Irish bishop urges end to celibacy in clergy

[Roy5]

An interesting and informative article in today’s NY Times (9-18) on the impact of the sexual scandals in Ireland and its devastating impact upon the church in Ireland. I have detected a bias against the Times here on CAF, but whatever else no daily newspaper covers as many matters at length as does the Times. I have received it for many years and still look forward to reading it each morning.

I believe that priests should be free to choose celibacy or marriage. Why? Many reasons, but here are five.

1. Marriage is - in my view - a natural desire of most people. We are equipped physically by God to be married, so the Lord must have approved of it for everyone.

 2. The first commandment in the Bible is "be fruitful and multiply". There is a certain sense in which enforced celibacy might be viewed as a form of birth control. God also has provided an instinct to become parents - at least within most people. 

 3. Priests, with rare exceptions and like the rest of us, need intimacy with someone. I have found that many priests seem essentially lonely, especially as they grow older. God gave Eve to Adam, and that is a pattern that the Lord seemed to approve. (Not that I believe in the Adam/Eve story literally, but as an important parable with a moral.)

 4. I know that many will scream NO!, but I believe that celibacy has some relationship to the sexual scandals. Some men (and women, too, of course) cannot resist the strong natural force we call the sex drive. I believe that priests, if married, would have a normal sexual outlet and not be tempted into sex with youth. Many people (more than we assume probably) have the capacity to be bisexual, and if sex with a woman is not available they may fall victim to lust and seek sex with someone more available.

 5. Allowing marriage of priests would help relieve the priest shortage. Probably the biggest barrier to the call to ordination is the requirement of celibacy. Normal, healthy young men are turned away. In an earlier age the culture was very different.  

 There are perhaps 300,000 Protestant ministers in the USA, perhaps even more, possible 5-6 times the number of Catholic priests. There are problems among Protestant clergy, of course, as people are human whatever their religion. But the Protestant experience with married clergy certainly has been positive enough so that a celibacy requirement is never even weighed among therm. Some do remain celibate by choice. 

  God bless everybody - no exceptions.

 

[ConstantineTG]

There’s no doubt the married priests = safe children argument is incredibly flawed. If you are a child abuser, marriage won’t stop you - neither will not being a priest - and it’s highly likely that some people are simply against the practice of celibacy and the recent scandals lend weight to the argument.

True, but if you have married men entering the priesthood, then you have more men to choose from. The Church can be more selective.

 

[ConstantineTG]

1. If priests were allowed to marry, is there a canon law that states it must be prior to ordination?

Not sure if its in a Canon but its been a longstanding Tradition. Given that, Canon Law can’t even trump that kind of tradition. In traditions that has married priests, diaconal ordination follows the wedding. I’ve heard some instances that the ordination happens in the same ceremony, after the marriage has been sacramentalized.

…And if that is the case, how would Seminary work? Would wives accompany their husbands to school, or would it be more of a ‘night-class’ approach?

Its like regular school where the man is married.

1. Would this mean bishops have to remain celibate?

Yes. In the East, Bishops are chosen from monastics, or even diocesan priests who chose to remain celibate. If the discipline changes in the West, there are still the Religious Orders to find candidates to the Episcopate and those who even though they are diocesan, have chosen to remain celibate.

I know the ordered clergy and brothers/sisters would remain celibate, I think, according to their charism, but AFAIK there has never been a licitly married Pope in St. Peter’s chair? Perhaps awesome brother JR could clarify…

Yes, there’s even a father-and-son Pope.

EDIT: Ditto on the comments on clibacy and child abuse, BTW: Has and had nothing to do with it. Let’s get some of those numbers for public schools before criticizing there.

 

[louis91766]

True, but if you have married men entering the priesthood, then you have more men to choose from. The Church can be more selective.

This is a good point.

 

[louis91766]

…AFAIK there has never been a licitly married Pope in St. Peter’s chair?

There have been 39 Popes who were married. See:
johnshuster.com/thirtynine_popes.htm

 

[SanAgustin]

 4. I know that many will scream NO!, but I believe that celibacy has some relationship to the sexual scandals. Some men (and women, too, of course) cannot resist the strong natural force we call the sex drive.** I believe that priests, if married, would have a normal sexual outlet and not be tempted into sex with youth.**

This is totally false, if you are a pedophile, your sexual relationship with your wife will likely not help you much to your sexual attraction to minors at all. There’s not study to back up that claim, although in a simplistic way it “makes sense” (and please, I’m not calling you simplistic. I mean to say what you are saying seems self evident, but it is not backed up with statistics and studies).

 

[NewEnglandPriest]

1. Marriage is - in my view - a natural desire of most people. We are equipped physically by God to be married, so the Lord must have approved of it for everyone.
2. The first commandment in the Bible is “be fruitful and multiply”. There is a certain sense in which enforced celibacy might be viewed as a form of birth control. God also has provided an instinct to become parents - at least within most people.

Do you not believe God calls anyone to celibacy?

1. Priests, with rare exceptions and like the rest of us, need intimacy with someone. I have found that many priests seem essentially lonely, especially as they grow older. God gave Eve to Adam, and that is a pattern that the Lord seemed to approve. (Not that I believe in the Adam/Eve story literally, but as an important parable with a moral.)

Being alone and being lonely are two different things. Do older single people seem as lonely to you or is it just priests that appear lonely to you?

1. I know that many will scream NO!, but I believe that celibacy has some relationship to the sexual scandals. Some men (and women, too, of course) cannot resist the strong natural force we call the sex drive. I believe that priests, if married, would have a normal sexual outlet and not be tempted into sex with youth. Many people (more than we assume probably) have the capacity to be bisexual, and if sex with a woman is not available they may fall victim to lust and seek sex with someone more available.

Marriage is not a “sexual outlet.” People who see it as such end up divorced and applying for an annulment.
Secondly, the idea that celibacy turns someone into a sexual predator is not only insulting but also rather silly. Unmarried people who aren’t dating don’t suddenly start trying to manipulate vulnerable youth.

1. Allowing marriage of priests would help relieve the priest shortage. Probably the biggest barrier to the call to ordination is the requirement of celibacy. Normal, healthy young men are turned away. In an earlier age the culture was very different.

This is the most interesting argument in the pro-married priests camp. How true it is, well, that’s up for debate. Protestant denominations with married clergy are suffering a decline in numbers as well.

 

[louis91766]

This is totally false, if you are a pedophile, your sexual relationship with your wife will likely not help you much to your sexual attraction to minors at all. There’s not study to back up that claim, although in a simplistic way it “makes sense” (and please, I’m not calling you simplistic. I mean to say what you are saying seems self evident, but it is not backed up with statistics and studies).

Who said so?
Expert sociologists, such as Bill Donohue, who has a doctorate in sociology, say differently. According to the expert Bill Donohue:
“homosexuals are disproportionately represented among child molesters.” Statistically, he said, the evidence for a “link between homosexuality and the sexual abuse of minors” in the general population is “overwhelming.”
By requiring marriage for the priesthood, you would be filtering out a large number of homosexuals who would not want to be married to a woman. By having fewer homosexuals, you would then have fewer child molesters. this follows from what Bill Donohue has said. BTW, in addition to having a doctorate in sociology, Bill is the head of the Catholic League and he knows his business. He is also on the board of advisers of the Washington Legal Foundation, the Howard Center for Family, Religion & Society, Society of Catholic Social Scientists, Catholics United for the Faith, Ave Maria Institute, the Christian Film & Television Commission and Catholic War Veterans. He received the 2005 St. Thomas More Award for Catholic Citizenship from Catholic Citizens of Illinois.
catholiconline.com/national/national_story.php?id=37507

 

[SanAgustin]

Who said so?
Expert sociologists, such as Bill Donohue, who has a doctorate in sociology, say differently. According to the expert Bill Donohue:
“homosexuals are disproportionately represented among child molesters.” Statistically, he said, the evidence for a “link between homosexuality and the sexual abuse of minors” in the general population is “overwhelming.”
By requiring marriage for the priesthood, you would be filtering out a large number of homosexuals who would not want to be married to a woman.

Hi Louis;

Several problems with your response;

1. Roy5 was not talking about homosexuals, he said;

but I believe that celibacy has some relationship to the sexual scandals. Some men (and women, too, of course) cannot resist the strong natural force we call the sex drive. I believe that priests, if married, would have a normal sexual outlet and not be tempted into sex with youth.

And no, nothing shows that if you have sexual tendencies toward young children, being married in to a woman is going to lessen or placate your disordered and illegal attraction.

That’s what I was responding to.

1. I won’t get much into your point about homosexuality and pedophilia, that wasn’t what I was talking about, if confused on my point re-read (1) and Roy’s original point. However, I’m not sure that studies show what you are saying to be true.
2. I’m familiar with Mr. Donahue, however I don’t believe a sociology is a field that would really speak with much authority and credibility on the original matter explained in (1), or the new matter you bring up in (2)

Hope this clarifies my point, God bless!

 

[louis91766]

Hi Louis;

Several problems with your response;

1. Roy5 was not talking about homosexuals, he said;

And no, nothing shows that if you have sexual tendencies toward young children, being married in to a woman is going to lessen or placate your disordered and illegal attraction.

That’s what I was responding to.

1. I won’t get much into your point about homosexuality and pedophilia, that wasn’t what I was talking about, if confused on my point re-read (1) and Roy’s original point. However, I’m not sure that studies show what you are saying to be true.
2. I’m familiar with Mr. Donahue, however I don’t believe a sociology is a field that would really speak with much authority and credibility on the original matter explained in (1), or the new matter you bring up in (2)

Hope this clarifies my point, God bless!

But what percentage of homosexuals would want to be married to a woman? And how would that compare with the percentage of heterosexuals who would want to be married to a woman.
I suspect it is a smaller percentage of homosexuals who would want to be married.
By requiring married priests, do you agree that it would reduce somewhat the number of homosexuals in the clergy, or would you disagree with that?

 

[TevereNauta]

Not sure if its in a Canon but its been a longstanding Tradition. Given that, Canon Law can’t even trump that kind of tradition. In traditions that has married priests, diaconal ordination follows the wedding. I’ve heard some instances that the ordination happens in the same ceremony, after the marriage has been sacramentalized…

Its like regular school where the man is married…

Yes. In the East, Bishops are chosen from monastics, or even diocesan priests who chose to remain celibate. If the discipline changes in the West, there are still the Religious Orders to find candidates to the Episcopate and those who even though they are diocesan, have chosen to remain celibate…

Yes, there’s even a father-and-son Pope.

All very solidly said Constantine, I agree totally. I think when stated this rationally, looking at the historical basis you well laid out (I am very familiar with history, but aside from the Medici Popes had no idea there was ever a family relationship so close as a father and son combination!) it is only common sense to open up the Dioscesan priesthood to married men. I think your keenest point in this regard is having a larger pool of men to choose from, hence one can get better sacerdotal material. At least, as far as our day and age go, the discipline of a celibate Disocesan priesthood needs to be relaxed. That is one of the many great things about the Church, that it can adapt to each age accordingly while keeping the dogma in tact. And as you point out, this would have nothing to do with celibate religious orders.

So seminary, rather than the sort of boarding school it is now, would simply be a regular school like a normal college? Makes sense.

On a related note Constantine you seem like a reaosnable and learned fellow…let me ask a follow up question, two-parter, your opinion: would allowing women into the diaconate satisfy the Catholics who want to see a greater role of women in the Church, and would it violate dogma?

 

[Roy5]

A couple quick responses

1. Most sexual scandals involving priests were not related to pedophilia. The overwhelming majority of victims were teenage boys.

2. No one is suggesting that priests should be required to marry. Of course not. No Protestants require that their clergy marry, and some never do.

3. There seems to be evidence that a higher percentage of priests are gay than in the rest of the population. This could be for various reasons, among them: (a) a sincere hope to evade homosexual practice by taking the vow of celibacy; (b) the desire to find a profession that provides dignity in a society where 'gayness' is not always respected; (c) no one will push a priest to be married or wonder why he isn't you married; (d) the attraction of an all-male fraternity; (e) the attraction of vestments, liturgy, etc - a strong artistic side, perhaps. The arts (e. g., theatre) seem to attract a higher percentage of gays.

 4. I read an article in some magazine not long ago that indicated that some Protestant denominations have more ministers than they can place in churches. 

 5. Thousands of Catholic priests have left the priesthood to marry. Such a waste of dedicated talent that could been of enormous assistance to the parishes.

 

[TevereNauta]

Roy—I think you make fine points, except perhaps for 3(e). I’ve heard that argument before, but I really can’t bring myself to think that Liturgy is an outlet for, well, lack of a better term, flamboyantly ‘artistic’ homosexuals. I can only speak from experience, but I’ve never had an outrageously effeminate priest along the lines of someone singing show tunes—lisp and all—or something. I can see a homosexual using the priesthood as cover, if you will, however it is also true that many homosexuals (especially famous ones) get married to use their spouse as a ‘beard’.

Regarding point 1, it’s a tough one, because that is correct. Needless to say, there is abuse in other faith communities as well, I recently heard about a famous preacher from the American South who was abusing numerous boys. But indeed it does make sense that a homosexual man would be most likely to abuse a post-pubescent male (ephebophilia) and hence large numbers of gays would mean such abuse is more likely.

If anything, I suspect opening up the Dioscesan Priesthood to married men will indeed make it a more masculine, conservative institution, besides the added bonuses of having more candidates. Also, simply put, the larger pool of candidates means that we might be able to negate the process of homosexuals using the priesthood as a sort of cover.

 

[PbloPicasso]

A couple quick responses

1. Most sexual scandals involving priests were not related to pedophilia. The overwhelming majority of victims were teenage boys.

.

This site operates by exercising the police state laws as once did in the middle ages. Freedom of speech is not allowed and therefore one can barely say what’s really on their mind without degradation of the meaning of ones writing.

I skipped the rest of your post because I only want to respond to this aspect of the same ole same ole post I see everywhere.

And old CSM (command sergeant major) would tell us when me met in Battalion formation, particularly after someone got into serious trouble, like fighting, lying, cheating, stealing, particularly DUIs, “there ain’t no right way to do wrong”. I’ve heard this same Balonie and I’m sorry, but it really doesn’t matter. I was 18 years old when I was attacked by a priest. I was a very naive 18 year old… I was no different than 16 old boys, in fact, many of them were probably more “experienced” and less naive. I saw the results of victims of abuse. Since when do we excuse rapist or men from having sex with our daughters and sons when they’re teenagers?

The study’s prove that homosexuals are more likely to commit these acts in the first place. This is the same lame argument old catholics try to defend and ancient discipline that is no longer necessary in our civilized society. In fact, it wasn’t required until almost a thousand years after Jesus time. there are so many things that Catholics love to pull out of their Catholic bags to say because someone told them to say it in response to these questions. The truth is that the Latin rite clergy are guilty of manipulating everything about the history of celibacy, for one. There are many things that have changed over the centuries, one being how often we receive. Another is confession, the number of times a person could go to confession, was no where near what we see today. One might be lucky to confess once in a life time. That’s all that was permitted. Another thing is that many adults as a result of confession being limited waited until later in life to get baptized. Marriage was no as controlled as we see today.

As far as trying to make some sort of excuse for those perverts that committed the atrocities they’re guilty of, we need to simply write them off as sinful h_____ and make them turn to God as laymen for mercy. That’s what used to happen in the old days of the Church. I’m for excommunicating divorce, gay, lesbian, h_____, Particularly bad priests and religious. They have a special place waiting for them if they don’t repent from their wicked ways. Charity is telling them to leave and strip them of all their faculties permanently. Wash our hands from them.

Have you never seen what people go through when they’ve been raped or molested? God help us all to better understand the permanent damage inflicted on victims of sex crimes. Technically, if someone molested my 13 year old boy or girl, it’s not pedophila. True, but the definition is changing and the play on words make Catholics sound and look like liars. We look like we’re trying to cover the dirty sticking truth.

There ain’t no right way to do wrong.

Thanks for listening to a teenage victim. Oh, I was a seminarian when he did it… I was asleep and woke up, jumped up and ran. But he had already done some of his stuff by the time I woke up and is now sitting pretty up in Virginia, teaching other students in college and has the audacity to have written a professional artical on “Ethics”. Shame on the bishop that never reached out to me or helped me with therapy. I have serious problems believing he made it to greener pastures, in spite of the other lame excuses presented to me over the years. If I could figure out that covering up sin is wrong, how could a man in his 70’s not realize it?

 

[PbloPicasso]

A couple quick responses

2. No one is suggesting that priests should be required to marry. Of course not. No Protestants require that their clergy marry, and some never do.

3. There seems to be evidence that a higher percentage of priests are gay than in the rest of the population. This could be for various reasons, among them: (a) a sincere hope to evade homosexual practice by taking the vow of celibacy; (b) the desire to find a profession that provides dignity in a society where 'gayness' is not always respected; (c) no one will push a priest to be married or wonder why he isn't you married; (d) the attraction of an all-male fraternity; (e) the attraction of vestments, liturgy, etc - a strong artistic side, perhaps. The arts (e. g., theatre) seem to attract a higher percentage of gays.

 4. I read an article in some magazine not long ago that indicated that some Protestant denominations have more ministers than they can place in churches. 

 5. Thousands of Catholic priests have left the priesthood to marry. Such a waste of dedicated talent that could been of enormous assistance to the parishes.

Responses by number
2. Sure, but in my previous church unmarried preachers never became permanent preachers for long. Unless they simply couldn’t find a married one, or they were an anti-

1. Are there more homosexuals hiding in the midst of the priesthood? That’s debatable. However, I do know that there WAS an environment somewhat conducive towards the homosexual lifestyle when I was in the seminary in the late 70’s early 80’s. I believe it blew up in their face though. The homosexuals I knew were given the boot. However, I personally saw the ramifications of men that fell prey to the practicing homosexuals. One young man, before I arrived was gang raped by seminarians. Theses are subjects that you never hear about because they are so scandalous. The seminarian went through shock therapy. In fact, there were 2 men that had gone through shock therapy, both former seminarians, both in serious need of help. One day, I will ask one fo the monks what happened to them.

now 3.c) ordain priest and deacons are never allowed to marry once they are ordained. Even if one is married, an ordained can never remarry… not without an impossible dispensation from Rome.
And 3 e) I’m sorry for the following word choice… plain ordinary dumb - it doesn’t deserve a response. But again, I understand from some people that think so bigoted. Just to use me as one who feels drawn to the liturgical ministry.

1. that depends on who and what denomination you’re speaking about. However, there are far more Protestant ministers per congregations than in the Catholic Church right now.
2. Refer to my comments to 3 c). misguided, but understandable.

 

[ProVobis]

This is a good point.

Out of 800 million or so Catholic men in the world, certainly you can find more single men to fit the priesthood. But why stop at married men to include in your pool, why not lower the minimum age and remove other restrictions?

 

[PbloPicasso]

Out of 800 million or so Catholic men in the world, certainly you can find more single men to fit the priesthood. But why stop at married men to include in your pool, why not lower the minimum age and remove other restrictions?

What kind of restrictions do you want to “lower”?

 

[hawkeye]

There’s no doubt the married priests = safe children argument is incredibly flawed. If you are a child abuser, marriage won’t stop you - neither will not being a priest - and it’s highly likely that some people are simply against the practice of celibacy and the recent scandals lend weight to the argument.

I agree some priests may have joined the priesthood because they were either pedophiles or hebephiles, and the priesthood not only gave them ready access to children but opportunities to groom them. It has been established that the vast majority of child abusers neither seek nor except help because they don’t see anything wrong with what they do, and the only way to stop a child abuser is deny them access to children. Every profession or vocation that involves working with children or young people has stringent vetting procedures and child protection policies. They are not impervious and sometimes get through the net because they are so adept at covering their tracks and presenting themselves trustworthy people. However, they are in place and Prevention is better than cure and for the sake of the safety of our children and young people, we cannot afford to delude ourselves an end to celibacy will prevent child abuse. It’s not enough. The implementation of stringent child protection policies and vetting procedures make it more difficult for child abusers to have access to children. In addition, there should also be a definite consequence for child abuse. I see these as more effective measure in preventing child abuse than an end to celibacy. Even if priests did marry, these measures would still necessary in order to prevent child abuse, and in these areas I feel the Church has been wanting.

Agreed…