O
otm
Guest
The Barrister:
Additionally, any one who wants to be a priest and does not want to take a vow of celibacy, and wants the Church to change the rules for them, is acting with the wrong intent in his heart.
I would respectfully disagree that there is “wrong intent”. The other rites allow a married preisthood; it is a rule of the Roman rite that we do not. I would say that he is out of luck. But wrong intent sounds a little too close to either “sinful” or “failing to agree wtih a doctrine”, neither of which it is.
And once you open the “celibacy” door, what then? Can they have multiple sexual partners? Can they divorce and remarry? Can they marry someone who is not Catholic? What if the wife decides to change her religious affiliation? What if the wife decides she wants to raise the kids to be Jewish or Muslim? What if he is assigned by his bishop to go to Juneau and she doesn’t want to live further north than Nashville? What if his wife insists on having an abortion? What if she has an affair?
And our Eastern rite brothers have the same problems, which I would hazard a guess, are minimal or non-existent. We don’t have the rule because it avoids those problems; we have the rule because celibacy is to be highly prized. Please don’t make up straw man arguments to answer a question not asked.
My purpose in wiriting is to state that it is better to promote celibacy as the best option, and make it thus. Many priests would choose it, were they given the choice now. Many who might be priests would also choose it. Right now, it is not a choice.
I don’t think that making celibacy optional, and promoting it as the best option, is opening any doors at all, or bumping up against any tip of the iceburg.