The Independent News Source
NCR on Kindle - NCR classifieds - YouTube - Twitter - Facebook - Email Alerts - RSS
Printer-friendly version
PDF versionPope Benedict gets the celibacy question backward
by Eugene Cullen Kennedy on Nov. 04, 2010
I remember the trouble my father and I once had putting the screens up on our house. The last two, like wailing and willful children, fought us and required so much forcing that we splintered an edge off one of them. Only then did we discover that we had roughly manipulated number 10 into number 11's window and vice versa.
As with Pope Benedict's recent remarks on celibacy, we had constructed a misshapen symbol of the hazards of getting things backward. The screens were out of sequence and they bulged ominously as if they might pop out of their frames; we had some laughs as fathers and sons can as we corrected our mistakes.
Pope Benedict, however, does not seem to appreciate that he has pressured his arguments out of logical order and that, like our misaligned screens, they may pop dangerously out of the Vatican windows that he is determined to seal off lest someone remember that Vatican II opened them to the world. Specifically, the pope, according to The Wall Street Journal (October 10, 2010), "defended the church's celibacy prerequisite as a way for priests to attain 'an authentic, pure and mature humanity.' " That is where the pope has things backward.
There is no evidence that celibacy gives seminarians an opportunity to achieve the ideal of "authentic, pure and mature humanity." There is evidence that celibacy can only be lived by candidates who are already authentic and mature when they enter the seminary.
In the psychological study commissioned by the American bishops after Vatican II, it was learned that the celibate life demanded but could not and did not produce maturity in priests who had not already achieved it. Celibacy was experienced as an onerous requirement that few, if any, priests would have chosen as a style of life on their own.
In fact, celibacy might well be investigated as a secular virtue for people like the secretary of state, rock stars, and the many men who, like the George Clooney character in "Up in The Air," are always traveling and are seldom at home. How many memoirs sadly begin with such phrases as "My father was so busy he didn't have much time for us."? If he wants to promote useful celibacy, Benedict should organize these legions of the lonely.
Most good priests observed celibacy by adjusting to it rather than finding it a pathway to transcendence. They kept the stressful rule because they were healthy in the first place and had the personal resources as well as the family and fraternal support that characterized the Catholic culture at that time. The classic clerical culture had some remarkably helpful features, especially the friendship and fellowship it promoted among healthy priests. The latter also enjoyed the support of the intact families from which most of them came and the respect and understanding of a Catholic culture then more tightly bound in its insularity from the general American culture.
Subscribe to NCR
Want to read more about important issues in the life of the Church? A subscription to NCR will keep you up to date and informed.
That culture also idealized the youth who became a priest as it did the mother who remained, for most, the only woman with whom priests had an enduring relationship. Many priests lived out their celibacy by living without growing out of their earliest nurturing relationships and never achieving the human qualities that the pope claims that life without marriage will produce. Those who came to the vow of celibacy in an immature state did not find it a resource for completing their personal development.
Psycho-sexually under-developed priests were thereby made vulnerable to the unexpected and overwhelming circumstances that tripped off their sexual development again often pitching them into darkness bound struggles to understand their impulses and previously unsuspected human needs. One cannot airily claim that celibacy played no role in creating the sex abuse scandal that arose in this cadre of immature men who accepted it long before they were mature enough to understand marriage, sex, or themselves.
Touching also were the adjustments that healthy priests made to celibacy that many of them experienced as an enforced bachelorhood. In fact, these priests were often criticized for the expensive hobbies, cars, and vacations they took as a way of maintaining their sanity rather than as a celebration of the "pure and mature humanity" that the pope envisions as streaming from the Grail of celibacy.
Holy Father, you have forced the screens onto the wrong windows. In short, you are forcing an abstract ideal of celibacy onto the gritty reality of real-life celibacy and it doesn't fit. Indeed, the only requirement for the priesthood is the mature capacity to form healthy relationships with other human beings. That cuts across all the other screens, such as gender and homosexuality that continue to be hammered into the niches of church requirements for priesthood as if they were stained glass.
[Eugene Cullen Kennedy is emeritus professor of psychology at Loyola University, Chicago.]
Editor's Note: We can send you an e-mail alert every time Kennedy's column, Bulletins from the Human Side," is posted to NCRonline.org. Go to this page and follow directions: E-mail alert sign-up. If you already receive e-mail alerts from us, click on the "update my profile" button to add Kennedy to your list.
It becomes almost a contest
It becomes almost a contest to see how far into one of Cullen's diatribes before I find something I can agree with. I finally found it in this phrase
"One cannot airily claim that celibacy played no role in creating the sex abuse scandal"
That statement is true, but not for the reasons Cullen cited. It's true because celibacy gave the perverted predators who were looking for a place to hide some cover by going into seminaries. They got there because they were allowed in by liberal admissions officers who were actively screening out healthy well adjusted and most of all faithful candidates for the priesthood. For proof of this read "Goodby Good Men".
So despite what Cullen might say, and what he desparately wants to believe, celibacy did not cause healthy well adjusted candidates to become perverts, but it did give cover for perverts to hide.
Then of course we get to the final sentence where Cullen's real agenda finally comes out. Cullen like most liberals starts with his agenda and then tries to justify it, and so his final line is.....
"That cuts across all the other screens, such as gender and homosexuality that continue to be hammered into the niches of church requirements for priesthood as if they were stained glass."
Yep as always the drum beat for priestesses and ignoring God's word on active homosexuality. So predictable, so trite, so wrong, but fortunately increasingly unpopular as the hippies die off.
kscrawler, please point out
kscrawler, please point out to me the sentence where Eugene Kennedy says celibacy causes healthy well adjusted candidates to become perverts. I've looked and can't find a hint of such a statement.
As to his last sentence, it references the ability to engage in healthy relationships as the number one prerequisite for a priest. That ability God gave to lots of other people, not just straight males. It's a statement that has absolutely nothing to do with gay sexual activity. You are the one introducing your pet issues out of context and blaming it on Kennedy. This is called projection. Don't feel bad, Pope Benedict does it all the time.
"please point out to me the
"please point out to me the sentence where Eugene Kennedy says celibacy causes healthy well adjusted candidates to become perverts"
I did not make that claim in my post. I am claiming that healty well adjusted males were systematically screened out of seminaries in the later decades of the past century. And I referenced the book "Goodbye Good Men" as my evidence.
my dear K, the only thing
my dear K, the only thing lacking here in this brilliant, insightful and correct analysis by one for many reasons an expert in the field is an examination of the alcoholism by which many priests sought to deal with their imposed celibacy, with ample social support for this drunken solution.
not by nice cars and vacations alone . . .
now, k (as in Kafka?), let us analyze your reasons for reading here . . .
The incidence of alcoholism
The incidence of alcoholism is far higher in the general population, and in many professional segments of the population, than it is in the Catholic priesthood. and most of these alcoholics have not been very celibate. If you want to take potshots at priests, go ahead, but be honest and let everyone know you tried to become a priest, but couldn't, and that you've been trying to pass yourself off as some kind of desert hermit instead. There are many "drunken solutions" to life's problems, and one of them is making believe.
I'm not sure comments like
I'm not sure comments like this one are helpful. I, too, am regularly offended by the generalizations about priests that appear on this blog, but I don't think we improve the situation by entering into ad hominem attacks. I think NCR would model the church it wants to be by helping commentators be more constructive and charitable. In the final analysis, I think both sides may be correct. I chose celibacy willingly, not because it was required, and I embrace it today because it brings me closer to God and helps me understand how hard it is to love. But I also recognize that it's not for everyone, and that many good people have vocations to love both God and another, and that the church would do well to take those vocations very seriously.
I'd also like to add that I rarely agree with what Charles says, but I hope he keeps saying it, because I believe he writes from the heart. Pax, frere.
As a recovering alcoholic,
As a recovering alcoholic, I've known my share of priests who were alcoholic, some in recovery and some who were actively drinking, usually alone and in secret, until the day they died. I have no statistics, but I would venture the rate is the same or exceeds the general population. Alcoholism has a distinct genetic predisposition. There is also a variant of it that passes almost exclusively and nearly 100% from father to son(s). If the son never picks up a drink for fear of becoming his Dad, he will never become alcoholic. But if he does start to drink, especially on a daily basis, he will become an alcoholic. What percentage of priests offering mass on a daily basis consume alcohol on a daily basis? 100% do as part of the mass. So if a man with a genetic predisposition to alcoholism was not an alcoholic before he was ordained, he has a much higher chance to otherwise be an alcoholic 10 years down the road. And believe me, no one ever started drinking thinking they were going to be an alcoholic in the end.
A 1995 CARA study found 5%
A 1995 CARA study found 5% alcoholism among US priests. A 1993 NCADD study found 6% alcoholism among the general adult population. Alcohol abuse is far higher among other professions, including journalism. That doesn't excuse priests who abuse alcohol, of course, but it does call into question the kinds of generalizations made here about priests abusing alcohol in order to deal with mandatory celibacy. I think your observation about genetic predisposition deserves more attention.
The real make-believe is all
The real make-believe is all the backwards baloney the RCC teaches about women, men, priesthood, and sex. So many good women and men have been ruinously duped by that institutionally self-serving crap.
What does mandatory celibacy have in common with the ban on women's ordination, birth-control, and homosexuality? I'll tell you what. It is the control/oppression of women. Never-mind it oppresses a few priests. Priests cant' be married to WOMEN! Women/wives might influence priests away from the Episcopal power that Lords it over them. Besides, there's ritiual purity to consider right???
Men marrying men and women marrying women puts no man in charge of a woman. Way too egalitarian for the RCC!!! The RCC is deathly allergic to individual self-determination of men and women and not just its members. That is why its dioceses nation-wide fund anti-gay secular marriage legislation affecting believer and non-believer alike!
The ban on birth-control .. who does it effect mostly? Well ....guess!
Ps Those propping up this kind of injustice do not believe! They are motivated by the maintenance, legitimation, and preservation of their own grandiose power regardless of the cost exacted in terms of human suffering!
Good God Charlie Baby, do
Good God Charlie Baby, do they ever get anything wrong on these pages? In your much sought after opinion??
I concur that somewhere there
I concur that somewhere there should be an examination of the role that alcoholism has played in the alleged sexual abuse of children by priests. Obviously an addiction to alcohol diminishes a person's inhibitions and his or her capacity to control their darker impulses. The Church also teaches that the person's culpability in the commission of serious or mortal sin is reduced as well.
I would be interested to see what role that played, as well as what supports existed to enable alcoholism among clerics and to determine the reasons for the alcoholism. I would suspect that celibacy would be only one minor reason among many.
Ah Charles no shilling for
Ah Charles no shilling for Sr. Chittister's book? If celibacy were the problem then it would have been an endemic issue prior to the abuse scandal and it would be continuing today. Now there have always, and will always, be sinners in the clergy, but the unprecedented increase in abuse cases between 1965 and about 1995 had to be due to something other than celibacy. The book "Goodbye Good Men" identified it.
Submitted by kscrawler on
Submitted by kscrawler on Nov. 08, 2010.
You stated:
"Ah Charles no shilling for Sr. Chittister's book? If celibacy were the problem then it would have been an endemic issue prior to the abuse scandal and it would be continuing today. Now there have always, and will always, be sinners in the clergy, but the unprecedented increase in abuse cases between 1965 and about 1995 had to be due to something other than celibacy. The book "Goodbye Good Men" identified it."
---------------------------------------------
In your opinion it seems that if we didn't heard or read about sexual abuse among the clergy (and hierarchy)---it must not have occured in the past or have been an issue. That is not true.
We have just reached a point in our history where we are no longer willing to tolerate sexual abuse of children/youth by the clergy (and hierarchy) or even to brush it aside as an occasional anomaly.
The book "Goodbye, Good Men" fails to recognize that the Church has waged a losing battle against the sexual abuse of women, teen-aged girls and boys by clergy and hierarchy alike over the centuries.
The problem was/is that transgressions from the official policy (celibacy) too often began at the top.
Fellow bishops put one of the early Popes, Sixtus III (432-40) on trial for seducing a beautiful young girl (aged 14). He was acquitted after he gave a quote from Christ in his defense: "Let you who are without sin cast the first stone." Sixtus' fellow bishops were afraid that he would begin to verbalize each one of their sexual exploits---so they let him off of the hook.
Sexual abuse often began in the seminaries--where handsome young seminarians (those 'beautiful boys') were sexually abused by their teachers, rectors, and bishops. And in the centuries that followed, those closest to bishops, cardinals and popes alike,(including lay servants) watched in impotent horror as sexual abuses continued at the highest levels of church
None of your opinions in this
None of your opinions in this matter are supported by any of the research done (which is quite a bit)on this issue. Several of them, intensive psychological and sociological studies by experts - many of them priests or ex-priests - support what Dr. Kennedy has written here. To reduce it, as you have kscrawler, to the worn out blaming of "liberal" admissions officers (just one more to add to the neverending list)is so simplistic and ignoring of what we have come to know, it is an unnecessary impediment to looking for best solutions. You have no data to cite that supports your contentions. Study the issue more and you will, I hope, find a fuller understanding of a difficult and complex problem.
As I said in my comments
As I said in my comments there is ample evidence to support my claim. If you have read "goodbye good men" then tell me why it is wrong. If you have not read it then I'd suggest you do so.
You missed my point again in
You missed my point again in your rush to defend yourself. What I was saying was that one source is not enough to understand the problem. There are many, many studies that show different things (outcomes) and many of the same findings from other studies. So, my admonishment to you was not to choose one source, but to broaden your knowledge base.
kscrawler, you must have
kscrawler, you must have majored in Apologetics at Steubenville ;-)
It would have been an honor.
It would have been an honor. Thanks for the compliment. ;)
They got there because they
They got there because they were allowed in by liberal admissions officers who were actively screening out healthy well adjusted and most of all faithful candidates for the priesthood.
Not so much that as it just didn't come up because these 'admissions officers' either:
Nobody looked too deeply into young men's motivations for entering seminary or consecrated lives. And in particular, there was plenty of room for guys who were running away from a sexuality which they didn't want to have to deal with.
To that you might add some measure of Vocations Directors pursuing a bit more vigorously certain young men in which they might have a 'personal' interest. But it isn't, or wasn't, quite that simple.
I don't remember any
I don't remember any discussion of sexuality in the admission process as I entered a minor seminary in 1951, with the exception of the admonition that I not date. Nor do I remember any detailed treatment of sexuality during my eight year seminary career. What I do remember is the "Scrutinium" I had in the spring of 1958 shortly before ordination to the Subdiaconate. The Scrutinium, required by canon law, was a 20 minute private interview with the awesome rector of our seminary to determine if I fully understood the implications of the vow of celibacy, which is taken at ordination to the subdiaconate, and whether I was committed to keeping the it. The only thing I remember from that encounter is the rector asking whether I realized that I would never have children of my own. My reaction was "no big deal". I liked kids but thought having babies meant changing diapers and cleaning baby bottoms.
Twenty years later, as my new born daughter was placed in my hands at the moment of birth, the rector's word came almost magically to mind. I whispered a prayer for him thinking "You were right. To miss this would have been a great loss!" Indeed this gift of a daughter has become the most maturing event of my life.
I should add that one of those studies of the psycho-social effects of celibacy mentioned by Dr. Kennedy was led by those two shining lights of American Catholicism in the twentieth century, Drs. Greeley and Kennedy. Reading that study in 1971 was another maturing event for me and helped me resign from the active ministry. Thank you Kirstin and Andrew and Gene!
Most of the priests
Most of the priests implicated in the sex abuse scandel were formed/or ordained BEFORE Vatican II. In the good old days, when they often accepted candidates in the midteens. You can't possibly believe that some liberal cabal of admissions officers even existed back then. Stop trying to make history fit your neocon catholic adgenda...
Saint Paul himself challenges
Saint Paul himself challenges the early Christians to live celibacy
as a prefered state . So celibacy has been around since ground zero
in the Church. Most Christians are called to sanctity through married life,
but God does call a smaller percentage to live celibacy in the priesthood
and religous state and also lay apostolic celibacy.
Celibacy is challenging to live but so is chastity even in the married
state, but with human effort and God's grace obtained through prayer and the
sacraments it is possible. A good culture that appreciates and supports
celibated life in the Church is also helpful.
My God! Right on! Thanks
My God! Right on! Thanks Mr. Eugene Cullen Kennedy. I have been a priest for twenty-five years and, really, you are right on! Many thanks.
DITTO............and I've
DITTO............and I've been a priest for forty-five years...and counting.
Mr. Kennedy's wise and
Mr. Kennedy's wise and thoughtful words are no diatribe. They are truthful in describing the plight of many good and spiritual young men who are trying to live their calling while keeping natural needs in check. Our creator made us both spiritual and physical. He saw nothing wrong in either. He never said that one was better than the other. All this was a way to control the workers in the field, making sure that they followed whatever line the bosses wanted them to follow. We need to correct this aberration that says that what God has created is not good and should be held in check. I thought that God saw what he had created and called all of it - everything - good!
KC Scrawler thinks that the
KC Scrawler thinks that the "hippies" dying off will make the people in the pews less tolerant of homosexuality hasn't met any of the young Catholics (20s and 30s) in my downtown Brooklyn community. But then I guess that Brooklyn is a pit of sin for someone like KC Scrawler.
The issue isn't so much what
The issue isn't so much what will the people tolerate, but what does God want? Until we get a revision of scripture from heaven homosexual activity is is, and will remain a sin. No matter how much public opinion polls say it isn't.
And just think!! Celibacy is
And just think!! Celibacy is a mere discipline that can disappear at the stroke of a Papal pen. A brief commentary like this can not involve many related negatives such as clericalism, nepotism and sexism.What will it take to open the Vatican to the need to talk?RUCUX Why did JP2 think it necessary to summarily cut off all discussion? Why is the Vatican
still so fearful of Vatican 2?
Response to your first
Response to your first question: Probably when we value theologians and the sensus fidelium equally with the hierarchy. Don't hold your breath...
JR
Of course this matter will be
Of course this matter will be discussed in the many Catholic papers allowed in parish Churches. Everyone wants to review and renew the way the Church operates. All parishes will have organized meetings so parents can raise the well formed people needed for effective leaders. Consider it your duty to get to these meetings.
Submitted by Edward Briody on
Submitted by Edward Briody on Nov. 04, 2010.
You stated:
"Of course this matter will be discussed in the many Catholic papers allowed in parish Churches. Everyone wants to review and renew the way the Church operates. All parishes will have organized meetings so parents can raise the well formed people needed for effective leaders. Consider it your duty to get to these meetings."
------------------------------------
I do not know whether you wrote this tongue-in-cheek or what, Edward. But none of what you wrote about will happen around where I live. I doubt very much if these matters will be discussed in any of the Diocesan newspapers. There will be no parish meetings to discuss anything about these issues. I know of parishes that don't even have pastoral/parish councils. And the bishops don't insist that all parishes even have them. Only the finance council is needed---and they are told only what the pastors want them to know.
I don't know about others,
I don't know about others, but what matters to me is what God Requires. Does God require that men taking the lead be celibate? Not according to his word.
Pope Paul VI, in his encyclical Sacerdotalis Caelibatus (Priestly Celibacy, 1967), endorsed celibacy as a requirement for the clergy, but he admitted that “the New Testament which preserves the teaching of Christ and the Apostles . . . does not openly demand celibacy of sacred ministers . . . Jesus Himself did not make it a prerequisite in His choice of the Twelve, nor did the Apostles for those who presided over the first Christian communities.”—The Papal Encyclicals 1958-1981 (Falls Church, Va.; 1981), p. 204.
1 Cor. 9:5, NAB: “Do we not have the right to marry a believing woman like the rest of the apostles and the brothers of the Lord and Cephas?” (“Cephas” is an Aramaic name given to Peter; see John 1:42. See also Mark 1:29-31, where reference is made to the mother-in-law of Simon, or Peter.)
1 Tim. 3:2, Dy: “It behoveth, therefore, a bishop to be . . . the husband of one wife [“married only once,” NAB].”
Before the Christian era, Buddhism required its priests and monks to be celibate. (History of Sacerdotal Celibacy in the Christian Church, London, 1932, fourth ed., revised, Henry C. Lea, p. 6)
Even earlier, the higher orders of the Babylonian priesthood were required to practice celibacy, according to The Two Babylons by A. Hislop.—(New York, 1943), p. 219.
1 Tim. 4:1-3, JB: “The Spirit has explicitly said that during the last times there will be some who will desert the faith and choose to listen to deceitful spirits and doctrines that come from the devils; . . . they will say marriage is forbidden.”
God Bless Pope Benedict XVI
God Bless Pope Benedict XVI and the Catholic clergy
I don't think the Holy Father
I don't think the Holy Father gets it "backwards" at all: I rather think he gets it just right. Nowhere does His Holiness say that celibacy is a way to attain "an authentic, pure and mature humanity" for men who *do not* have an authentic vocation or call to the priesthood. In fact, he has said repeatedly that the Church needs to button up its selection of seminarians. I agree with Archbishop Oscar Romero, who said about celebacy, "Besides the canonical or any other consideration, we are dealing with honoring our word that was given to Jesus Christ ... When there is love, one does not look for reasons; where there is love, there is self-sacrifice -- self-sacrifice and joy that results from serving and following Christ." (April 12, 1979 homily.)
and look to the total
and look to the total self-sacrifice he gave during the Offertory of his last Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.
SANTO SUBITO
did they catch his killer yet?
Did they check the SOA?
Carlos X, Would you be kind
Carlos X,
Would you be kind enough to post a link to this homily? Googling it did not produce it.Seem odd that at this point in his life he would be reflecting upon the issue of celibacy. Thanks.
Cheers,
Carlos X, Nevermind, I found
Carlos X,
Nevermind, I found the website. Here is the paragraph and link http://www.romerotrust.org.uk/homilies/149/149_pdf.pdf
"The Holy Father speaks about our commitment to celibacy. Before discussing the pro’s and the con’s of priestly celibacy and marriage, the Pope invites us to see celibacy as a charism that the individual has accepted after testing himself to see if he had been granted this gift. The Church, having placed celibacy as a condition for ordination, accepts and affirms the free decision of those who present themselves for ordination. Besides the
canonical or any other consideration, we are dealing with honoring our word that was given to Jesus Christ. The Pope says: It is a matter here of keeping one's word to Christ and the Church (11). When there is love, one does not look for reasons; where there is love, there is self-sacrifice --- self-sacrifice and joy that results from serving and following Christ. When
there is love, this charism, that carries with it the heavy burden of renouncing a home and the possibility of passing on the family name, enables us to participate in the Fatherhood of God and to give witness to the world that one has opted with maturity and liberty and one knows how to honor the option that was made. Celibacy is an expression of one’s personal dignity."
I think Kennedy agrees with Romero's point "maturity and liberty" (not imposition) is necessary: "There is evidence that celibacy can only be lived by candidates who are already authentic and mature when they enter the seminary." Compare that with "one has opted with maturity and liberty and one knows how to honor the option that was made."
The other point being that celibacy is a charism, a gift, not a commandment. Romero also notes that it is the institutional Church that has "placed celibacy as a condition for ordination" not God.
Cheers,
Probably the best article on
Probably the best article on the subject I have ever read. So many times, I have heard my fellow priests say, "I knew that celibacy just came with the territory." In other words, while we saw the seminary as a time to discern our vocation to the priesthood, we were never encouraged to discern our vocation to celibacy. It "came with the territory. A price we were willing to pay in order to be priests, something demanded by the Church. My spiritual director started the discussion about discerning celibacy two months before my ordination to the Subdiaconate, which included a vow to celibacy. Way, way too late. Plus, he didn't have a clue about how to help me discern such a call. And even if we had discerned a call to celibacy, there was next to no wisdom on how to maintain that vocation, apart from prayer and gutting it out. After long, long years as a priest, I look at forced celibacy as a solemn form of priest abuse, a grave evil alive and well inside the Church of Pope Benedict.
Gene Kennedy has hit the nail
Gene Kennedy has hit the nail on the head once again! If only we all had ears to hear. He speaks with outstanding credentials: he lived the life of a priest, he is now married, he holds a Ph.D in Psychology, and has many years of experience in counseling - laity, priests, seminarians. He was commissioned (by the bishops) to do a study of priestly formation in the 60's. He taught psychology at Loyola U. and became a personal friend of Cardinal Bernardin. His views are not opinions out of the blue. He is a faithful Catholic.
The disgruntled will vilify Loyola U or even Card. Bernardin because these facts don't fit in with their already solidified views.
I just want to know whether
I just want to know whether he knew my uncle, Jim Scanlon, while Maryknolling in Guatemala. My uncle has been in Sainte Therese's Residence since suffering a stroke in Guatemala precisely nine years ago now. I wanted to go to be certain his wishes to remain in Guatemala were seen to, but other heads prevailed.
In fact the hardest hour of my life was Saint Patrick's Day 1986 when, after keeping me outside the door for years, the Director of Vocations at Maryknoll finally gave me his No. By that time Father Jerry Beausoliel had already left the Cambridge formation house in any case and returned to Japan.
The wonderful and wise and brilliant and kind Brother Wayne Fitzpatrick should have been the one in charge of vocations then, and recently a bishop has prevented him being put in charge of anything despite his great merit.
I am certain I have names all messed up here; perhaps not. Not my uncle's anyway.
That Saint Patrick's Day remains the hardest, harder even than leaving in shock Solesmes in 1975 on the anniversary of the Kennedy assasination
just sharing with wise counselor Kennedy here
Then maybe the married
Then maybe the married priests of the Eastern Churches, both those in communion with Rome and those outside the Roman communion, are not living "an authentic,pure and mature humanity"? After years of associating with Eastern Christians, I definitely prefer their married priests over their celibate priests.
This is coming from an
This is coming from an ex-priest who married a nun...some gall people have!
...because he was wise enough
...because he was wise enough to realize that maturity was not to be found in the celibate life.
seems the perfect person for
seems the perfect person for these reflections, a psychologist as well.
meanwhile seek not the gall in another's bright eye while ignoring the tankerful in one's own
Hello as you are and
Hello as you are and ex-priest you will understand this I would love your response please, as it is my P.P and me.
I think the Pope should relax celibacy, the sooner, the better, Vicar’s and permanent Deacon’s can marry (if they so wish) so why can’t priest’s, nun’s and monks?
The Pope says that celibacy is a “Gift from God” I find it quite hard to get my head around that comment as were not us human beings created by God through our parents? And if so then, what on earth is the Pope on about, he creates us and when our time has come, we go back to him-we have been created by him!
I know a priest who I think he has feelings for one of his parishioners, lots of other people have noticed too, he said in one of his sermons that, (if anyone has a problem with their priest, you should tell a priest from another parish and let them talk to them because, that should not happen, it is wrong and something should be sorted) I agree, this priest has ran away from a parishioner when they tried to take a photograph of him but, poses for other peoples, he edges away from them when they are talking to them and now, when this priest used to insist on serving them Holy Communion on Sundays no longer does that, they either go to the other cue, and only help to get the cue down when this parishioner has already been served or, sits it out altogether, which is bound to deeply hurt the person, this priest is avoiding and the sad thing is, it must be really hurting him too, you can see the pain in both of their faces but, you can’t do a thing about it. The Pope is being really unfair and ridiculous with this impossible situation which he knows full well is ripping the Catholic church to shreds, I think celibacy should be scrapped immediately.
The Pope speaks of keeping celibacy as a “Gift from God”, even when there are still priests abusing children, and that is not celibate, far from it, the Pope in that direction is actually putting himself above God, OUR MAKER because, God is our creator, if we are not here from God, then who did make us Pope, there is no logic in saying that celibacy is a gift from God, if that is the case then where “ON EARTH” did plants, flowers and grass come from and us!!!!!
Thank you
Anonymous
Just to help keep things
Just to help keep things straight a bit here, don't confuse celibacy with the vow of chastity. Members of religious orders take a vow (among others) of chastity, and there is an entirely different theology, history and tradition about consecrated religious life as opposed to celibacy among secular priests (those not members of a religious order but who belong to a diocese). So while celibacy has not always been required of secular priests, chastity has always been a requirement for members of religious orders (priests, brothers, nuns, monks, sisters).
I think chastity is what we
I think chastity is what we really need to be talking about. Everyone is called to chastity. How many marriages are ruined because of a lack of chastity.
Makes sense, Anonymous. Once
Makes sense, Anonymous. Once again, then, it should be - in such a discussion - separated from chastity as an evangelical counsel (vow in religious life) and chastity as a condition of everyday Christian living in the lay state.
And it is being read (and
And it is being read (and agreed with) by an ex-serviceman who married an ex-nurse - what relevance does that have?
Life happens.
Now why would you possibly
Now why would you possibly object to that? And to be accurate, you should have added "ex-" before "nun."
and your point would
and your point would be........?
Cheers,
Gall is not in short supply
Gall is not in short supply by the people at NCR... they all seem to have agendas to suit themselves. Oh, and of course, they all know better than The Holy Father
"...some gall people
"...some gall people have!"
Nope.
A psychologist tellin' it like it actually is!
God works in mysterious ways.
God works in mysterious ways. God is Love.
Don't vilify the messenger
Don't vilify the messenger because you don't like the message!
Thank you Dr. Kennedy. I do
Thank you Dr. Kennedy. I do believe you are correct. Hopefully the Vatican will learn about and accept the real needs of human people, body and soul united, and not impose the life of angels on human persons who have not the calling to live in that form.
Most men cannot abide by
Most men cannot abide by lifetime celibacy. Even some priests who take the vow, with the best of intentions, sometimes slip. If Benedict insists on maintaining mandatory celibacy, then he will be drawing from a much smaller pool of men.
Benedict knows this of course, and perhaps he is resigned to having fewer priests. Curiously enough, he refuses to make even minor compromises, such as allowing Bishops to ordain, on an exception basis, married Deacons who they regard as worthy and able. This would be a very small step, that even most conservatives could live with, but yet, he will not even do that.
So we are left with a smaller priesthood, problems administering sacraments. etc. I think you will see some compromises by the next Pope with regards to the ordination of married Deacons. Celibacy will not be done away with, but I do see the Bishops allowed more latitude in ordaining married men on an exception basis. I think the Bishops could be trusted with this authority.
For the first 20 years of my
For the first 20 years of my priestly life, I was not able to live a happy celibate life. Every year I would fall in love with another woman and feel very frustrated that I could not pursue the relationship. I began to have homosexual encounters because they did not have the same pull on me and because I am mostly heterosexual I did not feel that I was entering an exclusive relationship that violated my promise of celibacy. I consider myself to have had an immature sexual development upon entering the seminary. I later came to accept that I needed romantic relationships with women and I pursued them, but I never had intercourse. I left a trail of broken-hearted women. In my own immaturity and arrested psychosexual development, I tried to live celibately the best I could. I tried to be faithful. God was faithful to me because, finally, after 20 years of priesthood, six diferent therapists and innumerable silent retreats, God gave me the gift of celibacy which I have lived faithfully for the last 15 years.
Glory to God for that.
Glory to God for that.
Dr. Kennedy's reflection and
Dr. Kennedy's reflection and analogy are on target! How sad that our Popes for the last 30 years have been more concerned with preserving celibacy than preserving the priesthood or the Eucharist! I have 34 years as a priest and agree completely with Gene Kennedy's article!
I think the pope and the
I think the pope and the curia's defense of celibacy is disingenuous. There are three reasons that I see that they won't talk about. First is the money. If the pastor has a wife and ten kids they need to recieve more of a salary than they do now. Second they do not want to deal with the problems of having wives and kids in the rectory such as divorce, drugs, or unwanted pregnanceys. The third reason is the biggest. They are fearful of a lot of married priests and bishops practising contraception like almost all of the other married Catholics.
Is it possible that you might
Is it possible that you might have got it backward, Eugene, and the Holy Father's got it right? I'm just askin'. It's always good to consider the alternatives.
It is interesting that in the
It is interesting that in the scandal ridden Church of Boston, there are now 61 men preparing to be priests in the diocese. The St Joseph Province of the Domincans welcomed 21 new novices, The last time that occurred was in 1966. These men will all to promise to live celibate lives. Perhaps Benedict does't have it "backward."
Submitted by Anonymous on
Submitted by Anonymous on Nov. 07, 2010.
You stated:
"It is interesting that in the scandal ridden Church of Boston, there are now 61 men preparing to be priests in the diocese. The St Joseph Province of the Domincans welcomed 21 new novices, The last time that occurred was in 1966. These men will all to promise to live celibate lives. Perhaps Benedict does't have it "backward."
-----------------------------------
I am glad that Boston has a number of men preparing for the priesthood. It may help that the Cardinal is a member of a religious order (Franciscan Capuchins---and observes a vow of poverty---along with chastity and obedience). But the old axiom of "Don't count your chickens before they hatch" is important to remember here. I know of religious communities that had over 40 novices---each year. Today---barely 1/4 remain from many of those groups.
If they profess vows after their two years of novitiate and STAY---all the days of their lives---that will be something to be happy about. As one of my professors used to say---'you can only say that you have been faithful if---you have loved the same woman (or man) all of your life and never wanted any other (marriage) or you have lived all of your life with the same love and fervor (for God and your fellow humans) that you had when God first called you to the priesthood/religious life. Only then, can you say that you had a real vocation.'
Many are called---
No shortage of vocations in
No shortage of vocations in Marcel Maciel's Legionaires either!!
On celibacy... Matt. 19:11-12
On celibacy...
Matt. 19:11-12 - Jesus says celibacy is a gift from God and whoever can bear it should bear it. Jesus praises and recommends celibacy for full-time ministers in the Church. Because celibacy is a gift from God, those who criticize the Church’s practice of celibacy are criticizing God and this wonderful gift He bestows on His chosen ones.
Matt. 19:29 - Jesus says that whoever gives up children for the sake of His name will receive a hundred times more and will inherit eternal life. Jesus praises celibacy when it is done for the sake of His kingdom.
Matt. 22:30 - Jesus explains that in heaven there are no marriages. To bring about Jesus’ kingdom on earth, priests live the heavenly consecration to God by not taking a wife in marriage. This way, priests are able to focus exclusively on the spiritual family, and not have any additional pressures of the biological family (which is for the vocation of marriage). This also makes it easier for priests to be transferred to different parishes where they are most needed without having to worry about the impact of their transfer on wife and children.
1 Cor 7:1 Paul teaches that it is well for a man not to touch a woman. This is the choice that the Catholic priests of the Roman rite freely make.
1 Cor. 7:7 - Paul also acknowledges that celibacy is a gift from God and wishes that all were celibate like he is.
1 Cor. 7:27 Paul teaches men that they should not seek marriage. In Paul's opinion, marriage introduces worldly temptations that can interfere with one's relationship with God, specifically regarding those who will become full-time ministers in the Church.
1 Cor. 7:32-33, 38 - Paul recommends celibacy for full-time ministers in the Church so that they are able to focus entirely upon God and building up His kingdom. He who refrains from marriage will do better.
1 Tim. 3:2 - Paul instructs that bishops must be married only once. Many Protestants use this verse to prove that the Church’s celibacy law is in error. But they are mistaken because this verse refers to bishops that were widowers. Paul is instructing that these widowers could not remarry. The verse also refers to those bishops who were currently married. They also could not remarry (in the Catholic Church’s Eastern rite, priests are allowed to marry; celibacy is only a disciplinary rule for the clergy of the Roman rite). Therefore, this text has nothing to do with imposing a marriage requirement on becoming a bishop.
1 Tim. 4:3 - in this verse, Paul refers to deceitful doctrines that forbid marriage. Many non-Catholics also use this verse to impugn the Church’s practice of celibacy. This is entirely misguided because the Catholic Church (unlike many Protestant churches) exalts marriage to a sacrament. In fact, marriage is elevated to a sacrament, but consecrated virginity is not. The Church declares marriage sacred, covenantal and lifegiving. Paul is referring to doctrines that forbid marriage and other goods when done outside the teaching of Christ and for a lessor good. Celibacy is an act of giving up one good (marriage and children) for a greater good (complete spiritual union with God).
1 Tim. 5:9-12 - Paul recommends that older widows take a pledge of celibacy. This was the beginning of women religious orders.
2 Tim. 2:3-4 - Paul instructs his bishop Timothy that no soldier on service gets entangled in civilian pursuits, since his aim his to satisfy the One who enlisted him. Paul is using an analogy to describe the role of the celibate priesthood in the Church.
Rev. 14:4 - unlike our sinful world of the flesh, in heaven, those consecrated to virginity are honored.
Isaiah 56:3-7 - the eunuchs who keep God’s covenant will have a special place in the kingdom of heaven.
Jer. 16:1-4 - Jeremiah is told by God not to take a wife or have children.
Didn't this chap leave his
Didn't this chap leave his Order to get married? Not exactly a credible on the topic. Rather, seems to be justifying his own choices ex post.
KScrawler....Why are you
KScrawler....Why are you trying to blog here with the Truth? Notice how you
are immediately attacked!! for expressing an opinion different from THE PROFESSOR-EX-PRIEST!! You cannot defend the Pope here successfully nor credibly, for you are speaking to the hard of heart and hearing. In other words, don't bother casting pearls among the swine! They are convinced Vatican II was high-jacked from them by the past and current Popes and nothing you can say will change their minds. To them anyone who thinks otherwise is a knuckle-dragging troglidyte. Shake the dust from your sandals ...and move on!
I have considered that, but
I have considered that, but if we don't post the truth here then they will never be forced to consider their errors. Plus there may be people reading these posts that need to know that the NCR is a hotbed of heresy, and that these people are coming very close to their expiration date.
No I don't want their exercise in self worship to go unchallenged. There is great growth in the faithful church and the worn out liberalism of these dying hippies should be given as quick a burial as possible.
If we don't challenge the nonsense on this site some innocent person strolling by might think this really is a Catholic web site, and that would be a tragic error.
kscrawler Enough already with
kscrawler
Enough already with the "dying hippies" phrase you keep throwing around. Apart from the offensiveness of such a phrase/thought (are you really hoping for the death of people??), your perception that progressive people are all baby-boomers hippies is wrong. All ages, genders, sexual orientations, socio-economic backgrounds, etc are involved in and hoping for change in the Church.
BTW: I'm 45. Certainly no aging hippie. And I have no plans of dying soon.
Please stop trolling the NCR website. When you have something constructive to say instead of continuously offering nasty, passive-aggressive comments, come on back.
Post new comment