Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Poohbah
My logic is that largely EXCLUDING the first-hand perspective of married life and family life from the clergy (the exceptions are extremely noteworthy) hasn't done the Church many favors.

Does a psychiatrist need to have first-hand experience of schizophrenia in order to effectively treat a schizophrenic patient? By way of hearing confessions and ministering to many different couples, priests hear and observe all sorts of personal difficulties and situations. As another poster said, human nature is pretty stable. An astute and devout priest will usually get right to the heart of the problem. Unfortunately, there aren't as many of them around as there used to be.

371 posted on 09/26/2003 4:12:08 PM PDT by ELS (s)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 150 | View Replies ]


To: ELS
Does a psychiatrist need to have first-hand experience of schizophrenia in order to effectively treat a schizophrenic patient?

Not really, because it is, at root, a medical condition--i.e., certain chemicals in the brain are not in balance, and this causes the brain to not work right. Treatment thus becomes a matter of prescribing the right medication in the proper dosage.

My concern is that the systematic exclusion of married life from the ranks of the clergy is not necessarily a good thing.

I think the Orthodox Church has the right idea: married men may be ordained, but ordained men may not marry. It seemed a good enough rule for the permanent deaconate; what is the problem with extending it to the priesthood? Answer: nothing, as celibacy is a disciplinary rule only.

393 posted on 09/26/2003 7:04:35 PM PDT by Poohbah ("[Expletive deleted] 'em if they can't take a joke!" -- Major Vic Deakins, USAF)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 371 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson