No matter what this new book says, the scriptures plainly and emphatically support the idea that clergy may be married if they choose, and early church history supports it as well. If it comes down to believing what a 20th-century priest says or what the Bible says, I'll go for the Bible every time. For example, we know that Peter was married:
And when Jesus was come into Peter's house, he saw his wife's mother laid, and sick of a fever. - MATTHEW 8:14Further, we know that other apostles -- and Jesus's brothers -- were also married. Paul indeed speaks out against clergy being forbidden to marry:
Have we not power to lead about a sister, a wife, as well as other apostles, and as the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas? - 1 CORINTHIANS 9:5Finally, Paul says that clergy member holding high office may (not necessarily must) be married:
This is a true saying, If a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work. A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach; Not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous; One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity; (For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?) - 1 TIMOTHY 3:1-5The notion of celibacy for clergy was not codified until the 1st Lateran Council in 1123, under Pope Callistus. If celibacy is a requirement of priesthood that is supposedly handed down by apostolic tradition, then why did it take over 1100 to recognize this requirement?
Enforced celibacy for clergy is a 900-year old failed experiment. It's time to quit arguing whether or not zero-tolerance is a good idea and get back to what the scriptures say.