Cardinal: Married Catholic priests a possibility

[Valmy]

The difference is, of course, that the Church (unlike say Penn State) is supposed to be a font of morality

Heh.  Joe Paterno's program was supposed to be the most moral upstanding college football program out there.

Though I guess that is sort of like saying the most truthful and honest politician out there.

[alfred russel]

Then why were you taking such issue with my statement which you specifically quoted as follows?

There simply isn't a religious reason, based on Christian doctrine, for unmarried priests. Or at least, I've never heard any.

[Emphasis added]

You claimed:

I posted one, others have posted others, and for some reason you aren't content to just disagree with them, but are apparently denying their validity as reasons altogether.

Are you now saying you were wrong and you haven't actually posted any? If so, we aren't disagreeing, right?

I sort of think we are, but I really can't really justify continuing an argument about a religion I don't like on an issue I think it is stupid regarding whether its reasons for the policy are completely unjustified or just really bad.     

[Razgovory]

On the priests abusing boys front, I'm quite willing to believe that the problem is statistically no worse than in any other comparable religion or profession in terms of numbers. I have no idea what the statistics say, but I can believe it. What makes it a true problem for the Church was of course its institutional response - to cover it up, to move abusing priests about.

It is plausable that this response was exacerbated by two factors: (1) a staffing shortage; and (2) the indulgence with which "sexual sinning" was viewed by the Church.

It is further plausable that both of these are exacerbated by the celebacy thing.

The church is hardly the only organization to have an institutional response of covering it up.  As time has gone by organization after organization from Penn State to the Boy Scouts have had this problem.  I imagine that you'll find that institutions defending their members from accusations is more common then not.

I'm not claiming that the Church is the only organization with this problem.

The difference is, of course, that the Church (unlike say Penn State) is supposed to be a font of morality - indeed, claims to be the font of morality. So a scandal of this sort bites harder.

The other issues - whether that scandal is made more prevelant or likely by celibacy - I find plausable, but of course, by its nature such a thing is hard to prove.

I think these stories resonate because of the morality angle and the trust angle.  I don't think celibacy factors into it really.  These men abused young boys because they were attracted to young boys.  If they were programers or lawyers or butcher or bakers they'd still be attracted to children.  If their colleagues were married I think you'd still have problems with cover ups organizations tend to defend their members and most people are reluctant to throw a friend under the bus even if they deserve it.

[Martinus]

Hey, Malt, it is celibacy.

Maybe Malthus is talking about abstaining from celery?

[garbon]

Hey, Malt, it is celibacy.

Maybe Malthus is talking about abstaining from celery?

I'm thinking abstaining from celebrity gossip.

[CountDeMoney]

I am not talking about starting a global crusade but more of what would happen if you found out one of your work colleagues is molesting kids. Would you be happy to look away and have it covered up?

I am not a very good example as I had pretty strong feeling about this long before I had kids since I worked with molested kids.  In fact I sort of lost it on this board a few times about things like this back in the day

And it's not like I've never been present at rape interviews in the Pediatrics ER or anything.  But let's not stop the Martinus Express from blowing past the station and going straight to Shrillsville.

[Sheilbh]

It is plausable that this response was exacerbated by two factors: (1) a staffing shortage; and (2) the indulgence with which "sexual sinning" was viewed by the Church.

On point 1 I think you're wrong. The overwhelming majority of these cases came before the shortage of priests or seminarians. As I think the cover up's are far more about an abuse of power and the protection of an institution over the vulnerable than anything else. The Church was hardly unique in that, as I've said, but is perhaps uniquely harmed by it because it undermines their moral credibility.

Rod Dreher has a line that I thinks very true. In the same way that 'honour' and 'glory' seemed like meaningless concepts next to the village WW1 memorial, so the concepts of 'holiness' and 'priesthood' were seriously emptied by the child abuse and the coverups.

Malthus, all your references go back to scripture. But in catholicism scripture isn't the only source of doctrine: tradition also is one, as well as major church councils. For instance, while I am aware that some popes were married, the vast majority have not been, and that crosses all the historically documented eras as well as the last 1000 years or so. The preference for celibate clergy is longstanding and well established.

Peter was married. Aside from that there are early 4th century Church Councils that prohibit bishops from marrying and they mention that the Roman Rite already had a tradition of total clerical celibacy.

Often it was a tool for the enforcement of the Roman Church and a tool of Papal reform. For example in Northern Italy (especially Lombardia and areas ruled by Ravenna) there was a tolerance of priests with concubines. In the late dark ages there were popular revolts against local elites and the priests because this was viewed as sullying the priestly office (how could the same hands that performed transubstantiation - a routine miracle - also wander lustfully on a woman?). The Popes sent representatives who not only sided with the populist revolts (a recurring theme in Papal history) but used them as a way of enforcing Roman rite practices and unity in the region and reforming the Papacy in Rome. Similarly in their treatment of the Mozarabic rite in Spain.

[Neil]

We already know what Martinus would do if he ever saw someone molesting kids:  Speak passionately in their defence, provided that they're not with the Catholic Church.

[CountDeMoney]

We already know what Martinus would do if he ever saw someone molesting kids:  Speak passionately in their defence, provided that they're not with the Catholic Church.

'But he's a member of the Academy!  He's an artist!"

[Caliga]

 

[Malthus]

Hey, Malt, it is celibacy.

Maybe Malthus is talking about abstaining from celery?

Everyone should abstain from celery. That goes without saying.

It's the only food that costs more calories to eat than eating it provides. 

[CountDeMoney]

Everyone should abstain from celery. That goes without saying.

Screw you, and the peanut butter that goes down the middle.

[garbon]

Everyone should abstain from celery. That goes without saying.

Screw you, and the peanut butter that goes down the middle.

What a waste of good peanut butter.

[dps]

It is plausable that this response was exacerbated by two factors: (1) a staffing shortage; and (2) the indulgence with which "sexual sinning" was viewed by the Church.

On point 1 I think you're wrong. The overwhelming majority of these cases came before the shortage of priests or seminarians. As I think the cover up's are far more about an abuse of power and the protection of an institution over the vulnerable than anything else. The Church was hardly unique in that, as I've said, but is perhaps uniquely harmed by it because it undermines their moral credibility.

I thought that the shortage of priests went back to the 1960s, or even earlier.  Am I mistaken in that?

Malthus, all your references go back to scripture. But in catholicism scripture isn't the only source of doctrine: tradition also is one, as well as major church councils. For instance, while I am aware that some popes were married, the vast majority have not been, and that crosses all the historically documented eras as well as the last 1000 years or so. The preference for celibate clergy is longstanding and well established.

Peter was married. Aside from that there are early 4th century Church Councils that prohibit bishops from marrying and they mention that the Roman Rite already had a tradition of total clerical celibacy.

I noticed that Malthus, in responding to AR, skipped over the point about church councils.

[fhdz]

Celery is rad.