Sink,
Did you write this piece of am-church agitprop?
http://www.mlive.com/printer/printer.ssf?/xml/story.ssf/html_standard.xsl?/base/news-0/1056984432297850.xml
Married priests' ordainment will have far-reaching implications
Monday, June 30, 2003
By PAUL F. HUGHES-CROMWICK
Despite the near complete lack of coverage concerning married priests being ordained into the Roman Catholic Church with the approval of the bishop of Lansing, I believe this to be a watershed religious event, perhaps the most significant in this 40-something Catholic's life. (On May 26 The News carried a brief Associated Press feed on page B3.) I predict three outcomes stemming from this authorization will have far-reaching implications.
First, married priests will be overwhelmingly welcomed into their respective parishes. (According to the AP article, the Diocese of Lansing will ordain three married Catholic priests; there will be about 200 nation-wide.) Sure, the novelty will upset traditionalists, but others, especially married parishioners who never fully understood or believed in the church's prohibition, will be very comfortable with the change and joyful about new opportunities. One can easily imagine a more "normal" social milieu taking root between parishioners and their priest's family. (When's the last time you invited your priest to dinner or golfing?) This will result in the laity accepting and even demanding married priests in growing numbers.
Second, current priests will obviously react to this development, but how do we predict their sentiments? For some, perhaps most, the change will be greeted by angst and disdain. They will see such a change as yet another cultural pathology only this time striking very near to home. They will profess that this change has no place in dealing with the grave problems the Church confronts - everything from a loss of moral authority because of pedophile scandals, to the resulting monetary strains from ongoing litigation settlements, to the central underlying crisis of too few priest candidates. But others, including many priests I have known over the years, will gladly accept this overdue policy. And let's be frank: some priests will advocate for their own permission to marry in the fullness of time. These developments will exert even greater pressure for overall acceptance of married priests.
Third, priestly "first ladies" will be accepted by most parishioners and their roles in the church will evolve and be transformed into wonderful benefits for the faithful. As above, there will certainly be resistance by parishioners who will have difficulty accepting the basic notion of married priests, let alone involvement, and assistance, from their spouses. But over time it is difficult to argue that their strong participation won't be welcomed if not demanded. Their potential for meaningful contributions is large indeed. This experience will add further to the pressure for married priest acceptance, and who knows, may even lay the ground work for female ordination. (God forbid!)
My hypothesis is that press coverage of this event mirrors the likely Diocese (and Vatican) perspective that this change represents an exception, used in the past under strict conditions, to a well-established prohibition. Why devote attention to a footnote in church history? From my vantage point, however, there is reason to believe that the faithful will view this "exception" not as an arcane, rarely exercised prerogative of the church but instead as a key stepping stone to rescission of the rule - an outcome that might spawn even more revolutionary changes in the Catholic Church, especially during the reign of Pope John Paul II's successor.
Paul F. Hughes-Cromwick is a resident of Ann Arbor. News readers can contribute essays of general interest to Other Voices. Please call the editorial page editor at (734) 994-6764.