I guess we can both agree that celibacy in the clergy is good for the economy of maintaining a professional personnel in the management of the Church. If all soldiers were celibates, imagine the savings on their support; likewise which is the case, with a celibate clergy.
Now, therefore a clergy that is even just optionally celibate is more expensive to maintain than one that is totally celibate. Do we have a solution to the difficulty of an additional strain in the finance of the Catholic Church?
I am not a rich man, but I do have some savings, and I think I can contribute an additional some percentage of my income to the support of a pastor who has opted to be married and to have a family.
Priests who opt to be married must before ordination look for additional benefactors who will provide for their family. So Catholic faithful in favor of a married clergy must be ready to shoulder the additional expense.
It’s not just about finances. The RCC believes that, in general, a married priest would not have as much time or energy to devote to his duties as a celibate priest would.
Thanks a lot for your notice of my last post. If you are curious about the history of my interest here, you might look up the starting point in Catholics and Anal Sex, pages 2 and 3, then follow through in What is a Lie, Priests Fornicating Bishops not Removing Them, and Catholic Priests and Sex.
What I am trying to do now is to find out exactly what are the benefits of a celibate clergy, in order to give some suggestions and proposals to the Vatican and the clergy how to effect a reconciliation that will make all parties happy: the Vatican and the clergy.
I am going to proceed like a Martian who only took studies in the human psychology of behavior and motivation. So I do not know about the spirituality of the priesthood, ascetical and mystical theology, and not much about the history of the celibacy institution.
You make a good point there, that a celibate clergy has more time and attention to give to the care of souls. So, now as a Martian I have two advantages of a celibate clergy, namely economy and efficiency of manpower.
There are certainly many other advantages of a celibate clergy; but some celibate-bound clergy are not happy. And the Vatican is not happy with these unhappy clergymen or priests bound to celibacy withal by an original free acceptance.
As a Martian observer I also notice that owing to the obligation of celibacy and the unhappiness attendant upon its observance, a good number of otherwise effective priests have left the priesthood in order to live a non-celibate life, on the one hand; and on the other, clearly eligible candidates for the priesthood are not applying, for the reason that they would not want to accept the celibate status.
The result is that Catholic faithfuls are in many instances left without those sacraments that only an ordained priest can deliver: Eucharist (Mass and Communion), Penance (absolution from sins and reconciliation with God), and Extreme Unction (the final preparation at the moment of dying to meet the Creator).
There are priests and there are bishops moving for an optional celibacy, but the Vatican does not even want to discuss the matter. (Correct me if I am wrong here. I am speaking from stock knowledge.)
Making a long story short, let us put the issue into the following statements of facts:
There is nothing wrong with sex in marriage for priests, it is not incompatible with the priestly ministry; for the Vatican allows married priests to continue in marital life, for the clergy of oriental churches accepting the primacy of Rome, and also for priest converts from Anglican and Episcopalian Churches.
There are priests who have left the ministry in order to assume a marital life and family.
There are eligible candidates to the priesthood who are not moving in because they don’t relish the observance of celibacy.
There is a serious shortage of priests, resulting in the spiritual deprivation of Catholic faithfuls.
There are good priests and good bishops interested in allowing for an optional celibate clergy.
But the Vatican does not want to discuss the matter.
The big question therefore that I am as a Martian asking is:
What is the advantage to the Vatican to not even want to discuss an at least optional celibacy?
So as a Martian I do some research into sex and Catholicism and this is what I find out:
(In my own summary)
There, I have found the core reason why the Vatican is not interested in even discussing the partial lifting of the celibacy obligation, namely:
Now, will the Vatican one day exercise the discretion of admitting that God is not necessarily happier because men are giving up lawful sex for Him?
There are ways and means to make the Vatican see that light at the end of the tunnel. I will as a Martian help in giving suggestions and proposals to the Vatican and the clergy, specially the unhappy members, how to effect a change of attitude in this regard on the part of the Vatican.
Glad to hear such comforting words from you. No more anger with me?
We are brothers, whether you like it or not, from Adam and Eve to the Baptismal character and that of Confirmation, and from being nurtured in the common magisterium of the Church.
I guess I can’t just keep opening new threads, even though I would like to think that each new thread is a kind of subheading of celibacy, so that people interested in the question can approach the various subheadings in a methodical manner.
Who would have thought that the thread on Catholics and Anal Sex by Golfer would have materials on family planning and celibacy of the clergy? Well, I guess I exhausted the threshold of Gaudere’s tolerance.
Some people seem to be more oriented toward the debate orientation of this board. For my part I would like to keep to the discussion, dialogue, colloquium, and conference perspectives.
So, I would not want people to think that I am being confrotational and antagonistic in my posts. Even though due to my peculiar style I seem to be good at writing a book, as I said elsewhere, on “How to Make Enemies and Antagonize People”.
I accept your warm words, and would note that in general, the purpose of a forum called “Great Debates” is… well, not to put too fine a point on it, but let’s just say that debates will almost inevitably play a part.
As a Martian and having been instructed in the psychology of human behavior and motivation, I can see that this attitude on the part of the Vatican is what might be called a pride thing. As one of the early disciples of – I read in the primeval constitutional corpus of all Christians whether Catholic or non-Catholic, called the Bible, somewhere – Jesus, their original teacher, namely, that disciple called John, he tells all who follow their common Master, Jesus, that “All in the world is the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eye, and the pride of life”.
That pride thing, it is not essential to keeping alive; but it is so very important that a human would commit suicide if he should lose that pride thing to a grievous extent. So the Vatican, just considering it simply as a human though collective entity, is attached to the imposition of celibacy on the clergy because of a pride thing, to show to the whole world that her clergy is better, superior, to the rest of mankind, for abstaining from the even lawful use of sex: that the Vatican Roman Catholic Church of the Latin Rite is better, superior, for the institution of celibacy in her clergy.
Summing up: There are many advantages to a celibate clergy, but the pride thing is the most important on the part of the Vatican; that is why the Vatican will not even allow any discussions of so much as a partial lifting of celibacy, allowing for an optional celibacy.
But what’s the use of inflexibly maintaining a pride thing in the family when the children are not happy with it. Now, that is exactly the trouble with a sizable number of the Catholic priesthood: they are not happy with celibacy; they want to have a wife and a family like everyone else.
As a Martian, I can see from my study of human psychology on behavior and motivation, that the problem is as simple as changing the heart and mind of the Vatican or the heart and mind of priests not happy with celibacy or changing both.
Can there be change in the heart and mind of the Vatican? physically possible but morally impossible (another distinction I learned in human psychology); because the Vatican is composed of old men whose blood is already weak and cold and whose bodily and – very important – mental habits are indelibly scripted. So you have got to change the men running the Vatican, the Pope and all his vitally crucial assistants: put much younger men there, only men at most in their late forties. Such men can still think of ways and means to work out another pride thing to replace that one of celibacy.
How can we change the men in the Vatican, the Pope and his assistants. We need outside experts. Get someone like Karl Rove, tell him the problem and give him and his men one month to study, and I am sure they will come up with a very acceptably feasible solution.
Now, as regards changing the heart and mind of priests who are not happy with celibacy, even though they accepted the obligation ‘freely’ on ordination. First, they need not have to undergo any change in heart and mind, they just have to be transferred to oriental churches recognizing the primacy of Rome. The pope can do that.
Second, in regard to those not yet ordained, and those would-be candidates to the priesthood, I recall having read in their Bible that their founder, Jesus, had said something about men making themselves eunuchs for the Kingdom of Heaven. But of course requiring them to be eunuchs will not solve their difficulty with celibacy, because even their Bible bears witness that eunuchs do fondle maidens though futilely.
What I would suggest is the implanting of a drug or a mechanism – and human sciences have produced all kinds of substances and mechanisms that can really change the heart and mind of men – in the body to affect the neural system of men aspiring after priestly ordination. Make it a condition for such men, otherwise they will not be accepted to holy orders. The substances or mechanisms will counteract the natural physiology of male sexuality in its emotional and in its physical operations; so that men thus implanted with such substances or mechanisms will no longer feel the urge to not observe celibacy.
Now, to effect changes both in the Vatican and in the clergy, there must be some give and take from each side; so that on the one hand the Vatican will allow optional celibacy; and on the other, priests who choose to not assume the obligation of celibacy will have to observe some restrictions. Such restrictions would be that they must observe periodic abstinence from their conjugal duty to their wife, like for example that once a year their wife will have to stay in a convent for some days.
For that purpose, the Catholic Church can again be very well served by outside experts. Look for skilled professionals like the Karl Rove kind. One of their suggestions might be that celibacy should be optional even for bishops and Vatican personnel from the pope downward, even already ordained priests and consecrated bishops. Trust those guys, they will find a solution and it will be acceptable and in perfect harmony with matters of faith and morals.
Were you not supposed to give us, Herr Martian, some tips on how priests can be ordained without subsuming the duty of celibacy. What you are proposing has nothing to do with abolishing celibacy, but with making it tolerable to priests.
What we want to know from you is how candidates to the priesthood and those already there can be deregulated from the obligation of celibacy. Your suggestion about priests having left the priesthood for non-observance of celibacy is instructive, namely, get the Vatican to have them transferred to oriental churches in communion with Rome. But we want to help candidates to the priesthood and those already inside but wishing to be married and to continue in their ministry: that they can have the priesthood and have marriage also.
O.K., Dr. Susma, you bring up a good point. I forgot all about my original purpose. It seems celibacy is such a good thing for the Church in order to situate itself above the rest of gonadal mankind, that I got unconsciously drawn to it and acquired a plus bias in its favor. The problem I set out to tackle is how to get the Vatican to remove the obligation of celibacy from the priesthood.
Don’t you remember, Dr. Susma, that you did a research paper once in college on ‘Sacerdotium et Imperium’, with the end of showing how changes in the Vatican have come about with a lot of nudging from the civil powers. Isn’t there a lot of U.S. legislation about discrimination in employment: that there should not be any on the basis of gender, civil status, race, and other factors?
Now, consider that the priesthood is a livelihood undertaking of men of the cloth and it’s a profession like medicine and law. Whatever clergymen are as priests, they are also deriving a living from such a career and enjoying a status of prestige in society; and they are pursuing the constitutionally guaranteed right of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
What Catholic bishops and priests should do is to bring the Vatican to the law, of the U.S.A., on the complaint that it is discriminating against married men, barring them from the access to the profession that is the priesthood, like barring married men from the profession that is medicine or law.
For this end, they have got to exercise a lot of guts. And guts is what they don’t have, owing to a lifetime of being subservient to the Vatican. If they would organize and move as a collectivity, then they might stir the Vatican, by recourse to the law, that of discrimination against married men, in this case to open the gate to them for acceptance to the profession of the priesthood. Toward this objective they can learn from labor unions.
But Herr Martian, you are not aware that there is such a thing as separation of church and state in the U.S.
You are right, of course, Dr. Susma. However, I want to remind you that when it comes to discrimination and other matters of public policy, in the land of the free and home to the brave, the state of the U.S. will decide where it can step in to decide first what is of purely church domain and what is within the state’s purview. I am almost certain that in the present instance where discrimination against married men is involved, U.S. law can and must exert itself to advocate and safeguard the right to equal opportunities in employment.
This is the way to go about it:
A Catholic man married but otherwise qualified for the priesthood applies for priesthood in a diocese. He is turned down. He goes to the law on a complaint of discrimination against married men for admission to the occupation and profession of the priesthood. The bishop says it is an internal matter within the Catholic Church, the state has no competence. Well, then go to the court to seek a clarification whether the matter is really an internal matter of the Church like the Immaculate Conception of Mary, or it is a matter where the civil employment right of a citizen is at stake. And the court might have to decide in favor of the married man applicant for the priesthood.
So, Dr. Susma, don’t you think that is a very good way for the ‘Imperium’ that is the U.S. to effect change in the ‘Sacerdotium’ that is the Vatican, for the removal of the celibacy obligation in the priesthood?
I have to do some thinking and reading, and I will be back to you, Herr Martian.
Were you not supposed to give us, Herr Martian, some tips on how priests can be ordained without subsuming the duty of celibacy. What you are proposing has nothing to do with abolishing celibacy, but with making it tolerable to priests.
What we want to know from you is how candidates to the priesthood and those already there can be deregulated from the obligation of celibacy. Your suggestion about priests having left the priesthood for non-observance of celibacy is instructive, namely, get the Vatican to have them transferred to oriental churches in communion with Rome. But we want to help candidates to the priesthood and those already inside but wishing to be married and to continue in their ministry: that they can have the priesthood and have marriage also.
O.K., Dr. Susma, you bring up a good point. I forgot all about my original purpose. It seems celibacy is such a good thing for the Church in order to situate itself above the rest of gonadal mankind, that I got unconsciously drawn to it and acquired a plus bias in its favor. The problem I set out to tackle is how to get the Vatican to remove the obligation of celibacy from the priesthood.
Don’t you remember, Dr. Susma, that you did a research paper once in college on ‘Sacerdotium et Imperium’, with the end of showing how changes in the Vatican have come about with a lot of nudging from the civil powers. Isn’t there a lot of U.S. legislation about discrimination in employment: that there should not be any on the basis of gender, civil status, race, and other factors?
Now, consider that the priesthood is a livelihood undertaking of men of the cloth and it’s a profession like medicine and law. Whatever clergymen are as priests, they are also deriving a living from such a career and enjoying a status of prestige in society; and they are pursuing the constitutionally guaranteed right of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
What Catholic bishops and priests should do is to bring the Vatican to the law, of the U.S.A., on the complaint that it is discriminating against married men, barring them from the access to the profession that is the priesthood, like barring married men from the profession that is medicine or law.
For this end, they have got to exercise a lot of guts. And guts is what they don’t have, owing to a lifetime of being subservient to the Vatican. If they would organize and move as a collectivity, then they might stir the Vatican, by recourse to the law, that of discrimination against married men, in this case to open the gate to them for acceptance to the profession of the priesthood. Toward this objective they can learn from labor unions.
But Herr Martian, you are not aware that there is such a thing as separation of church and state in the U.S.
You are right, of course, Dr. Susma. However, I want to remind you that when it comes to discrimination and other matters of public policy, in the land of the free and home to the brave, the state of the U.S. will decide where it can step in to decide first what is of purely church domain and what is within the state’s purview. I am almost certain that in the present instance where discrimination against married men is involved, U.S. law can and must exert itself to advocate and safeguard the right to equal opportunities in employment.
This is the way to go about it:
A Catholic man married but otherwise qualified for the priesthood applies for priesthood in a diocese. He is turned down. He goes to the law on a complaint of discrimination against married men for admission to the occupation and profession of the priesthood. The bishop says it is an internal matter within the Catholic Church, the state has no competence. Well, then go to the court to seek a clarification whether the matter is really an internal matter of the Church like the Immaculate Conception of Mary, or it is a matter where the civil employment right of a citizen is at stake. And the court might have to decide in favor of the married man applicant for the priesthood.
So, Dr. Susma, don’t you think that is a very good way for the ‘Imperium’ that is the U.S. to effect change in the ‘Sacerdotium’ that is the Vatican, for the removal of the celibacy obligation in the priesthood?
I have to do some thinking and reading, and I will be back to you, Herr Martian.
(My purpose is to provide researchers who might really be interested in what is the status quo of certain questions brought up in the following threads: Catholics and Anal Sex, What is a Lie, Priests Fornicating Bishops not Removing Them, Married Men in 60 Minutes Program, and Sex and Catholic Priests. My own sympathy here is as a rule neutral, but tending towards the maximum liberty in accordance with sound public policy on the one hand, and health and hygiene of individuals on the other.)
Here are some information from the Canon Law Society of America 1995 – of the Vatican Roman Catholic Church of the Latin Rite:
(If any parties here can bring up more recent information, so much the better for real serious researchers, on behalf of their personal purposes or for their academic interest in knowledge.)
On the likelihood of originally married Catholic men being ordained to the priesthood:
On married converts being second class citizens in the Catholic priesthood:
On the use of the conjugal rights by married ordained priests:
Susma Rio Sep’s Summation:
Adopting the conclusions of the Canon Law Society of America:
Are there originally married Catholic men being ordained to the priesthood and allowed to continue in their conjugal life, like married men converts from outside the Vatican Roman Catholic Church of the Latin Rite? To quote again from the CLSA (reproduced from above):
”These cases (married men ordained) for the Latin Church, however, have been limited to men being received into the full communion of the Catholic Church, who formerly were ministers in some other Christian church or ecclesial community.”
I know however from stock knowledge founded upon living in very close quarters with the local Catholic clergy and having been in very close acquaintance with the priests in the Catholic university where I studied many years, even going with some of them to the Vatican to attend seminars and conventions – because they wanted me to join them: namely that it is very rare to grant such a dispensation to originally married Catholic men to enter the priesthood or the religious life; unless they are of advanced years and their wife and children are agreeable, and they and their wife give up conjugal life.
I guess I will have to wrap up this thread on Married Priests in 60 Minutes. For the continuation of this issue, in particular on lifting of celibacy, please proceed to the thread on Priests Fornicating, Bishops not Removing Them, of which there is still reaction as of 061403, probably my last post on the subject.
Thanks to everyone for your patience and forbearance.
And, of course, Susma, I will submit to you that the Holy See has every right to make rules for the local churches, dioceses, provinces, etc., that accept it as an authority. And, for whatever reasons it may have, it does not seem inclined to accept as candidates for the Roman Rite priesthood men who have accepted a call to the married life.
As for “married priests,” I presume you will limit this to people who have in fact both undergone a Christian marriage and who have undergone ordination by the laying on of hands by a bishop in the Apostolic Succession. In that case, you have the following:
Married men who have entered the Roman Rite of the Catholic Church after being trained as clergy in another denomination, and who have been ordained priest by a Roman Rite bishop on authorization by the Holy See.
Married men of mature years who have felt a call to the priesthood and who have been ordained by a Roman Rite bishop on the same authorization. (I don’t know how many of these there are, or what the rules surrounding them may be – I include it for completeness since you noted it above.)
Married men ordained to the priesthood in the Eastern Rites of the Catholic Church.
Married men ordained to the priesthood in the Orthodox Churches.
Men and women ordained to the priesthood in the Anglican Churches, who either were married at the time of their ordination or married afterwards.
Men (and I think women) ordained to the pastorate in the Churches of Sweden and Finland, who either were married at the time of their ordination or married afterwards.
Men and women ordained to the presbyteriate in the Church of South India, who either were married at the time of their ordination or married afterwards. (I believe there are other South Asian “union” churches where the apostolic succession has been preserved; I’m including only the one I’m certain of.)
All these have had legitimate ordination by a bishop in the Apostolic Succession and have entered into a Christian marriage, in one order or the other. Note that a priest of the Catholic or Orthodox churches may not marry, but that a married man may be ordained in accordance with church law, but that that does not apply to Anglicans, Lutherans, or clergy of the Church of South India.
Thanks, Poly, I must bow to you for your extensive and intensive knowledge of things religious and non-religious. And I have learned from you. Thanks again.