Posted on 03/14/2010 2:18:46 PM PDT by NYer
Rome is using this day of rest to stir a debate that never seems to rest:
The Vatican on Sunday denied that its celibacy requirement for priests was the root cause of the clerical sex abuse scandal convulsing the church in Europe and again defended the pope's handling of the crisis.Continue at the link.
Suggestions that the celibacy rule was in part responsible for the ''deviant behavior'' of sexually abusive priests have swirled in recent days, with opinion pieces in German newspapers blaming it for fueling abuse and even Italian commentators questioning the rule.
Much of the furor was spurred by comments from one of the pope's closest advisers, Vienna archbishop Cardinal Christoph Schoenborn, who called this week for an honest examination of issues like celibacy and priestly education to root out the origins of sex abuse.
''Part of it is the question of celibacy, as well as the subject of character development. And part of it is a large portion of honesty, in the church but also in society,'' he wrote in the online edition of his diocesan newsletter.
His office quickly stressed that Schoenborn wasn't calling into question priestly celibacy, which Pope Benedict XVI reaffirmed as recently as Friday as an ''expression of the gift of oneself to God and others.''
But Schoenborn has in the past shown himself receptive to arguments that a celibate priesthood is increasingly problematic for the church, primarily because it limits the number of men who seek ordination.
Last June, Schoenborn personally presented the Vatican with a lay initiative signed by prominent Austrian Catholics calling for the celibacy rule to be abolished and for married men to be allowed to become priests.
In the days following Schoenborn's editorial this week, several prominent prelates in Germany and at the Vatican shot down any suggestion that the celibacy rule had anything to do with the scandal, a point echoed Sunday by the Vatican newspaper, L'Osservatore Romano.
''It's been established that there's no link,'' said the article by Bishop Giuseppe Versaldi, an emeritus professor of canon law and psychology at the Pontifical Gregorian University in Rome.
''First off, it's known that sexual abuse of minors is more widespread among lay people and those who are married than in the celibate priesthood,'' he wrote. ''Secondly, research has shown that priests guilty of abuse had long before stopped observing celibacy.''
One of the more asinine things I have ever read on FR. As you have no way of knowing such a thing, we see where your prejudices lie. I, on the other hand have known personally hundreds of priests. All of them are "normal."
Paul wrote most of the New Testament, and he was the only Apostle Jesus made a special trip for. Do you reject Paul?
No, I do not reject Paul. I believe that the examples of Peter and Paul offer two equally acceptable paths for clerics and laymen with regard to celibacy/ marriage.
Do you reject Peter?
SnakeDoc
I don't like that as a possibility.
Honestly, it doesn't sound like very "good news" for Peter's wife.
I can appreciate that, but there's another view that says that the role of a leader is to "equip the saints" for the work of the ministry.
In other words, the pastor shouldn't be doing everything, he should be training others to do a lot of it.
It also seems odd to me that the idea "perfection" involves NOT having a wife and children.
Paul also said: "If anyone does not know how to manage his own family, how can he take care of God's church?"
Actually, this being America, I AM entitled to an opinion.
But it won't mean much to anybody that matters in the debate.
We can let others be the judge of that.
Certainly a lot of sexual deviants get married. But a man's family life is relevant to the qualifications of a church leader.
In fact, the apostle Paul himself said as much:
"If anyone does not know how to manage his own family, how can he take care of God's church?"
In fact, it's not 100%, but you've come dangerously close to calling the apostle Paul an idiot.
You might also have a look at Matthew chapter 5.
You will always have an opinion in my book. I have worked to hard for the morons to understand how hard the training is.
You test right and tough or pussy europe left. Call it.
Thanks.
I owe Nevada a huge release. I’ll stop there for now. I owe the money just a hare.
Priestly celibacy in the Catholic Church, has been practiced from the earliest centuries ref. It was not practiced by the lay people, except by those who are not married. Why is that so difficult to understand?
Amen!!! That IS the point isn't it? Why some think going into the ministry will magically cure all their sinful desires, I do not know. It is not the "calling" itself, but the surrendering of the called to be completely yielded to God in ALL things. This is an aspiration for all Christians and not just in an open ministerial role.
I am so sorry to hear about your brother. I hope you and your family have found comfort and healing in the Lord.
I was commenting on the scripture passage said by Paul that you quoted to defend the idea of celibacy. You cannot have it both ways. You want to assume Paul is recommending a life without marriage (and, of course, celibacy) as the ideal for a priest, yet you leave out where he is speaking to both men AND women and he mentioned it was because:
I Corinthians 7:25 Now about virgins: I have no command from the Lord, but I give a judgment as one who by the Lord's mercy is trustworthy. 26Because of the present crisis, I think that it is good for you to remain as you are.
So, Paul was not just speaking to non-lay people. That was my point, that if Paul's recommendations were meant for all time, we would probably not be here speaking as Christians. So that's why I don't think he meant it for us for all time, but only because of the present time. Not difficult at all to understand, unless one wants to be obstinate and say they are correct and everybody else is wrong-headed about this subject.
Any Priest could go remove his collar go out into society, meet someone and have an evening or an affair and no one would be the wiser. The fact they chose CHILDREN makes them pedophiles.
Ditto for Protestant ministers, Jewish rabbis and Muslim imams, who don't need to remove any collars.
OH absolutely. Ditto for anyone who does this. I was responding to the Catholic church.
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.