Celibacy

[Maerzie]

@recessiveMeme

Like gigi and others, I’m somewhat confused by this point.

Just for the sake of argument, I’ll assume that the celibacy requirements of the Catholic Church had their origin in a scheme to accumulate wealth. How exactly does that work anyway? As far as I can tell from your posts thus far, the process of making money for the church consists of these steps:[ol][li]Impose celibacy on clergy.[]…[]Profit.[/ol]So, can you describe “step 2” in more detail? It doesn’t sound like much-- but hey, step 2 might be really compelling if only you’d explain it.[/li]
Somewhat less facetiously… a point of clarification:
When you say “building up riches” do you mean to imply that a celibate priest somehow generates wealth or, rather, that a celibate priest simply wastes less wealth than a non-celibate** one? If you are driving at the former, perhaps you’ve a point. Naturally, that point demands yet more explanation. Otherwise, I honestly don’t see how “losing less money” is a valid system of building wealth. If you choose to throw a dime down a storm drain instead of a quarter, you can’t claim that you “made fifteen cents”… or can you?

** Does “celibate” have an antonym?

However, you do listen to or watch the news, do you not? And you do know that the Catholic Church is one of the richest instituions in the world, do you not? What was the amount of money given out by the Church last week(I believe it was an archdiocese in California)?? Do you think they’re BORROWING that money from a bank?? And where does all the money come from to pay for the insurance premiums in case there is a sex abuse scandal? (But, I repeat myself–please see past posts.)

Definitely a priest’s salary would be greater if he had a family, whether or not his wife worked . Our parish coordinator (we don’t rate high enough any more to get one of the few priests left) is a nun, who makes $56,000 a year , more than almost any of the other incomes in this area. That is the income for a one person family. How much would the Church have to be paying out if there were a married priest with 4 children and a wife. No doubt it would be commensurate, which would leave MUCH less money to send to the Bishop’s coffers, and eventually to the Rome coffers. T

Figure it out! Families cost more money to support than an individual. DUHHHHH!
Would the balance to send for amassing wealth for the Church be the same from one as from an entire family??

[Maerzie]

@Maerzie

However, you do listen to or watch the news, do you not? And you do know that the Catholic Church is one of the richest instituions in the world, do you not? What was the amount of money given out by the Church last week(I believe it was an archdiocese in California)?? Do you think they’re BORROWING that money from a bank?? And where does all the money come from to pay for the insurance premiums in case there is a sex abuse scandal? (But, I repeat myself–please see past posts.)

Definitely a priest’s salary would be greater if he had a family, whether or not his wife worked . Our parish coordinator (we don’t rate high enough any more to get one of the few priests left) is a nun, who makes $56,000 a year , more than almost any of the other incomes in this area. That is the income for a one person family. How much would the Church have to be paying out if there were a married priest with 4 children and a wife. No doubt it would be commensurate, which would leave MUCH less money to send to the Bishop’s coffers, and eventually to the Rome coffers. T

Figure it out! Families cost more money to support than an individual. DUHHHHH!
Would the balance to send for amassing wealth for the Church be the same from one as from an entire family??

To Gigi and Recessivememe, if you have ever had to balance a budget, you will be able to figure it out yourselves without using my brain.–Maerzie

[Autumn_Almanac]

@Maerzie

Figure it out! Families cost more money to support than an individual. DUHHHHH!

Can you address Sarahfeena’s point about the pay scale? Why would the Church automatically be forced to pay more just because the priest decided to have a family? They could just as easily say that they provide for the priest only, and if he wants to support additional family members, the spouse has to pay for it.

[ITR_champion]

@Maerzie

I am wondering, Sarahfeena if you ever have an original thought to post or if your position is only as a non-thinking, indoctrinated critic? There are times and situations in our lives when we MUST question and THINK. Critical Thinking is an excellent course available to all at most college campuses across the nation for people who always just accept the programming they have had.

Let me offer one piece of advice before I vacate this thread. Smug, intellectual self-righteousness like what I quoted here is not a good way to endear yourself at the Straight Dope Message Board, or, for that matter, anywhere.

[recessiveMeme]

@Maerzie

However, you do listen to or watch the news, do you not? And you do know that the Catholic Church is one of the richest instituions in the world, do you not?

I don’t recall debating that The Church has a good deal of money. How is this related to your point? If I told you that “All the water in the ocean was flown-in by helicopter from Mars a bajillion years ago on Thursday” and, when pressed for information, pointed out that there’s currently a lot of water in the ocean, would you find that compelling? :dubious:

@Maerzie

Definitely a priest’s salary would be greater if he had a family, whether or not his wife worked . Our parish coordinator (we don’t rate high enough any more to get one of the few priests left) is a nun, who makes $56,000 a year , more than almost any of the other incomes in this area. That is the income for a one person family. How much would the Church have to be paying out if there were a married priest with 4 children and a wife. No doubt it would be commensurate, which would leave MUCH less money to send to the Bishop’s coffers, and eventually to the Rome coffers.

Ya know… I don’t want to be a bother or anything, but I can’t help noticing that you didn’t address my question at all. I mean, I see that you quoted my post, but you must have missed this bit:

@recessiveMeme

When you say “building up riches” do you mean to imply that a celibate priest somehow generates wealth or, rather, that a celibate priest simply wastes less wealth than a non-celibate** one? If you are driving at the former, perhaps you’ve a point. Naturally, that point demands yet more explanation. Otherwise, I honestly don’t see how “losing less money” is a valid system of building wealth. If you choose to throw a dime down a storm drain instead of a quarter, you can’t claim that you “made fifteen cents”…

…So again, if priests represent a net outflow of money from the church, how can decreasing that outflow create a positive inflow of money? It’s that whole quarter vs. dime thing I mentioned before. From a financial perspective, chucking the dime down the storm drain is “better” than the quarter, but I’ve still lost ten cents.

@Maerzie

To Gigi and Recessivememe, if you have ever had to balance a budget, you will be able to figure it out yourselves without using my brain.

But your brain seems to be able to reach such fascinating conclusions. I might be doing something wrong, but every time I balance my checkbook- every time- expenses make the balance go down.

[tomndebb]

From http://collegegrad.com/

Salaries of diocesan priests vary from diocese to diocese. According to a biennial survey of the National Federation of Priests’ Council, low-end salaries averaged $15,291 per year in 2002; high-end salaries averaged $18,478 per year. In addition to a salary, diocesan priests receive a package of benefits that may include a car allowance, room and board in the parish rectory, health insurance, and a retirement plan.
Diocesan priests who do special work related to the church, such as teaching, usually receive a salary which is less than a lay person in the same position would receive. The difference between the usual salary for these jobs and the salary that the priest receives is called “contributed service.” In some situations, housing and related expenses may be provided; in other cases, the priest must make his own arrangements. Some priests doing special work receive the same compensation that a lay person would receive.

Religious priests take a vow of poverty and are supported by their religious order. Any personal earnings are given to the order.

In the case of a sister being paid $56K, I would guess that the salary was negotiated with the diocese based on what it would take to hire a lay professional manager for a similar facility, (e.g., a small business such as an assisted living facility). Part of the reason that the RCC is hurting, financially, is that it does have to pay “outsiders” (even sisters) the going rate rather than the lower salary given to priests. (And the decline in vocations means that the sister’s convent is probably playing hardball in negotiations, since there are one or more retired sisters (and a large convent) to support for every sister working at an “outside” wage.)

(Just providing a few data points to the discussion.)

[recessiveMeme]

Something occurred to me. Perhaps you’d care to rephrase the assertion that

@Maerzie

…the Church continues and began the celibacy requirement purely as a way to build up its riches because wives and children cost LOTS of money.

as something more along the lines of:

“…the Church continues and began the celibacy requirement purely as a way mitigate certain operational costs. Because wives and children cost LOTS of money, the Church could spend less on a celibate priest.”

I’m still not certain I’d agree with the aspect of the statement that specifically addresses the Church’s intent, but it’d be less objectionable than your original assertion. Just a thought.

[tomndebb]

Well, the statement that the church “began” the practice for financial reasons is flat out wrong and has no no support in any reference thus provided. However, if one wishes to continue to assert that the church continued the practice for financial reasons, that certainly sounds more likely than that it continues in order to build wealth.

[Zakalwe]

@tomndebb

Married.

I suggest fuck-bunny.

“Is he celibate?”
“Nope, total fuck-bunny.”

[Sarahfeena]

@Maerzie

I am wondering, Sarahfeena if you ever have an original thought to post or if your position is only as a non-thinking, indoctrinated critic? There are times and situations in our lives when we MUST question and THINK. Critical Thinking is an excellent course available to all at most college campuses across the nation for people who always just accept the programming they have had.

Quite frankly, I think that your critical thinking leaves more to be desired than mine does. I have not only not heard an original thought from you, but I have not seen any evidence that you have any facts to back up the thoughts you do have…your style of rhetoric seems more like indoctrination talking points than anyone else’s here…you repeat the same opinion over and over, with no support whatsoever.

Oh, and BTW…I am college educated already…thank you for your advice, but my critical thinking skills are just fine.

As to the difference in the job descriptions and the demand on personal time between Catholic priests and Lutheran ministers my view is biased on my experiences in an average parish and by what I actually saw occurring in my real life when such clerics were needed. Perhaps you have never called your parish and gotten no one, even after repeated calls?

Never.

In response to your 24/7/365 clarification, please name me ONE priest who never has relief from other parishes or diocesan retired priests during the 365? An impossiblity. You are speaking as if ALL of them make this enormous sacrifice, when it is no more common (maybe less so) than for any other on call profession. Yes, on call status is relieved some days for all other professions also, just as it is for the priests.

Yes, I’m sure on-call status is relieved some days…everyone gets a vacation, even priests, and there are traveling priests who can fill in. But based on what I see from the priests I know, their on-call status is much more demanding than that of a doctor, nurse, fireman, or any other on-call profession…certainly more demanding than I would want my husband’s to be, especially at the pay rate involved.

Who are these “most Catholics”?? In your area? In your parish? In your own social group? Did you take a poll? See, I know how to be critical too, but I am not so cowardly and indoctrinated that I’m afraid to have a personal thought to publish and dissect.

I’ve grown up and lived around Catholics my whole life. Believe me, none of them are afraid to have a personal thought.

And finally, as YOUR opinion is only YOUR opinion, so also, of course, is MY opinion MY opinion. Who else’s could it possibly be? Or, are you demonstrating the depth of your criticisms?

No, what I’m demonstrating is that you are giving opinions without any factual information that might explain how those opinions were formed. Why should I take your opinion more seriously than my own? How do I know that YOU know anything about critical thinking?

How very wonderful it would be if ANY of the criticisms would be “constructive” or “informative” instead of all the “better than thou” indoctrinated responses requiring no thought.

It would be wonderful if you would point out where I have been “better than thou.” I don’t even know what that means in this context.

I have attempted not to necessarily champion the idea of celibate clergy (I personally am not 100% convinced about it either way), but to give one possible roadblock or complication that would be involved in allowing priestly celibacy.

[Maerzie]

{So again, if priests represent a net outflow of money from the church, how can decreasing that outflow create a positive inflow of money?}
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

EXACTLY!! You’ve answered your own question. Unfortunately you don’t even realize it.

Please bother to read the thread from the beginning so you understand what it is about.

Maerzie

[Miller]

@Maerzie

{So again, if priests represent a net outflow of money from the church, how can decreasing that outflow create a positive inflow of money?}
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

EXACTLY!! You’ve answered your own question. Unfortunately you don’t even realize it.

Please bother to read the thread from the beginning so you understand what it is about.

Maerzie

I’ve read the thread from the beginning, and I have no idea what you’re talking about. And it looks like I’m not the only one. Maybe you need to explain it a little more clearly?

Incidentally, any chance of you stopping back by the homosexuality thread? We had some more questions for you in there, too.

[gigi]

@Maerzie

{So again, if priests represent a net outflow of money from the church, how can decreasing that outflow create a positive inflow of money?}
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

EXACTLY!! You’ve answered your own question. Unfortunately you don’t even realize it.

Huh?

[Mangetout]

I think Maerzie is saying that decreasing expenditure is equivalent, in terms of bank balances or net profits, to increasing income.

[Cat_Fight]

@CalMeacham

I personally feel that priests ought to marry and have a normal sex life. It would help them relate better to the bulk of their parishoners

In the doc Deliver Us From Evil, one of the couples whose child was molested by Father O’Grady pretty much said this. They couldn’t understand why this unmarried 30-something would be able to help their marriage and family-related problems (and he admitted that he was way too inexperienced for the job of guidance counselor).