The (Catholic) Church Has Always Prospered When Celibacy Is Honored

The Wanderer | January 22, 2004 | Frank Morriss

[NYer]

Advocates of a sort of religious Darwinism - all change is for the better - are agitating among priests a push for making celibacy in Holy Orders a matter of personal choice. Thus is some dioceses petitions from a number of priests have asked that marriage be introduced into their ranks as a general practice for those wanting to serve at the altar and with the sacraments from a home and family, rather than in the fullest imitation possible of Christ, who as the Second Vatican Council reminds us (Presbyterorum Ordinis) is the Church's sole Spouse, she alone being His Bride. He was also homeless.

The cardinal argument advanced in these petitions is that there is a shortage of priests, and that clergy being allowed to marry would alleviate that condition. History, however, runs contrary to that reasoning (or is it more a quarrel with troublesome old St. Paul, who encouraged all serving the Church to imitate him, as he imitated Christ?). The fact is, celibacy never in the past was found to be the cause of the Church's lacking recruits to the priesthood. The Church has always prospered when celibacy is honored and followed; it was in the worst of times, when the priesthood itself was held cheap and dishonored, that celibacy was disregarded. It has been cast aside with practically every schism, so that those abandoning the Church herself usually begin with throwing away celibacy, as did Luther and the English Reformers.

Now, do the ministry and priesthood of those bodies grow in any great degree because of their acceptance of marriage? Is the great rapport of Lutherans with their ministers or Anglicans with their priests because of the abandonment of celibacy?

Newman had hoped for his Oxford Movement that one of its lights for the Anglican Church would be the example of celibacy. He found himself more and more alone in the hope rejection of marriage would light a path to greater perfection by selfless dedication to the cause of Christ. When John Keble, “angel” of the movement whose Assize sermon had sparked it, married, Newman seemed to sense a defeat for that noble adventure.

Indeed, today the Anglican priesthood with its acceptance of marriage is not only failing to prosper; it is in a condition of dissolution revealed in acceptance of things carnal beyond a married male priesthood. It is not unthinkable to believe such conditions would today be different had the Established Church not have disestablished celibacy.

Catholics, when they are presented with the argument that ending celibacy would increase the ranks of the priesthood, should ask themselves if, even were that so, would something more important than numbers of priests be lost, something today’s culture desperately needs? That would be the example of heroism in the practice of chastity. Vatican II’s De Presbyterorum Ministerio et Vita touches on this with an appeal to priests who have freely chosen the priesthood to appreciate celibacy as a “glorious gift that has been given them by the Father and is so clearly extolled by the Lord:

“And the more that perfect continence is considered by many people to be impossible in the world of today, so much the more humbly and perseveringly in union with the Church ought priests demand the grace of fidelity, which is never denied to those who ask” (n.16).

Today’s culture is diseased with lust the way a human body is with cancer. Lust rots both the exterior and interior of society. Popular entertainment exposes children to sex without regard for the damage that is inevitable. The workings of lust and the structure feeding it are presented shamelessly even in private homes via television. In Hollywood’s greed, the young are preyed upon with humorous or enticing portrayeals of sex. In classrooms, innocence regarding sex is stripped away in the case of “safety” at the same age when pupils are learning their ABCs.

In this welter of filth and enervating sexual fantasy, a celibate priesthood and the chaste marital fidelity of husband and wife it encourages are the only two countercultural forces. Abandoning priestly celibacy would leave marital chastity without an example of heroism to encourage it, and would inevitably advance the cause of sexual libertinism, already shamelessly reigning in the field of cultural exemplars.

Satan knows that real heroes in the cause of restraint of bodily appetite are among his worst enemies. In C.S. Lewis’ little mockery of Hell’s denizens, The Screwtape Letters, Uncle Screwtape asks his nephew demon, Wormwood, “I suppose you’ve tried persuading him (Wormwood’s patient) that chastity is unhealthy?”

Something similar is at work now regarding celibacy. There is a diabolical effort to convince us Catholics that refraining from marriage is not merely unhealthy for priests, but in fact is impossible. This notion rests on the lie that not having sex is unnatural, and reflects the philosophical error of humanism and naturalism. If celibacy is unnatural, the attempting of it is very dangerous. There is at least a hint in the public reaction to the abuser-priests scandal that everyone’s sexuality will breakout in nastiness if it is not allowed the outlet of marriage.

The Church knows by both experience and good reasoning that God provides the grace to do difficult good things, just as St. Paul knew that God offers no burden beyond the ability of bearing it to those who wish to serve Him well and faithfully. As for Christ’s choosing at least one married (or possibly widowed) man (Peter) as an Apostle, He also said no one unwilling to leave aside wife and family (father, mother, children) for His sake was worthy of Him. If there is any literalness to that insistence of Christ, surely it should be seen in the steady movement by the Church from its beginning toward a celibate priesthood.

There is a recognizable link between abandonment of celibacy by most Christian religions and an abandonment of the confessional, with its seal of secrecy. Luther advised confessing one’s sins to the neighbor next door. Perhaps he was jesting? He must have realized no sinner with an ounce of prudence would choose to confess over the backyard fence. It is known that on at least one occasion Fr. Damien shouted out his sins from a boat to his clerical superior on shipboard above him. But then Fr. Damien was heroically a priest and a servant of Christ.

Confessing sins is humiliating enough when the hearer is a celibate priest. It would take more heroism than many of us have to tell them to a family man. It is a matter-of-fact truth that secrets between husband and wife exist only when there is nearly superhuman dedication to keeping things hidden, or a great deal of self-interest in doing so.

Finally, there is something highly chivalric in priestly celibacy. That is, having the priest as a model of dedication to cause as was the knight in serving one master only, distracted by no other summons or answering no other call. The chair of Galahad was reserved for him alone because, in the poet’s words, “his heart was pure.” Christ said something similar as to purity of heart enabling a vision of God. Taking here purity of heart to mean singleness of love, then both chivalric code and Christ the teacher can be understood as recommending celibacy as a means toward the Beatific Vision. This takes the priesthood beyond the vocation of service to others. Such vocation joined to celibacy brings God better into the sight of the inhabitants on earth, thus encouraging them to seek its undimmed and unmatched enjoyment in the true home awaiting us, where there is nether marriage or betrothal.

The sociology of Christianity is noble indeed, and the cause of service to others that is so strong in this age should not be demeaned or underestimated. Granting that service can be given well, and sometimes is, by those married, if it is the prime motive for the priesthood then celibacy might be seen as a penalty if demanded in priests’ living of the life of goodwill toward men. But the Beatific Vision far outshines such a motive, and if single-heartedness is preparation here for such perfection beyong, then celibacy becomes the blazon of Christ’s heroes. Faithful married people surely are honored in the court of Christ above. But there they, too, will give special honor to those who gave their hearts to Him in a most special way.

Catholic mothers have always given recognition to that when they gave sons to the priesthood – that is, the celibate priesthood. For such priesthood is far beyond a profession, even a noble one such as serving the spiritual and worldly needs of people: In the pride and joy of mothers of priests we can detect their intuition that those sons are among the elect who heard and heeded Christ’s call, and therefore unlike the rich young man who turned away from what Christ promised with these words: “And everyone has left house, or brothers, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my name’s sake, shall receive a hundredfold, and shall possess life everlasting” (Matt. 19:29).

Should Christ have a priesthood that strives for anything less?

[NYer]

No link ... just wanted to share this commentary with all of you.

One more good reason to take out a subscription to The Wanderer.

[NYer]

Thought this was worth posting. Enjoy!

[sitetest]

Dear NYer,

Great commentary.

Dear sinkspur,

"Catholics, when they are presented with the argument that ending celibacy would increase the ranks of the priesthood, should ask themselves if, even were that so, would something more important than numbers of priests be lost, something today’s culture desperately needs? That would be the example of heroism in the practice of chastity."

He says it better than I can.


sitetest

[johnb2004]

In this welter of filth and enervating sexual fantasy, a celibate priesthood and the chaste marital fidelity of husband and wife it encourages are the only two countercultural forces. Abandoning priestly celibacy would leave marital chastity without an example of heroism to encourage it, and would inevitably advance the cause of sexual libertinism, already shamelessly reigning in the field of cultural exemplars.

[sinkspur]

"Catholics, when they are presented with the argument that ending celibacy would increase the ranks of the priesthood, should ask themselves if, even were that so, would something more important than numbers of priests be lost, something today’s culture desperately needs? That would be the example of heroism in the practice of chastity."

Catholics don't ask themselves that question because they're not convinced that celibacy has a witness value. They see married Protestant converts serving as priests, they see married men serving as deacons, and, in our diocese, they see lay leaders directing Eucharistic services in lieu of a priest.

While the Church is figuring out how to re-sell celibacy as having a "heroic value", average Catholics see laymen ministering, in many cases heroically, while balancing family and work life.

If the Church decides that celibacy is more important than the Celebration of the Eucharist in every parish every Sunday (because that's what it boils down to), then we'll have laymen assuming more and more of the leadership of parish communities.

Make no mistake about it: the Holy Spirit is alive and well in Catholic communities, and if priests aren't there to lead them, laymen will.

[sinkspur]

Abandoning priestly celibacy would leave marital chastity without an example of heroism to encourage it, and would inevitably advance the cause of sexual libertinism, already shamelessly reigning in the field of cultural exemplars.

I don't follow this line of argument, at all. I doubt most of those of us who observe marital chastity even think of the chastity of the priesthood. I know I don't, especially when I see priests compensating by buying vacation homes, driving new cars every two years, and going to the Kentucky Derby every year.

Some guys live celibacy perfectly, but forget that Christ called them to not be accumulators of things.

[sitetest]

Dear sinkspur,

"If the Church decides that celibacy is more important than the Celebration of the Eucharist in every parish every Sunday (because that's what it boils down to), then we'll have laymen assuming more and more of the leadership of parish communities."

I believe that this argument is essentially, "there would be more priests if married men could be priests."

Perhaps in the short term there might be. I imagine that many married deacons would enter into the priesthood, giving a significant boost in numbers.

But in the long term, I think we'd lose as many (or more) vocations as we gained.

The experience of the Protestant churches is instructive. Many of these denominations are hard-pressed to find sufficient numbers with "the call," as well. Yet, they may marry.

Part of the difficulty is that the priesthood is not (and will not become) a particularly remunerative vocation. For folks who embrace celibacy, this isn't the greatest concern. But for folks who anticipate a wife and family, and who understand the moral obligation to provide adequate material support thereto, this is a very big concern.


sitetest

[johnb2004]

"While the Church is figuring out how to re-sell celibacy as having a "heroic value", average Catholics see laymen ministering, in many cases heroically, while balancing family and work life."


Perhaps that is true in some places. It is not my experience. I see lay folks and nuns wanting to play priest. I see dissent. I see the social gospel proclaimed week in and week out. I hear folks claim artificial birth control is not a sin. I hear that the Vatican is against homosexuals. I hear some say the vatican is sexist. I hear some say they are above the Church.

[johnb2004]

"I don't follow this line of argument, at all. I doubt most of those of us who observe marital chastity even think of the chastity of the priesthood."

Good point. It is not thought of because it is not preached. People who advocate for an end to mandatory celibacy usually come from the groups that want other "chages" as well. Do you agree?

[sinkspur]

The experience of the Protestant churches is instructive. Many of these denominations are hard-pressed to find sufficient numbers with "the call," as well. Yet, they may marry.

The Protestant experience definitely shows that there is a concern in all denominations with materially supporting a minister and his family. There are no shortages of men who would serve a Highland Park Presbyterian Church in Dallas, for instance; there are fewer men willing to accept a call to a rural church with 600 people in attendance at Sunday service.

I don't know what the answer is. I don't think the ministry, generally, is viewed as a satisfying life in America today, regardless of the denomination. Perhaps its due to the better-educated laity, who often can do a better job of teaching than the priest or minister can, and these people intimidate men who thought they were entering a life where their congregations would defer to them.

That's why I think celibacy at least ought to be discussed. Either it will emerge from such discussions stronger, and Catholics will embrace it more confidently, or there will be changes made.

But, this present dissatisfaction of many older priests, who are being worked to death and must forego any kind of retirement because there simply is no other alternative, will only get worse before it gets better.

[sitetest]

Dear sinkspur,

Well, perhaps you don't think about it, but I do. I'm personally inspired by those who are faithful to their vows of celibacy, and take strength from their lifestyle, contradicting, as it does in the extreme, the pornographic culture of our own society.

"I know I don't, especially when I see priests compensating by buying vacation homes, driving new cars every two years, and going to the Kentucky Derby every year."

I just don't know many priests like this. I know of no priest with a vacation home. Our own priests lived in a rickety old rectory up until a few years ago, when we completed the new one. It is beautiful, large, even somewhat luxurious. I'm delighted to help provide these accommodations for my priests, both elderly men who have given lives of service to the Church.

Our last pastor owned his own house, which he purchased with an inheritance. At the time, the old rectory was nearly unlivable, and rather than spend the parish's money on it (the parish had recently completed the new church building after the old one had burned down), he spent his own money and bought his own house.

Lots of folks criticized him for it. No good deed goes unpunished. ;-)

I don't think our priests go to the Kentucky Derby, though our pastor is an avid golfer. The parishioners are glad of this, as his participation in this activity has been a real aid in helping him recover from several serious illnesses these past few years. He also is a gun collector, and in his youth, was an expert marksman, I'm told. In his youth, I'm told, he was quite an all-around athlete.

I do think he occasionally joins the old folks when they take their regular trips to Dover Downs (a racetrack), and he does buy a raffle ticket from every parish group that is selling them. But he isn't really much of a gambler.

He eats modestly (but he has at least a bite of everything, especially at parish functions), and gave up alcohol a few years back. In the midst of his health problems, he began to drink one too many beers to assist the anaesthesia. When he recognized it had become a problem, he went cold-turkey.

Our associate pastor is also a man of modest appetites. He is in his 70s, and a little frail. He eats and drinks lightly, usually vacations by going on spiritual retreats. I think he owns a nice, relatively-late model Buick.

This year, our priests didn't actually get to take real, full-fledged vacations, because they couldn't find any priests to say Mass on the weekends. Many of the leading parishioners told them to each take a week when the other would still be at the parish. We have five Masses per weekend, and we suggested that for a few weeks during the summer, we could cut back to two or three, so that one of them could handle the load on his own.

Our priests wouldn't hear of it. They felt that celebrating Mass for their parishioners was more important than taking vacations. So they cut out Monday-Thursday for a week at a time each, for a little mini-vacation.

As to having a nice car, I own two Mercedes-Benzes, so obviously I don't see that that's a moral problem. ;-)

I could go on, and frankly, though I describe my own parish, much of what I describe could easily fit most of the parishes with which I'm acquainted. We just don't have many vacation-home-owning, Kentucky-Derby-going living-in-the-lap-of-luxury priests around here.


sitetest

[sitetest]

Dear sinkspur,

"That's why I think celibacy at least ought to be discussed."

I think that's what we're doing right here. I also think the DISCUSSION is a good thing.

It is appropriate to take the time, and lay out explicitly the worthy arguments in favor of celibacy. If people wonder why celibacy is a good thing, then the questions ought to be asked, the folks who would wish celibacy be entirely optional should say their piece. And those who will defend the discipline should respond.

And in the end, we will all follow the discipline laid out for us by the Catholic Church, submitting to her rightful authority.


sitetest

[johnb2004]

How many sermons have you heard that give the benefits of celibacy? How many sermons have you heard that say true freedom is following the teachings of the Church?

I am not being sarcastic. In my experience I almost never hear such things? How can the laity come to an informed opinion if they never hear tha truth?

[sitetest]

Dear johnb2004,

At least a few times a year, every time I hear Cardinal McCarrick give a homily. I have never heard him say Mass without bringing up the need for vocations, and how wonderful, heroic, and adventurous can be the life of the celibate, chaste priest or religious.

He is very affecting in this. He will point out into the pews and say something like, "I know that there are young men and women RIGHT HERE listening to me whom God is calling!"

At the pro-life Mass on Thursday, he asked these men and women to stand, and hundreds did.


sitestest

[johnb2004]

You are fortunate. I have never heard a single homily on the benefits of celibacy. Only on EWTN.

[sitetest]

Dear johnb2004,

I ought to correct a possible misimpression, entirely my own. The cardinal's homilies and talks, that I've heard, are not specifically on celibacy per se, but rather on vocations, fo which celibacy is an integral, important, and worthy part.


sitetest

[sitetest]

entirely my own = entirely my own fault

[sinkspur]

Thanks for the good points in both of your posts.

I don't know that many priests who are actually materialistic, but EVERYBODY knows who the ones are that are.

I'm going to say that, if my wife were to die before me, I could embrace celibacy wholeheartedly. Part of that is due to my age (53), but also because I've known the companionship of a wonderful woman and I don't believe I'd have any real desire to "replace" that. So embracing celibacy at this stage of my life wouldn't be that great of a challenge. And this seems to be the same thing I've found with those men (one of whom I know very well) who have entered the seminary after the death of their wives. "I had a wonderful wife," Jim told me last year before he entered the seminary. "I carry her around with me all the time; no other woman could replace her."

[sinkspur]

People who advocate for an end to mandatory celibacy usually come from the groups that want other "chages" as well. Do you agree?

Yes. But, if those "changes" are in non-essentials, and there's a rationale behind them, I see nothing wrong in at least having a discussion.

[johnb2004]

Do you not think there tends to be a minimalist approach to the faith by many? It seems that so many of us just want to do the bare minum the Church asks of us.