[Androcles]

I dislike Kung, but he is right regarding the origins of the celibacy rule. It was a comparatively late development and has been unevenly enforced. Within the Catholic communion for instance, for the last few hundred years Maronites have been permitted married clergy with a gentlements agreement they cannot progress higher in the church once married.

I don’t have an issue with married clergy theologically, but I suspect we’d see some awful instances of priests unable to keep distance between them and their flocks or finding it even harder to do so.

As to whether it would magically fix the pedophile scandal - I doubt it. The anglicans have had married clergy yet there’s been plenty of dubious instances within their ranks and within other bodies. As ever, most of this just comes from sick twisted perverts driven by lust or power, taking shelter within a respected institution and using it as cover.

[vladimir998]

You wrote:

“Within the Catholic communion for instance, for the last few hundred years Maronites have been permitted married clergy with a gentlements agreement they cannot progress higher in the church once married.”

I think they always had married priests and celibate bishops.

[A.A. Cunningham]

I dislike Kung, but he is right regarding the origins of the celibacy rule. It was a comparatively late development and has been unevenly enforced.

You and the disgraced Kung are both quite mistaken.