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."
It’s just Paul’s admonition. “Are you married? Remain married. Are you unmarried? Remain unmarried.”
I don’t see what’s so difficult to understand?
This is just the usual tripe from useful idiots attacking clerical celibacy.
I’m sure that you are right. The fact that a priest often interacts with children, like educators, is no doubt part of the reason for the increased odds of depravity.
Yet most cities also have gay districts where the gay bars and establishments operate, and this is presumably to foster a sense of community and make them welcome. I submit that an organization which forbids sex with women is more attractive to someone interested in boys than one that does not.
The other reason I think the rule is stupid is that there are plenty of married men AND women with great leadership qualities who could be of so much more value as leaders of a parish than sidelined in a supporting role.
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.
Attack the messenger; never discuss the issue. Personal attacks are in bad form on the Religion Forum. You might want to ask the Religion Moderator on that topic. The creator of the universe ended all requirements of priests in 70 CE. However this Passover the YHvH commanded Priests will beginYou are up to your usual activity.
shalom b'SHEM Yah'shua HaMashiach
again the Korban Pesach this Passover as spelled out in YHvH's Word.
“The priest has the experience of marriage from his own parents and the teachings of God.”
No, that’s not experience. You’re right, though, I retained a priest to witness my marriage. I will talk to my parents or hers for suggestions and advice.
The argument is silly though, and I was just making a joke in my first post. My concerns with priests not being allowed to marry (or be women) is not a joke, and something I believe has suppressed so much potential.
Good point.
“Keep in mind that he hears married people’s confessions all the time.”
Would you prefer to have heart surgery done by an experienced heart surgeon or just someone that talks to doctors all the time?
“The lesson I would take from that example is that either is acceptable.”
To Jesus, yes. To the Catholic Church? Not so much.
Your example makes no sense. Being married doesn't make someone an experienced marriage counselor, any more than having a heart makes someone a heart surgeon. And the priest isn't talking to "doctors" in the confessional, but to "patients".
Not to mention that you're posing a false dilemma -- nobody is saying there's anything wrong with going to a married marriage counselor.
I cannot imagine going to a man for marital advice that had never been married. Would you seek driving instructions from an Amish guy? I mean, he’s seen a car before, he should have some idea how it works, right?
It's not a causal connection. But the challenge of celibacy is to sublimate sexual desires -- whether those are heterosexual, homosexual, pedophilic, or what have you.
Imagine for a moment that you have sexual urges that you know to be wrong. You could choose to simply be a celibate insurance salesman (or whatever), or you could enter the priesthood, where you'd be supported and praised for your sacrifice. It's an attractive environment for people trying to suppress their sexual urges, whatever they are.
I cannot help if if you feel personally offended by the refutation of your opinions.
I courtesy copied the Religion Moderator on my response since you failed to ping him/her when you made them a party to your complaint.
Then don't. Nobody's forcing you, are they?
Celibacy: 1. abstention from sexual relations. 2. abstention by vow from marriage: the celibacy of priests. 3. the state of being unmarried.
Abstinence: The act or practice of refraining from indulging an appetite or desire, especially for alcoholic drink or sexual intercourse. -- c.1300, "forbearance in indulgence of the appetites" -- Specifically of sexual appetites from mid-14c.
In the case of Catholic priests and nuns, there is a prohibition of both marriage AND sexual relations. You're not suggesting that priests and nuns are free to engage in sexual relations, are you?
I cannot help if if you feel personally offended by the refutation of your opinions.
I courtesy copied the Religion Moderator on my response since you failed to ping him/her when you made them a party to your complaint.
Saul Alinsky's Rules
shalom b'SHEM Yah'shua HaMashiach
There you go again.
Ronald Reagan
i think you are very close to the crux of the problem. the catholic church is infested with closeted homosexuals(much like congress apparently). they need to do a much better job of seperating the celibate from the perverted.
Put some ice on it and sack up.
The Church does not differentiate between the clergy and the laity in its prohibition against sexual activity out of wedlock, but places no celibacy requirement on the laity.
So by your logic the only acceptable criteria for a heart surgeon is one who has performed surgery on himself.......
Are you a priest, ex-priest or have one in your family?
Were you a vocations director or a Catholic psychologist in this field?
What is your expertise on the subject?
I claimed no expertise.
SnakeDoc
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.