The myth of priestly celibacy
Reading Katherine Kersten's April 3 Commentary article regarding her expectation of priests, I find myself drowning in the hypocrisy of the myth of priestly celibacy. Celibacy exists in the sense of bachelorhood, of course, in the church. But celibacy as chastity . . . as being saints like Francis and angels like Mother Teresa? I don't think so!
Kersten states that "the church has viewed celibacy as important to priesthood for at least 1,000 years." Sure, and lying about it has been around all that time too. Have you ever read Chaucer? Do you know about Martin Luther?
Kersten, dear readers, priests: Consider how you'd feel if you were a parent, who, being saturated with images and stories about the pervasive problem of priestly sexual abuse of children, would have to send a 7-year-old to talk alone to a priest, knowing that he or she will be expected to talk about any (natural) erotic feelings or behaviors, and have to say they're sorry when they're not, and have to promise to try and never do it again (which they don't mean).
And maybe these parents know, but are not acknowledging, that the child has seen these sickening and frightening television stories, or heard them from other kids. And maybe the kid is terrified, or grossed out, and the parents feel sick inside when they "make" the kid go do this.
Or consider the teenage boy who has read the papers, seen on TV the stories of "nice guy priests" who rape boys, and heard about parents who won't believe the victims.
Then, too, imagine how his mom and dad might feel about his discussing masturbation or other sexual matters while alone in the confessional with this man. Also, don't forget that girls are victims of priests too.
Maybe Kersten and I are children of the '60s, and believe that the appearance of love solves everything. Her commentary strikes me as being a lot like the summer of love, when we wore flowers and tossed balloons and dope was destroying minds all around us, but we chanted and danced and pretended that everything was groovy . . . . One can hope that more responsible people will work to make our society and the church be a sanctuary for children -- and, oh yes, women and homosexuals too.
Perhaps there will eventually be a rite of confession for people who will not address evil when it's in front of their faces.
-- Nancy Coleman, St. Louis Park. Retired therapist.
© Copyright 2002 Star Tribune. All rights reserved.
As a matter of fact we do know about Luther. We also know about Melchisedech. Elias, John the Baptist, Paul, Jesus, the Blessed Virgin Mary and many others.
Her commentary strikes me as being a lot like the summer of love, when we wore flowers and tossed balloons and dope was destroying minds all around us, but we chanted and danced and pretended that everything was groovy . . . .
Sounds like Nancy did more than dope.
It was just a greedy power grab.
a). What if he has marital problems that lead to divorce?
Will the Church be asked to pay alimony and child support?
b). What if their children get into all sorts of trouble with the law?
Will the Church be asked to pay for defense costs?
c). Tuition, medical, dental, housing, clothing, cars, insurance, will the Church be asked to fund?
Homo priests bad, homo boy scout leaders good
The dexterity needed by the Left Wing for this hit is astonishing. Brain surgeons should take notes.
While the LDS approach produces some very fine bishops, there are still a few cases every year of the same types of problems currently faced by the Roman Catholic church. Allowing priests to marry and have families wouldn't be a detriment in my view. It might actually attract more men into the priesthood.
Since God said, "it is not good for man to be alone".
I think God knows best. Priests should be allowed to marry.
I'd rather deal with a priest who has marital problems than one who is a sick hypocritical queer or child molester.
I'm really sorry if I've offended, but this topic sets me off.
What those who advocate that priests should marry always forget is that a priest is different from the rest of us and is held to a much higher standard. The priest is married to the Church - one priest once described his Breviary as his wife. I cannot believe that the priests who make the headlines read their Breviaries every day as they are required to - those beautiful daily prayers would have strengthened them and kept their minds on their vows and Holy Orders.
Putting aside the fact that a priest has not the time nor the finances to support a wife and children and that such a relationship would be doomed from the start, a priest is bound by Canon Law to be a member of a Community of priests, whether it is as a Franciscan or a Dominican or any number of other Priestly Societies. He must live and pray with them, again gaining strength and support from his brother priests.
Celibacy is a God-given grace and cannot be measured within the self-gratification norms of our "present sex-drenched culture", as Kersten describes it so perfectly. Those who argue for marriage for priests simply do not understand the sanctity and holiness of the vocation, and the duties that attend to it.