Get Rid of the Celibacy Requirement

  • Thread starter Thread starter CampionTheChampion
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Phemie said:
We do have married priests in the Latin Rite. They are converts who were ministers/priests in their other religion.
Click to expand...
You’re right…we do have married priests in the Roman Rite. Today there is an exception process associated with that… I’d like to see it go mainstream.
 
No. Do NOT get rid of the celibacy requirement. It is an immemorial custom which has immense spiritual value, and is very beautiful. Allowing for the ordination of married men will not make things better. A married priest has told me himself that the Church does NKT need more married priests. That from a married priest HIMSELF!
 
I have no problem with removing the celibacy requirement for priests, but don’t do it to fix the sex abuse crisis.

The sex abuse problem is a chastity problem. We all know that married men are not immune to chastity challenges.
 
If a priest wants to have sex, his first choice isn’t going to be a child, its going to be ditching the collar and going down to the local bar. Studies shows that rates of sexual assault do not vary between married vs celibate clergy. Protestant churches with married clergy have just as much of an issue with child molestation and sexual assault, the only difference is the media doesn’t cover them like they do the Catholics. Getting rid of celibacy won’t solve the problem. Getting rid of homosexual clergy should be the priority and stronger vetting of seminary candidates should be our next steps.
 
I think you’ve given the most convincing argument for why married priesthood might help. Up to this point the arguments I’ve heard have been unconvincing.

The Latin Church is open to non-celibate men. Our diocese has a married man who converted from Lutheranism. I think looking at such situations helps us to see that it is possible and it doesn’t undermine the priesthood.

However… my knee jerk when people make it seem like married men don’t abuse children is to say: NOPE. Let’s not change. But when approached as you approached it I can see the benefits.
 
@(name removed by moderator) I respect your viewpoint, but let me offer a counter: free housing (yes, some rectories will need remodeling), free education at the nearest Catholic k-12 school, and a car paid by for by the diocese. Those are HUGE family expenses they wouldn’t have to pay for. I don’t think any priests will be getting rich here, but I think it’s definitely feasible.
 
Because it is what the Church teaches. To quote the Vatican, ““The Church, while profoundly respecting the persons in question, cannot admit to the seminary or to holy orders those who practice homosexuality, present deep-seated homosexual tendencies or support the so-called ‘gay culture.”
 
This simply isn’t true. I’ve been parts of both Catholic and Protestant parishes. As a Protestant, I never had any trouble getting help from a minister when I needed it. They were always available during office hours, and often by phone or e-mail otherwise. Once, when I needed gas money, the minister delivered it himself! In the Catholic Church, I found that the best - often the only - time I could reach a priest was during confession or after Mass - for a very few minutes. When my father passed away, the hospital chaplain tried every parish in town to find a priest. All were busy, most didn’t answer. This in a fairly good-sized city with many parishes, on a week night, and not a holy day. He finally came up with two, but that’s another story.

The reason why, I believe, is quite simple. In spite of the fact that there are many more Protestant churches here than Catholic, there are also many, many more ministers than priests. There are enough ministers to know their congregants by name, know their problems, and care for them, while priests are little more than consecrators of the Eucharist. It’s not their fault. There are simply too few of them. And this will only continue and get worse.
 
There are less men with same sex attraction entering the priesthood than in the past.

In the past, homosexuals were pretty much in the closet and often a young homosexual man saw the priesthood as the only viable career option.

Today as homosexuals are out in the open and most states prohibit discrimination against homosexuals, their options are open and the priesthood is less attractive

Jim
 
True. Some sort of mileage reimbursement for sure though. That’s the standard where I am, at least. Point is, I think we could figure out the financial side of it.
 
Guest1 said:
Why the need to get rid of homosexual priests?
Click to expand...
Let’s assume that 20% of today’s priests are homosexual. 80% of the abused in the John Jay report were teen age boys. So 80% of the crime was committed by members of the 20% (understanding that not all were abusers).
Removing the 20% would result in an 80% reduction in assaults.
 
Last edited:
mrsdizzyd said:
The sex abuse problem is a chastity problem. We all know that married men are not immune to chastity challenges.
Click to expand...
While I think that chastity is an issue (not celibacy , not homosexuality , or even pedophilia) it’s an issue with the abuse of power. Exploiting the vulnerable in a sexual way is the just an issue that grabs headlines (money might be another). There even more incidents of priests and bishops being jerks and not held accountable. I guess I need to add myself to the list condemning clericalism. I think as a cradle Catholic I’m so acclimated to it I ignore it when I see it. But when a priest abuses his authority in a way that has nothing to do with chastity he maybe more likely to abuse in non-chaste ways or be all pharisaical and think, “At least I’m not a homo or pedo.” I deal with abusers a lot and they can justify their behavior or blame others like no one else.
 
I agree that there also seems to be a power and control dynamic at play especially with the abuse of seminarians. Still, I think that being a “jerk” or “bully” would be the extent of the abuse if chastity were not also a major issue.
 
Last edited:
Guest1 said:
@MikeInVA
But not all homosexuals are attracted to teenagers.
Click to expand...
And not all child abusers are pedophiles.

If we think that screening out candidates who are SSA or attracted to children we are still left with the sociopaths that will exploit others without a second thought. The priests and bishops (them especially) did this for so long because they created an environment that protected the abuser not the victim.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top