any case, this silence is reflected in catechesis, which says nothing in this regard, so Christians often demonstrate perplexity and misunderstanding about this reality" and their confusion is increased "by not a few pseudo-scientific articles or by bizarre and false film portrayals of Jesus' sexuality," the archbishop said.
Jesus' choice not to marry "was not a casual choice. He chose to be himself," the archbishop said. By renouncing marriage, he was able to love all people with a self-giving and life-giving love.
Conference speakers also acknowledged -- and rejected -- common claims about the damaging psychological effects of celibacy.
Aquilino Polaino Lorente, a professor of psychopathology at the University of St. Paul Medical School in Madrid, said that accepting God's call to a vocation as a celibate priest "does not carry any more psychological risks than marriage does."
Human beings, with their intelligence and freedom, do not have to act on their sexual impulses in order to be happy and healthy, he said, and, in fact, never controlling those impulses is a sure sign of a serious psychological problem.
"Naturally, renouncing sexuality -- an important part of human love -- has a cost. But much less than most people think," he said. "To the degree that a person gives himself fully to the aim of his life and the reason for his existence, chastity costs less. To the degree that the person forgets himself and gives himself to others, renouncing sexuality weighs less because it is lived in the fullness of a freely chosen love."
You do realize that celibacy is a prohibition against marriage and is not to be confused with abstinence don't you? Can you explain why the military academies prohibit cadets and midshipmen from marrying?
Where does Scripture say that peter's wife was alive? oOly his mother in law is mentioned.
He did not abandon his wife.
I doubt St Peter was celibate. The requirement for priests is a discipline, not a doctrine. It appears to have been in place since the early Church, but I don’t think it was that early.
“More than many married men...”
You just lost credibility. Someone can read a hundred books and hear a million stories, but if they haven’t been married and personally raised the children that are the fruits of a marriage, then they are the farthest thing from an expert. They’re not even an amateur. I have three children and laugh in the face of anyone without children who tries to give me advice.
The abstinence requirement is administrative policy, not scriptural and has served God, the Church, and mankind extremely well for centuries. Besides, what concern is it of yours how an organization you don't belong to conducts its affairs? If you really had any concern you would make a legitimate attempt to educate yourself on the Catechism, dogma, and encyclicals of the Church and wouldn't lurk and snipe annonymously from the internet.
What nonsense. You just outed yourself as a gibbering whackjob.
Would you apply the same thought process towards your wife's selection of an Ob/Gyn? Or what about a female Ob/Gyn who never gave birth? How well equipped are either of these physicians, to deliver babies?
“Being celibate has NOTHING to do with raping children!”
Raping children is obviously the opposite of celibacy. However if you are going to challenge that there isn’t a higher population of child sexual abusers in the clergy than the general public, I’ll take you up on it.
>> You do realize that celibacy is a prohibition against marriage and is not to be confused with abstinence don’t you?
I understand what celibacy means in this context — thanks ... though my understanding for priests (not military cadets) is that celibacy included abstinence.
>> Can you explain why the military academies prohibit cadets and midshipmen from marrying?
Can you explain why they don’t prohibit marriage when they’re out of the academies and actually serving? They are committing to not marrying during their training, not during the actual performance of their job duties. It is a temporary commitment, during which cadets are permitted to continue dating and marry upon graduation. This makes sense. Priestly celibacy does not.
SnakeDoc
“Would you apply the same thought process towards your wife’s selection of an Ob/Gyn? Or what about a female Ob/Gyn who never gave birth? How well equipped are either of these physicians, to deliver babies?”
Of course I would. I would much prefer an Ob/Gyn who had experience delivering babies instead of one who had never done so before. In fact, that is a very good example that supports my argument. Was that a trick question? Or did you not apply your own analogy appropriately?
Discuss the issues all you want, but do not make it personal.
“What nonsense. You just outed yourself as a gibbering whackjob.”
Do you really need me to outline in detail the centuries of corruption at the top of the catholic church (note the distinction between leadership and the front lines)? I’m gonna point out that only one of us has made a personal attack (see the vicious insult above). Maybe you should practice what your church preaches.
The Catholic Church requires that married men make their families a higher priority than their vocations. This would require married priests to place the wants and needs of their families above that of their flock which is incompatible with the duties and priorities of the priest.
That's because the American Education system is what's called a targetted institution: one that paedophiles gravitate towards because it puts them in touch with children.
The same is true for any organisation that works with children. Boy Scouts, you name it, they all have more paedophiles than the general norm. Not because the Boy Scouts are evil, but because that's where the children are.
Tell me: do you believe that celibacy is the cause of the ludicrously high level of paedophilia and child abuse in the American Education system?
The question referred to an Ob/Gyn who had never given birth? Never experienced gestation or birth? Should giving birth be a mandatory qualification for an Ob/Gyn?
“Should giving birth be a mandatory qualification for an Ob/Gyn?”
Why would it be? Is part of their job description giving birth? I don’t hire an Ob/Gyn to give birth, I hire them to deliver a baby.
Well it also dates back to a time when the Roman Catholic Church was effectively the largest governing body on earth... wives or children of a priest could be the focus or ire and abuse and intimidation.
Of course. And you retain a priest to witness to your marriage. The priest has the experience of marriage from his own parents and the teachings of God.
Christ was never married either.
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.