FreeRepublic , LLC
PO BOX 9771
FRESNO, CA 93794
STOP BY AND BUMP THE FUNDRAISER THREAD
Posted on 06/14/2002 10:21:48 AM PDT by Polycarp
5 Arguments Against Priestly Celibacy and How to Refute Them
1. Allowing priests to marry would end pedophilia.
It is completely untrue that celibate priests are more likely to be pedophiles than any other group of men, married or not. Pedophilia affects only 0.3 percent of the population of Catholic clergy, and sexual abusers in general account for less than 2 percent of Catholic priests. These figures are comparable to rates among married men, as non-Catholic scholar Philip Jenkins points out in his book Pedophiles and Priests. Other Protestant denominations have admitted to having similar problems among their own married clergy, so clearly the problem is not with celibacy.
2. A married clergy would create a larger pool of healthy priestly candidates, solving the current priest shortage.
There are actually plenty of vocations today in faithful dioceses: Denver, Northern Virginia, and Lincoln, Nebraska, have great numbers of men entering the priesthood. If other dioceses, such as Milwaukee, want to answer the question of why they have so few vocations, the answer is simple: Challenge young men to a religious life that is demanding, countercultural, sacrificial, and loyal to the Holy Father and Catholic teaching. This is the surest way to guarantee a greater number of vocations.
3. Married priests relate better to issues concerning marriage and the family.
To put it bluntly, one doesn't need to be an adulterer to counsel other adulterers. Priests understand the sacrificial nature and sanctity of marriage in a way that few others do. Who better to counsel a person in the ways of keeping the marital vow of fidelity than one who keeps the vow of celibacy?
4. It's unnatural for men to be celibate.
This idea reduces men to animals, creatures who can't live without their sexual urges being gratified. But humans are not animals. Humans make choices about the gratification of their appetites. We can control and channel our desires in a way that sets us apart from the rest of the animal world. And again, most sexual abusers are not celibate. It's sexual license that breeds sexual abuse, not celibacy!
5. Celibacy in the Latin rite is unfair. Since the Eastern rite allows married priests and the Latin rite allows married priests who have converted from Episcopalianism and Lutheranism, why can't all priests be married?
The discipline of celibacy among priests is one of the distinctive marks of the Roman Catholic tradition. Anyone who chooses to become a priest accepts the discipline. The Eastern rite, Lutheranism, and Episcopalianism, on the other hand, have a long tradition of married priests and the infrastructure and experience to handle it. However, Eastern rite priests and married priests who have converted from Lutheranism or Episcopalianism are NOT allowed to marry after their ordination or remarry after the death of their wife. In addition, the Eastern Church only chooses bishops from among their celibate, unmarried priests, clearly demonstrating that they see an inherent value in the nature of celibacy.
**********************
5 Arguments for Priestly Celibacy
1. Celibacy reaffirms marriage.
In a society that is completely saturated with sex, celibate priests are living proof that sexual urges can be controlled and channeled in a positive way. Far from denigrating the sexual act, celibacy acknowledges the goodness of sex within marriage by offering it up as a sacrifice to God. The sanctity of marriage is dishonored if it is treated merely as an outlet for sexual impulses. Rather, we as Christians are called to understand marriage as the inviolable commitment of a husband and wife to love and honor one another. A priest offers up a similar commitment of love to the Church, a bond that cannot be broken and that is treated with the same gravity and respect as in marriage.
2. Celibacy is scriptural.
Fundamentalists will tell you that celibacy has no basis in the Bible whatsoever, saying that Christians are called to "Be fruitful and multiply" (Genesis 1:28). This mandate speaks to humanity in general, however, and overlooks numerous passages in the Bible that support the celibate life. In 1 Corinthians, for example, Paul actually seems to prefer the celibate life: "Are you free from a wife? Do not seek marriage. . . . Those who marry will have worldly troubles, and I would spare you that. . . . The unmarried man is anxious about the affairs of the Lord, how to please the Lord; but the married man is anxious about worldly affairs, how to please his wife, and his interests are divided" (7:27-34). This is not to say that all men should be celibate, however; Paul explains that celibacy is a calling for some and not for others by saying, "Each has his own special gift from God, one of one kind and one of another" (7:7).
Jesus Himself speaks of celibacy in Matthew 19:11-12: "Not all can accept this word, but only those to whom it is granted. Some are incapable of marriage because they were born so; some, because they were made so by others; some, because they have renounced marriage for the sake of the kingdom of God. Whoever can accept this ought to accept it." Again, the emphasis is on the special nature of celibacy, one for which not all men are suited, but one that nevertheless gives glory to "the kingdom of God."
Perhaps the best evidence for the scriptural support of celibacy is that Jesus Himself practiced it!
3. Celibacy is historical.
Most people assume that the celibate priesthood is a convention introduced by the Church fairly late in history. On the contrary, there is evidence that even the earliest Church fathers, such as St. Augustine, St. Cyril, and St. Jerome, fully supported the celibate priesthood. The Spanish Council of Elvira (between 295 and 302) and the First Council of Aries (314), a kind of general council of the West, both enacted legislation forbidding all bishops, priests, and deacons to have conjugal relations with their wives on penalty of exclusion from the clergy. Even the wording of these documents suggests that the councils were not introducing a new rule but rather maintaining a previously established tradition. In 385, Pope Siricius issued the first papal decree on the subject, saying that "clerical continence" was a tradition reaching as far back as apostolic times.
While later councils and popes would pass similar edicts, the definitive promulgation of the celibate, unmarried priesthood came at the Second Lateran Council in 1139 under Pope Gregory VII. Far from being a law forced upon the medieval priesthood, it was the acceptance of celibacy by priests centuries earlier that eventually led to its universal promulgation in the twelfth century.
4. Celibacy emphasizes the unique role of the priest.
The priest is a representative of Christ, an alter Christus. In this respect, the priest understands his identity by following the example of Jesus, a man who lived His life in perfect chastity and dedication to God. As Archbishop Crescenzio Sepe of Grado explains, "[A priest's] being and his acting must be like Christ's: undivided" (The Relevance of Priestly Celibacy Today, 1993). As such, the sacramental priesthood is holy, something set apart from the rest of the world. Just as Christ sacrificed His life for His bride, the Church, so too must a priest offer up his life for the good of Christ's people.
5. Celibacy allows the priest's first priority to be the Church.
The image used to describe the role of the priest is one of marriage to the Church. Just as marriage is the total gift of self to another, the priesthood requires the total gift of self to the Church. A priest's first duty is to his flock, while a husband's first duty is to his wife. Obviously, these two roles will often conflict, as St. Paul noted and as many married priests will tell you. A celibate priest is able to give his undivided attention to his parishioners without the added responsibility of caring for his own family. They are able to pick up and go whenever necessary, whether this involves moving to a new parish or responding to a late-night crisis. Celibate priests are better able to respond to these frequent changes and demands on their time and attention.
Well, ready or not, it's finally here. Months of allegations, abuse, finger-pointing, and mudslinging have come down to this one event: the meeting of the American bishops in Dallas this weekend. The decisions that they reach will, for better or for worse, change the face of the American Church, but in the meantime we must get ready to be part of the recovery process.
After it's all over, the Church will need our support more than ever. We may not be able to help the bishops in Dallas this weekend, but we can stand with them in defending our Church against dissenters and naysayers who will continue to use this opportunity to attack the Church's discipline of celibacy in the priesthood.
To that end, CRISIS has put together a list of arguments for priestly celibacy and responses to commonly heard criticisms. We hope it helps you better prepare for the future and the role all of us must play in restoring the moral authority of our Church.
Best,
Deal Hudson
It is completely untrue that celibate priests are more likely to be pedophiles than any other group of men, married or not. Pedophilia affects only 0.3 percent of the population of Catholic clergy, and sexual abusers in general account for less than 2 percent of Catholic priests. These figures are comparable to rates among married men, as non-Catholic scholar Philip Jenkins points out in his book Pedophiles and Priests. Other Protestant denominations have admitted to having similar problems among their own married clergy, so clearly the problem is not with celibacy.
First of all, "celibate priests" are, by definition, not engaging in sexual activity with anybody. Second, I just do not buy into the statistical argument unless the term "pedophilia" is read to exclude "sex" with teenaged boys, in which case perhaps it is true. I don't think that ignoring the problem of active homosexuals in the priesthood is an effective way to defend priestly celibacy.
Would anyone put McBrien on TV if he weren't "catholic?" If the heretics and schismatics had the courage to leave the Church, they'd be nobodies and they can't stand not to be noticed
And, finally IMHO, it will put some pressure on the homosexuals now hiding behind their priestly robes to get out of the closet and hopefully the clergy!
It doesn't exist.
What does exist, is a priesthood made up in large part of active homosexuals. And the Church has done absolutely nothing to root out these miscreants.
Don't tell me about how these priests are upholding Scripture. They aren't---they are getting their sick kicks either with other gay men, or by raping boys.
I was before I was married at 24. It was not impossible for me then, nor is it impossible for priests now. Grow up. Quit living life and believing as if that thing between your legs rules your mind and your soul. It doesn't.
Shouldn't that choice still be between God and the individual priest?
Just as a particular priest might decide to follow a more strict religious regimen (extra fasting, extra praying, etc) than his fellow priests, perhaps a priest might choose to remain celibate.
Eating is not a sin. Gluttony is a sin.
Taking it easy isn't a sin. Sloth is a sin.
Having sex isn't a sin. Having sex outside of marriage is.
Marriage is not a sin, that needs to be avoided, any more than eating is a sin. Priests don't need to fast all the time, out of fear that they will become gluttonous if they eat or that their mealtimes will interfere with their work. Why must all priests avoid marriage all the time?
Servicemen and service women and doctors have lives that demand sacrifices of them. Are we going to say that they can't get married because marriage will interfere with their vocations?
Sorry, even given the sins of some of its shepherds, I'll go with the Church with the authority of Christ over your personal interp based only on the fallible whims of men.
I assume you mean the fallible whims of men like the Pope. According to Paul, church leaders must be married. See 1 Tim 3.
Additionally, if you are married your ability to move up in rank is limited to a certain level.
It just seems, regardless of religion, the left is trying to make god in the left's image.
"According to Paul, church leaders must be married. See 1 Tim 3."
Well, that's the interpretation of some Christians. Other Christians (not Catholics) interpret this to mean that church leaders may not be married more than once. Yet others interpret it as a ban on being married to more than one person at a time. I even ran into a sect that explained how this verse supported optional polygamy (only church leaders must be the husband of no more than one wife - everyone else is free to load up on extras).
So, it seems that faithful, well-meaning people, all trying to follow Jesus Christ, have interpreted this verse in widely diverging ways.
I'm sure that this is what Jesus meant when He prayed that all might be one. That there would be thousands upon thousands of variations of interpretations of the Truth. And that there would be no visible guide to distinguish truth from error. Uh huh.
Well, we Catholics have our own understanding of doctrine, faith, Scripture, and authority. The Catholic interpretation differs from yours. It is a logically reasonable interpretation, and actually fits better with other Scriptures (at least in our view) than does yours. Paul certainly endorses celibacy elsewhere. Jesus states that there will be some that embrace this state for the sake of the Kingdom. A logically coherent reading of these verses would seem to contradict your assertion.
By what authority do you assert that your interpretation (which fits other Scripture less-well) is the correct one?
The peace of Christ be with you,
sitetest
Dear Polycarp:
Wake up. Why do you think the Church is having so hard a time recruiting in its seminaries or why so many hetrosexual priests are leaving the pulpit? Clinging to such an antiquated (and unScripturely sound) ideal as celibacy is only leaving the Roman Church with empty altars--and vacant pews because of it>
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.