Celibacy | Blogger Priest

Priestly Celibacy – A Higher Form of Love

Posted on July 24, 2013 by Father Joe

The Church has often deemed celibate love as of a higher order than that of marital love. This mentality is especially evident in the writings of monks, even the Augustinian and Protestant reformer Martin Luther who defected and had six children of his own. While promoting married clergy, Luther thought that sexual congress between a husband and wife was at least a venial sin. The antagonism was due to the lack of control and almost bestial passion. The marital act was heavily imbedded, no pun intended, in the perception that man was just another animal, more connected to earthly affairs than spiritual ones. Celibacy reflected something of the eschaton where Jesus said there would be no marriage or giving in marriage. We would be like the angels. The testimony of St. Paul in favor of perfect continence and the model of Christ’s life insured that the celibate model would be given preference as the exemplar for holiness of life. Married people could become saints but their carnality was remarked upon as a handicap. Obviously, the negative view could be taken to extremes. The marital act, as the consummation and renewal for the sacrament, was a holy union. The two became one flesh and we saw something of Christ’s love for the Church in their covenant. Celibacy would still be deemed as of a higher order but it would be wrong to disparage the graces that come to a husband and wife.

Today it seems that many Catholics cater to the same negativity toward celibacy and virginity as most Protestant reformers. We should not imagine that the reformers attacked virginity or urged marriage simply from principle. Celibacy created a grouping of men and women who belonged entirely to the Church. It was sometimes difficult to intimidate such faithful sons and daughters. However, earthly princes, both German and English, learned quickly that if you give a man a wife and family then his first concern, more so than not, was their welfare. They would become more dependent upon the temporal ruler and accommodate his brand of religion. This coarse and opportunistic attack upon celibacy was disguised behind allegations of hypocrisy and unnatural lifestyles, just as critics today carelessly banter charges of child molestation. The notion of a meritorious virginity was reduced to the butt of jokes.

Filed under: Anti-Catholicism, Apologetics, Catholic, Celibacy, Morality, Priests, Religion, Sacraments, Sexuality, Sin | 1 Comment »

Priestly Celibacy – The Rule Not the Exception

Posted on July 23, 2013 by Father Joe

Except for the fact that I am a priest, I am unsure what value my reflection upon this matter of celibacy may possess for others. There are already historical studies which demonstrate that perfect continence was an ideal of the early Church. Much has been written toward a theology of priestly celibacy, especially citing the marital analogy. In any case, for what it is worth, I will add my own personal musing.

I am already well aware that my support for the full retention of the discipline has put me at odds with critics, even with some of my fellow priests. Petitions have popped up in various countries where clergy want optional celibacy, much as practiced in our Eastern rites. The Anglican clergy who have accepted the papal offer of Catholic inclusion are also making noise about the celibate/married priest situation. A few have paraded how wonderful it is, to be a married man and a Catholic priest. I would prefer that they remain quiet and keep a low profile. I hope that the Holy Father will compel the Eastern rites to restrict their married clergy to Europe and not to allow their numbers to amass in North America, as has been asked of them under holy obedience. The Anglican usage Catholics should not expect that the next generation of clergy will contain married priests. The aberration is tolerated for the sake of reunion; not as a permanent relaxation of the discipline. Or am I wrong? I have heard it said that married candidates will be granted dispensations for ordination on an individual basis and that the Pope will be generous. What if he is not?

Some act as if opposition to celibacy might be a new phenomenon; it is not. Our erotic society makes the custody of the eyes difficult today but priests are men and men have always struggled with the emotions, passions and yearnings of all men. There is also the inescapable truth of original sin and our fallen nature. This struggle associated with celibacy is precisely why it is regarded as an important element of sacrificial love.

Filed under: Anti-Catholicism, Apologetics, Catholic, Celibacy, Discipleship, Morality, Priests, Religion, Sacraments, Sexuality | Leave a comment »

Priestly Celibacy – Under the Shadow of Scandal

Posted on July 22, 2013 by Father Joe

While it might seem that “conservative” clergy, to borrow a political adjective, are resentful toward the laity who “would dare” reflect upon priestly celibacy; such is not really the case. Our ire or hurt is only aroused when there is a lack of appreciation or thankfulness for the very real and substantive sacrifice made by priests on their behalf. Our gift of celibacy, enabled by divine grace, is offered to God so that we might more completely and intimately belong to the people we serve. It seems to me that there are two erroneous extremes: the first as a dissent or dismissal of celibacy as wrong or ill-opportune and the second as a cold indifference. It is frequently proposed that priests who stumble regarding celibacy struggle under a sexual immaturity or impeded development (although these critics often wrongly clamor for earlier sexual acting-out as the preventative).

Indeed, I read one researcher who taught that the crime of child molestation was symptomatic of stunted psychosexual development; having retarded their own maturation at childhood, their preoccupation remained with children. Not being a social scientist, I cannot say for sure if this last assessment be true. It seems to me that the actual culprit is a grossly misaligned sexual orientation. Men who abuse children are both sick and criminals.

While the American Psychiatric Association and liberal politicians would grant homosexuality the status of normalcy; the Church deems such attraction as disorientation and the commission of subsequent acts to be wrong and sinful. It may be that certain homosexuals entered the priesthood to disguise their attraction; however, the Holy See has judged homosexuals as unfit candidates for holy orders. There is much worry, even if unsaid or denied, that most clerical child abuse cases were homosexual in character.

Consecrated men who fall with adult women also sin grievously, but according and not as opposed to nature. Despite this, especially in light of criminal allegations against pederasts, certain bishops now wrongly punish such clergy as if they had broken civil law or endangered the innocent. While no molester of children can ever return to ministry; the man who stumbles with a consenting adult woman may need fraternal correction and prayer more than clinical exile for treatment or forced laicization. The priesthood of this man might be salvaged, yes, even if a child is the fruit of a forbidden liaison. It comes down to authentic penance and reform from the priest and how much God’s people are willing to forgive.

Filed under: Anti-Catholicism, Apologetics, Catholic, Celibacy, Discipleship, Forgiveness, Morality, Priests, Religion, Sacraments, Sexuality, Sin | Leave a comment »

Priestly Celibacy – Do People Believe It?

Posted on July 21, 2013 by Father Joe

There are a number of excellent books written by priests about the value of celibacy; and yet, the public seems to give a heightened weight to criticism of celibacy from either fallen-away priests or from critical laity. Why is this? Given society’s addiction to all things sexual, heterosexual and homosexual, I suspect it is because celibacy is viewed as either a fiction or as an aberrant perversion. The fact that it is a natural lifestyle and one chosen by St. Paul and our Lord is readily dismissed. I recall many years ago taking weekly communion to the elderly Catholic residents of Judiciary House in NW Washington, DC. The maintenance man, himself a senior citizen, saw my collar and remarked that we both wore uniforms. Making small talk, he asked, “Is it true?” “What?” I returned. Incredulously, he queried, “Is it true that you guys never get some?” It was not the kind of question I expected, given that we were standing on a public sidewalk in front of the building where he worked. Pedestrians were passing by on every side of us. I repeated his question, trying to figure how to respond. Did I misunderstand him? No, he did indeed mean sex. I answered, “Yes, it is true; we take promises of perpetual celibacy.” He shook his head. He could not believe it. He walked away unconvinced and mumbled to himself, “How can you live and not get some? A man has to get some? I know I have to get some.” If such average working men were dubious about this a quarter of a century ago, today many would accuse priests of hypocrisy and outright deception. This incident happened before the floodgates opened with the so-called pedophile crisis. The failure of a few has damaged the witness of many. Celibacy, once respected as a sacrifice signifying devotion to God and to the service of his people, is now regarded as expendable or worse, as a sign of sexual deviancy and secret sin. We have our work cut out for us if we hope to correct the false label stamped upon the celibate priesthood. Celibacy is very personal and private to the priest; nevertheless, we must be courageous and extroverted in demonstrating both its viability and utility.

Filed under: Anti-Catholicism, Apologetics, Catholic, Celibacy, Discipleship, Priests, Questions, Religion, Sacraments, Sexuality, Sin | Leave a comment »

Married Priests Now? Um, No Thank You!

Posted on June 10, 2013 by Father Joe

Cathy feels very strongly that the Church should allow priests to marry. I took exception to her opinion.

CATHY: It is impossible to make the assumption that having a wife and children would be distraction to priests, bishops, cardinals and the pope when they were never allowed to have a family in the first place and many have fooled around anyway.

FATHER JOE: You are presumptuous that many priests have “fooled around.” Most Catholic priests are faithful to their promises and to the commitment of obedience and celibacy. Priests are normal men who grew up in families. We also deal with the marriages and families of others. Many married people who have come to understand what priesthood entails have themselves told me that celibacy is the best way. The Catholic preference is that the priest’s wife and family is his parish— he belongs to them, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year (or 366 in leap year). I am not saying that we do not have some good and holy married priests. We do. But the daily character of their priesthood and personal life is very different. It has to be or they would not be good and faithful husbands and fathers. Even things that are usually reckoned as good can be distractions to the priest. Here I speak not just about activity but about the donation or surrender of himself and of his heart.

CATHY: To make people choose against a holy sacrament of marriage is to break the first commandment in the bible which is to be fruitful and multiply.

FATHER JOE: First, the sacrament of marriage comes with the Christian dispensation; all that comes before belongs to the natural covenant of marriage. Second, the mention of fruitfulness comes not as a command in itself but rather as part of man’s stewardship over creation. Third, what we are dealing with here is a divine benediction or blessing. We read: “God blessed them and God said to them: Be fertile and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it. Have dominion over the fish of the sea, the birds of the air, and all the living things that crawl on the earth. (Genesis 1:28). Fourth, it is a generalized matter for the whole human race and not a particular command to individuals. You personally cannot fill the earth and subdue it. You personally do not have mastery over all the animals. There is no commandment that says that men and women MUST get married. Choosing celibacy is not simply opting never to get married; rather, it is the decision to love in another way. Marriage is regarded by the Church as a natural right. However, the man called to priesthood or religious life opts not to exert this right. Yes, it does signify sacrificial love but so does marriage. What makes it a higher form of love is that it is the road less traveled. It points in a unique fashion to the coming kingdom where there will neither be marriage nor the giving in marriage. This is what theologians mean when they speak of priestly celibacy as an eschatological sign.

CATHY: You would take away some of the supposed scandal from the church if you would allow for men and women (nuns) to serve and be married.

FATHER JOE: Are you so sure? Have you noticed the divorce and remarriage rates among Lutheran clergy? Child abuse rates are higher in marriages than among celibate clergy. No, you are very wrong about this. The Church could make the discipline of celibacy optional; however, it will neither be because of scandals nor because genital sexual expression has become a modern necessity.

CATHY: How can ministers of the word even begin to identify with parishioners if they have not lived through some of their circumstances, especially since ministry begins in the home?

FATHER JOE: Again, you pile one false presupposition upon another. Priests do not come from distant Pluto. We have grown up in families, some good and a few that were dysfunctional. Priests prepare couples for marriage, give counseling, interact regularly with families, and know all the blessings and malignancies that can plague the home. It comes first through our pastoral training and then in our daily association with the people we serve. I would suspect in all this that priestly experience is far beyond yours or that of many married people. This is precisely an area where celibacy frees the priest so that he can be available to his parishioners. Otherwise, the cares and tribulations of his own home would have to come first.

CATHY: Sex is not vile if done within marriage. It is a God sanctioned act.

FATHER JOE: Did I ever say that sex was vile? Please do not put words into my mouth. The marital act consummates the marital union and it regularly renews the covenant of the spouses with each other and with God. Marital love and family are great treasures; but celibate love is a still greater gift. You do not prize it. You do not understand. This is the tragedy of the modern age. We agree with St. Paul, that the single-hearted love of God (celibacy) is the better way. But, it is not the only way. God will give the gift of celibacy to any man truly called to the priesthood. I firmly believe this. We see it realized in the lives of thousands upon thousands of priests.

CATHY: This not being married is a man sanctioned decree.

FATHER JOE: There are doctrinal components, but yes it is what the Church terms a discipline. Remember that the Church is both a human and a divine institution. While the Church has charge over such disciplines, it is the mind of the Church that celibacy pleases God and that such reflects his providential will over the orders of the Church.

CATHY: Every prophet and most of the apostles including St. Peter were married.

FATHER JOE: So what? We still have married clergy, a few priests and many deacons. And they are permitted to exercise their marital prerogatives. However, many married clergy in the early Church opted after their ordinations to live like Joseph and Mary. They may have had children before ordination but then practiced perfect and perpetual continence just as the Jewish priests practiced temporary abstention during their terms of service.

CATHY: Their trials were due to the times they were living in. Now, unless you are living in pagan or atheist parts of the world, no one is trying to burn or stone you for being Catholic.

FATHER JOE: What you say here is not entirely topical to this discussion. But, your gullibility frightens me. Have you missed all the uproar this past year about religious liberty? I have a parish with members from Asia and Africa. They have seen their priests killed and churches at home destroyed. I know priests here at home who have suffered the prison cell for peacefully protesting evils in our society like abortion. I suspect the day will soon come when declaring homosexual acts as sinful from the pulpit will be equated as hate-speech. When that happens, we will see many more priests behind bars. A priest-friend was murdered in his bedroom just a few years ago by a madman unhappy with him. We had several priests up north killed by a homeless man who beat their brains out with the very soup can with which these holy men sought to give the beggar nourishment. The family of married priests, as with ministers, can become the ground for manipulation and the cause for passivity in the face of evil. How is that? The celibate priest has only himself. The married man thinks first of his wife and children. He needs an income to provide for them. He needs a home to shelter them. The world plays hardball all the time. How many ministers have shut their mouths on certain issues for fear of alienating parishioners and forfeiting lucrative positions? We have some incredibly poor parishes. We already have men who can barely pay their small salaries. Could you raise a family on a thousand or fifteen hundred dollars a month? When all the assessments are paid there is not much left. Sometimes there is nothing left. The Church’s resources go back into our care for the poor, our schools, hospitals, and churches. As I said, we belong to the people we serve.

Filed under: Catholic, Celibacy, Magisterium, Pope, Priests, Religion, Religious Liberty, Sacraments, Sexuality, Sin | 1 Comment »

Another Anti-Catholic Pays a Visit

Posted on June 9, 2013 by Father Joe

The following is my response to Steve Thompson who posted comments against the Priesthood, the Church, and Mary.

STEVE: Joe, you are NOT my father.

FATHER JOE: I certainly hope not because I do not know your mother.

STEVE: Jesus said to “…call no man father except Father who is in heaven.”

FATHER JOE: Yes, and he also said to call no man your teacher, but we have many teachers. We also have biological fathers. Saint Paul even spoke about himself as a spiritual father. Priests are also spiritual fathers. Jesus uses Hebraic hyperbole so as to make an emphatic statement or emphasis. It is the Jewish way of adding an exclamation point, by making an outrageous claim. Our fatherhood should amplify and make clear the reality of God as our Father. God cares about us. Similarly, genuine teachers teach in conformity to the truths revealed by God. Anything else is forbidden.

STEVE: The Catholic church is full of pedophile priests.

FATHER JOE: Actually, it is not. There were as many sick men as in the general population and we have made a real effort to remove them from ministry and to enact policies to protect our children. But let us be honest, you are not so concerned about the issues and answers as you are eager to pounce on the Catholic Church (large ‘C’).

STEVE: Jesus Christ is our high priest, and the pastoral epistles (Timothy I & II, Titus) outline the church offices, whereby you will not find monks, nuns, cardinals and popes.

FATHER JOE: Cardinals are the electors for Popes. The Church at one time selected the Bishop of Rome in other ways. Most Cardinals are bishops or at least priests. Your mistake is a failure to discern that the titles or labels attached to ministries and sacraments have changed over time. Everything that the Church is today is planted by Christ and grew up during the apostolic period. Ministers are called pastors, a name originally associated with shepherds. Our bishops to this very day carry the shepherd’s staff or crozier as a sign of their office. Men are ordained, elders (presbyters) are appointed and the qualifications for bishops (episcopoi) are detailed. Deacons are selected to care for the Greek widows and they preach the Good News. St. John would become a part of an ascetic community. The desert fathers would trace their piety to him. Early Christian monastic communities would model themselves on the Jewish communities as at Qumran. Like St. Paul, many would embrace a celibate way of love and life. While the title was not always used, all the Popes are successors of St. Peter. The charge given him by Christ is also given to them. “You are Rock! Feed my sheep! I give to you the keys of the kingdom.”

STEVE: Christians do not need human priests, popes, nor the “mother of God,” since God has no mother.

FATHER JOE:

The unique mediation of Christ as our great High Priest does not preclude the extension of Christ’s ministry through his priests. Indeed, the Bible makes this point. Our Lord told his apostles to perpetuate the Eucharist (Lord’s Supper) in remembrance of him. He gave Peter universal jurisdiction over the Church. He gave his priests the awesome power to forgive sins. Read 2 Corinthians 5:14-21: “Brothers and sisters: The love of Christ impels us, once we have come to the conviction that one died for all; therefore, all have died. He indeed died for all, so that those who live might no longer live for themselves but for him who for their sake died and was raised. Consequently, from now on we regard no one according to the flesh; even if we once knew Christ according to the flesh, yet now we know him so no longer. So whoever is in Christ is A NEW CREATION: the old things have passed away; behold new things have come. And all this is from God, who has reconciled us to himself through Christ AND GIVEN US THE MINISTRY OF RECONCILIATION, namely, God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting their trespasses against them AND ENTRUSTING TO US THE MESSAGE OF RECONCILIATION. SO WE ARE AMBASSADORS FOR CHRIST, AS IF GOD WERE APPEALING THROUGH US. We implore you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God. For our sake he made him to be sin who did not know sin, so that we might become the righteousness of God in him.”

As for the title MOTHER OF GOD given to Mary, it is the language or communication through idioms. What are you, a heretical Nestorian? Mary’s title defends the divine identity of her Son. Mary is a blessed creature preserved from sin and chosen by God to be the vehicle through which the Messiah and Lord would enter our world. Your rebuke against her is most foul and unbefitting a Christian. But are you a Christian? Do you believe in the Trinity? Do you believe that Jesus is the Second Person of the Trinity made incarnate by the power of the Holy Spirit? Do you believe that he is the eternal Word made man? Those who argued that Mary was only the mother of the man were interpreted as denying that Jesus was a divine Person.

STEVE: Catholic Jesuits endorsed the Inquisitions, and their banana republic nations in South America reflect what this religion is really all about.

FATHER JOE: Jesuits, Franciscans and Dominicans were involved with numerous Church courts. Many of these functioned as civil courts do today, seeking to preserve public order. Various nations misused particular inquisitional authority, but in some kingdoms the efforts were very mild. Protestant and Catholic nations both sometimes misused religion. The numbers of people wronged are often exaggerated, some pushing from a few thousand to other critics ridiculously suggesting millions (which would have emptied Europe of any and all population). People also suffered in the ancient prisons from poor health conditions. You wrong the Jesuits who died to bring the faith back to England. Priests have also suffered torture and execution in Mexico, Central, Latin and South America from the very tyrants with whom you associate them.

STEVE: Catholics/Popery signed a Concordat with Adolf Hitler during World War II.

FATHER JOE:

The Concordat was signed in 1933, a number of years before World War II. Hitler’s Germany would break such agreements just as it would with France, Russia and other nations. The Concordat was to protect the status and work of the Church in a totalitarian fascist state. The Church was very much at odds with Hitler and was seeking breathing room. The Church wanted to insure the spiritual care of 20 million German Catholics. It was not approval for a Socialist state that was philosophically antithetical to Catholic faith and values. Pope Pius XI issued the encyclical Mit brennender Sorge in 1937. It was drafted by Pope Pius XII and read in all the Catholic churches. It criticized Hitler, National Socialism, and the persecution underway. Catholics were warned that Nazism was incompatible with Catholic Christianity.

Your insinuations or perjury to the contrary is a gross violation of the commandment against false witness. This was one of the strongest condemnations ever offered by the Vatican!

STEVE: Furthermore, your Maryolatry is based on the pagan “Queen of Heaven” cult going back to Nimrod/Semiramis, Venus, Diana, Isis and Aphrodite. Get yourself a copy of the Two Babylons by Alexsander Hislop and you will learn what I already know about your religion.

FATHER JOE: I have a first edition hardback copy on my anti-Catholic bigotry shelf. The book Two Babylons by Alexsander Hislop is a joke and represents the worst of twisted logic and poor scholarship. Only anti-Catholic bigots take it seriously because it fuels their hatred against Catholicism. He equates similarities with an absent historical progression. It is up there with spurious works like Chariots of the Gods by Erich von Däniken, although his fancy are ancient alien astronauts.

STEVE: The Catholic Church is all about the Babylonian religion, priestcraft and sacraments (Your so called 7 saving sacraments could not save anyone from anything).

FATHER JOE: The Catholic Church is the most authentic and original form of Christianity. The apostles were the first bishop-priests. The sacraments or as they were once called, the divine mysteries, are sacred signs instituted by Christ to give grace. They enter us into the Paschal Mystery of Christ. It is because of this that they have saving value. The priests of the Church participate in the one priesthood of Jesus Christ. Jesus offers the Eucharist. Jesus forgives sins. There is no contradiction.

STEVE: Anyone can have access to Jesus Christ directly without your pagan plumbing, including but not limited to Maryolatry, Popery and your priestcraft.

FATHER JOE:

The Church encourages both a personal and a corporate faith in Jesus Christ. You would shortchange others just as you do to yourself. Separated from the Church, believers are liable to lose their way just as you have. We do not come to God alone. You are deceiving yourself if you think otherwise. Without the Church, you would have neither a Bible nor someone to translate and pass it on. The Holy Spirit watches over the Pope and bishops to insure the faithful transmission of the deposit of faith. As for Mary, precious biblical prophecy is preserved in Catholicism that you out-rightly reject:

Prayers and Intercession of Mary

Luke 2: 33-35: “The child’s father and mother were amazed at what was said about him; and Simeon blessed them and said to Mary his mother, ‘Behold, this child is destined for the fall and rise of many in Israel, and to be a sign that will be contradicted (and you yourself a sword will pierce) SO THAT THE THOUGHTS OF MANY HEARTS MAY BE REVEALED.’”

Honoring Mary

Luke 1: 46-49: “And Mary said: ‘My soul proclaims the greatness of the Lord; my spirit rejoices in God my savior. For he has looked upon his handmaid’s lowliness; BEHOLD, FROM NOW ON WILL ALL AGES CALL ME BLESSED. The Mighty One has done great things for me, and holy is his name. ’”

STEVE: Peter was married and there was no “pope” for 300 years.

FATHER JOE: The Church began with many married ministers but later decided that celibate love was more desirable for our Christian shepherds. So what? But there were indeed Bishops of Rome or Popes, extending from Christ to the present day. Clement of Rome wrote an epistle or papal letter to the Corinthians in 96 AD! The Popes and the Church was proclaiming the Gospel even though the New Testament had not been completely written and the biblical canon had yet to be formed.

STEVE: Your religion is mostly man made.

FATHER JOE: Sorry, but such is the charge that convicts you. You have made yourself into the great authority of the divine and arbiter of truth. You oppose the Pope by making yourself a false Pope. You strip Christianity of its richness and truths. Yours is a religion of hate and bigotry. You define your faith by what you oppose and offer little of lasting value. You poison the mix.

STEVE: You killed people during the Middle Ages for owning a Bible or part of one, and read the services in Latin so no one could understand them.

FATHER JOE:

Me? Actually I was not born until the last century.

Your charges do not stick against the Church, either. Disagreements I can understand, but I am always challenged to keep my cool in the face of bigoted ignorance. Before the printing press, bibles took years to make and churches preserved them so that all might benefit. Many people could not even read which is why bible stories were told with images in stained-glass windows (something else I suspect you hate). Latin was originally used as the language of the people. Church language transitioned from Aramaic/Hebrew to Greek to Latin. Modern English did not even exist as a language. The languages of man changed over time and the Romance languages grew from Latin: Italian, French and Spanish. Latin was preserved as the language of the Church reflecting the changeless quality of faith. Jesus is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow. Today the liturgy is translated into the vernacular.

STEVE: I was blessed by God to have never been born into this religious institution.

FATHER JOE:

People are not born into the Church as through nature; rather, they are reborn into the Church through faith and baptism. Some as children and others as adults are initiated. Parents and sponsors witness for a child and we trust that the same baptismal promises will be personally professed in Confirmation. We become temples of the Holy Spirit, members of a priestly people and a holy nation. We are fashioned by grace into the likeness of Christ. We become adopted sons and daughters of our heavenly Father. Jesus who is our King becomes our elder brother and Mary is the Queen Mother. The saints are our spiritual brothers and sisters. We become members of Christ’s Mystical Body, the Church. We become inheritors of the kingdom of heaven.

We are the ones truly blessed and we would pray that you might know such blessing!

Filed under: Anti-Catholicism, Apologetics, Apostles, Baptism, Bible, Bishops, Catholic, Celibacy, Church, Commandments, Faith, Forgiveness, Incarnation, Jesus, Mary, Pope, Religion, Sacraments | 3 Comments »

Another Upset Woman About Married Priests, WHY?

Posted on March 24, 2013 by Father Joe

CATHY: It is impossible to make such assumption that having a wife and children would be distraction to priests, bishops, cardinals and the pope when they were never allowed to have a family in the first place and many have fooled around anyway. To make people choose against a holy sacrament of marriage is to break the first commandment in the bible which is to be fruitful and multiply. You would take away some of the supposed scandal from the church if you would allow for men and women (nuns) to serve and be married. How can ministers of the word even begin to identify with parishoners if they have not lived through some of their circumstances especially since ministry begins in the home. Sex is not vile if done within marriage. It is a God sanctioned act. This not being married is a man sanctioned decree. Every prophet and most of the apostles including St. Peter were married. Their trials were due to the times they were living in. Now, unless you are living in pagan or atheist parts of the world, no one is trying to burn or stone you for being Catholic.

FATHER JOE:

You assert several serious falsehoods:

First, the Church in the West once had a married clergy and determined that celibate clergy best served the Lord and the Church. In other words, we have “been there and done that.”

Second, most Catholic ministers are faithful to their promises and do not “fool around” as you put it. You malign me and many good priests. How dare you do this?

Third, the command in Genesis is given to the species, not to every individual. Otherwise, you would have to force people to get married and mandate that all fertile females get pregnant. Such would be absolutely silly. Our Lord did not get married and neither did St. Paul. Deacons represent both married and unmarried clergy in the Catholic Church. Most priests and all bishops are celibate. We did not “choose against marriage” but rather “chose a spiritual marriage to Christ’s Church.” You minimize the sacrifice and the value of such single-hearted love. You should be ashamed of yourself for that.

Fourth, please, do not be silly; sick and unfaithful people are still sick and unfaithful if they are married. A majority of men who left priesthood for marriage subsequently divorced. Protestant churches may not have their dirty laundry paraded on the news, but they have their own scandals with married clergy. A Methodist minister and friend of mine had a large and vibrant church in Washington, DC. He had an affair with a lady in the choir and got himself fired and defrocked. A married clergy would only amplify the possibility of scandal, albeit with divorce, abuse, incest, etc. There is nothing unnatural or wrong with celibacy. The answer to our problems is not a married priesthood. Allowing nuns to marry violates the very nature of their calling.

Fifth, the family may be the little Church but there is no requirement that every man be an ordained priest. Priests deal with many families. There is marriage preparation, counseling, and confession. We see and hear it all. We know the plight of our people. Our celibacy makes us available to them. We might not have our own wives and families, but we belong to our many parish families. Priests are not fools.

Sixth, a celibate priesthood is no condemnation of human sexuality and marriage. Do you know nothing about Pope John Paul II’s theology of the body? The marital act must remain within marriage as the consummation and renewal of the marital covenant. But there is no requirement that we collect as many sacraments as possible. Most men will never be priests. Most Western priests will never be married. I will never have a child. But few men can stand at the altar and make Christ present with the words of consecration. The Priesthood with Mass and Confession are enough for me.

Seventh, celibacy is a discipline of the Church. But our Lord gave such authority to his Church and it is not for you or me to impugn or spurn it. The Church has the mind of Christ in this matter.

Eighth, the Jewish and Christian view of marriage was not the same. Jews tended to see God’s blessings in progeny, wealth and land. Christians are urged to embrace a poverty of spirit. It is in this light that St. Paul recommends celibacy as the better way. You would be hard-pressed to show a married background for all the prophets. St. Paul and certain others were not married. There is evidence that the early Church had a preference for perfect continence on the part of married men who became priests. Strict celibacy would relieve the tension caused by such a situation.

Nine, while I not entirely sure how this fits into the debate about priesthood and marriage, we are facing terrible trials today, too. I have parishioners with family members suffering violence and death in Asia and Africa. Churches are being bombed and Christians are being martyred. The news here at home is filled with daily assaults upon the Church and our religious liberty. Indeed, the government is seeking to shut us down or compromise our moral message. Sorry, but you really do not know what you are talking about. Not having a wife and family might free a priest from fears of retaliation against them or intimidation through them. Men often feel that they must make compromises to secure their families. Are you married Cathy? Does your husband agree with you about mandating married priests?

Cathy, you really know very little about men as priests or what matters to us. We have men and women friends but we save our intimacy for God. Marriage is a wonderful thing, but so is celibate love. Do you find that hard to believe? We do not need to be married. We do not want to be married. We are happy. Why is it that people like yourself want to mess with our lives? If a man is called to holy orders then God will give him the graces for this state of life.

Peace!

Filed under: Bishops, Catholic, Celibacy, Church, Marriage, Priests | 6 Comments »

Faith & Values in the News

Posted on September 20, 2012 by Father Joe

Religious Banners Removed at Catholic School

God forbid that young people at school events should get a taste of traditional American liberties, like freedom of religion and freedom of speech… NOT! Schools can teach science and the faith of atheism but are to make no mention a Creator. Schools can teach safe “promiscuous” sex and give away condoms, but not a penny is available for abstinence education. Schools are forbidden to teach the 10 Commandments and then wonder why youth misbehave and get in trouble with the law. All manner of vulgarity is tolerated but not a bible verse on a sheet… yep, these girls are real trouble-makers, but the right kind. When Islamic religious fanatics burn the flag, destroy property and commit murder… we target our sights upon peaceful Christian cheerleaders at a school football game. Ah, the world is insane!

Muslim Prayer Room Opens at Catholic High School

How many Catholic chapels are there in Islamic schools? Where does courtesy end and religious indifferentism begin? How does one reconcile this with the insistence that “Catholic identity” is not at risk in our parochial schools? Do the Jewish children get their private prayer space as well? What about the Wiccans and Satanists? Do they get chapels to honor the goddess and/or the horned beast? Certainly, we would not want to discriminate or be judgmental… would we? Ah, the plight of radical tolerance!

7-Election 2012

It does not look good for Romney… vote with a cup of coffee. The trouble is that the Tea Party is into another type of drink!

Ex-Priest Sues the Catholic Church to Clear His Name

If what he says is true, I really feel sorry for this guy and there needs to be justice.

The New York Times Remembers Sister Mary Rose

Rest in peace, Sister, and many thanks for saving children and Covenant House.

Children Freak When Disney Channel Cartoon is Interrupted by Porn

If trash television were not trasmitted at all then such accidents would not happen. The truth is that our children are exposed to unhealthy and vulgar images all the time. We cannot trust television to babysit our children. It is a compromised media. The providers are more interested in making money, even with virtual prostitution, then in helping parents to raise kids of good moral character and virtue. In any case, if adults are themselves corrupted by this media, then how can they pass on anything of value without the poison of hypocrisy?

Filed under: Atheism, Bible, Catholic, Celibacy, Conscience, Discipleship, Evangelization, Faith, Family, Modesty, News, Politics, Religion, Religious Liberty, Schools, Sexuality, Sin, Youth | 1 Comment »

The Scandal of Father Bob Pierson

Posted on August 24, 2012 by Father Joe

STEPHEN:

Father Joe, what is your take on Father Bob Pierson?

FATHER JOE:

I had heard of him but had not followed the recent business about his ten minute statement that went viral attacking the initiative supported by the U.S. bishops in opposition to so-called same-sex marriages.

What the priest fails to appreciate is that conscience must be properly informed. Freedom of conscience is not relative moral license. Otherwise, the cause of conscience could be rallied not only for homosexuality but also for other evils like polygamy, bestiality and pederasty. Rather, true liberty comes with an orientation to that which is true and good. Obedience to divine positive law (as revealed in the Church through Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition) and natural law (as ascertained through the right use of reason to the objective order) makes us truly free. The commission of sin and immoral acts brings not freedom but spiritual bondage.

The priest in the video takes statements from the Church and churchmen out of context, much as a fundamentalist minister might from the Bible to support his claims. Cardinal Ratzinger, i.e. the Pope, has certainly always taught about the obligation in following conscience; however, he has likewise insisted that homosexuality is a serious sexual disorientation and that the commission of genital acts associated with it are intrinsically immoral.

Notice that he quotes Cardinal Hume who wrote, “Love between two persons, whether of the same sex or of a different sex, is to be treasured and respected.” His quote came in the context of a larger statement in the UK on the homosexual question. While it is certainly permissible to exhibit fraternal and platonic love, as in most friendships, it would be wrong to equate these words with sexual activity and or anal or oral sex. This is another instance where the priest’s remarks are deliberately deceptive. He is well educated and knows what he is doing. This makes him all the more culpable.

Father Pierson is selective in his quotes from the universal catechism. Note that he does not read from CCC #1601: “The matrimonial covenant, by which a man and a woman establish between themselves a partnership of the whole of life, is by its nature ordered toward the good of the spouses and the procreation and education of offspring; this covenant between baptized persons has been raised by Christ the Lord to the dignity of a sacrament.”

Although he attempts to bracket off sacramental marriage in the Church from civilly recognized marriages, such is only a shallow ploy to avoid personal censure and to elicit support from normally orthodox Catholics. The way that society views marriage informs and spills over into how the faithful understand the sacrament of marriage. Indeed, he, himself, is a staff member in an organization where a Protestant minister and an ex-Catholic bless same-sex unions. Understood in this light, Father Pierson is not only promoting immorality but is taking a heretical position toward one of the seven sacraments of the Church.

The speaker acknowledges that Pope Benedict XVI has declared that homosexuals should not be accepted as candidates for the priesthood. Father Pierson has “come out” that he is a homosexual who opposes Church teaching. We can only hope that he has kept his promise of celibacy. Regardless, he now ridicules the Holy Father and takes a scandalous position against the U.S. bishops and the Marriage Matters campaign. I should add, however, that marriage was threatened long before this issue of so-called same-sex marriage. Marriage was imperiled by growing rates of promiscuity, cohabitation, contraception, adultery, divorce (especially the no-fault variety), and remarriage outside the Church.

Father Pierson had resigned from his post as director of campus ministry after the Vatican officially barred men with “deep-seated homosexual tendencies” from ordination, and because of associated issues in the Church’s faith and moral teaching. “Because I can no longer honestly represent, explain and defend the Church’s teaching on homosexuality, I feel I must resign,” he said. It was also rumored that he was forced out, as he should have been, to avoid further intervention from higher-ups.

His local bishop, Archbishop John Nienstedt of St. Paul and Minneapolis has strenuously promoted the amendment in opposition to so-called same-sex marriage. He required parishioners in the archdiocese to recite A Prayer for Marriage as part of the General Intercessions at Masses. The U.S. bishops have been very clear in their opposition. Marriage is only genuine if it is between a MAN and a WOMAN.

Back in 1986, Cardinal Ratzinger, writing for the Vatican, made a statement for correction and support of a letter promulgated by the American bishops. Father Pierson selectively quoted him, but strangely and dishonestly, not this statement which speaks to the question at hand.

Follow this link for the statement:

Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons

ON THE PASTORAL CARE OF HOMOSEXUAL PERSONS

“Although the particular inclination of the homosexual person is not a sin, it is a more or less strong tendency ordered toward an intrinsic moral evil; and thus the inclination itself must be seen as an objective disorder…. It is only in the marital relationship that the use of the sexual faculty can be morally good. A person engaging in homosexual behavior therefore acts immorally.”

“To choose someone of the same sex for one’s sexual activity is to annul the rich symbolism and meaning, not to mention the goals, of the Creator’s sexual design. Homosexual activity is not a complementary union, able to transmit life; and so it thwarts the call to a life of that form of self-giving which the Gospel says is the essence of Christian living. This does not mean that homosexual persons are not often generous and giving of themselves; but when they engage in homosexual activity they confirm within themselves a disordered sexual inclination which is essentially self-indulgent….”

“It is deplorable that homosexual persons have been and are the object of violent malice in speech or in action. Such treatment deserves condemnation from the Church’s pastors wherever it occurs. It reveals a kind of disregard for others which endangers the most fundamental principles of a healthy society. The intrinsic dignity of each person must always be respected in word, in action and in law.”

“But the proper reaction to crimes committed against homosexual persons should not be to claim that the homosexual condition is not disordered. When such a claim is made and when homosexual activity is consequently condoned, or when civil legislation is introduced to protect behavior to which no one has any conceivable right, neither the Church nor society at large should be surprised when other distorted notions and practices gain ground, and irrational and violent reactions increase.”

Father Bob Pierson, O.S.B. should be disciplined by his Benedictine order. He has caused scandal and given rise to public dissent from the Church. His faculties to function as a priest should be revoked or curtailed. As a man under ecclesial obedience, he should either publicly recant his dissent or face immediate dismissal. A priest who recommends mortal sin is no longer aligned with Christ. Even if he should be demented or ignorant, he is now on the side of the evil one.

STEPHEN:

Father Joe, I agree with everything you said, albeit except for maybe one small clarification. You write, “Understood in this light, Father Pierson is not only promoting immorality but is taking a heretical position toward one of the seven sacraments of the Church.” Father Bob would disagree as he was careful to differentiate between civil marriages, which are all “outside the Church” and the Church does not recognize anyway and “sacramental” marriages within the Church. Thus, Father Bob would argue that his voting NO on banning same sex “marriage” has nothing to do with Church teaching on sacramental marriage.

I completely agree this priest should be disciplined severely. But will he be? Almost certainly not, and this is the primary reason for our current crisis. Dietrich Von Hildebrand called it the “Lethargy of the Guardians” as far back as the 70’s. We have suffered under the complete unwillingness of ecclesiastical authority since Vatican II to discipline clerics and bishops for egregious sins against doctrine and the faith. What makes it worse is that the same ecclesiastical authority DOES discipline and bring the hammer down for breaking procedural rules/canon laws that have nothing to do with heresy or doctrine. This sets up a practice which lessens the credibility of the bishops who selectively punish lesser offenses while allowing the most egregious publicly scandalous statements from dissenting priests to go unpunished.

I would dare say it is a sin for this man’s bishop or superior not to discipline him in some way, including at minimum, silencing him on this issue to at least minimize further scandal. Will it happen? I’m willing to bet you a shiny nickel it will not. And it is a slap in the face to you and other good priests who would be punished in a second if you did something like deny Holy Communion to a practicing Lesbian Buddhist who introduced you to her “lover” in the sacristy before Mass.

FATHER JOE:

The priest has a track record beyond the video. (I have not directly linked the video, only a strong critique. Those who want to see it can Google the liberal propaganda.)

He recognizes same-sex marriages as valid, both civilly and in the eyes of God. What confuses the issue is that he denies that there has to be concurrence or approbation from the “institutional” Church. I do not have proof, but like some of his Episcopalian liberals, he would love to bless (and maybe has) these unions. He is a regular speaker at gay-lesbian conventions. Remember, too, that priests are only allowed to witness marriages in the U.S. that are also civilly recognized. We function as both civil magistrates and as ministers of the Church. This is not the case in many countries where Catholic couples are required to endure two ceremonies. Such only happens in the U.S. when there is a convalidation.

I should add, that the Church generally recognizes civil marriages between spouses who are not Catholic. If they are legitimately baptized, then there may be a sacramental character as well. Indeed, if there is a divorce and a desire to marry a Catholic, they would have to pursue a formal case annulment with no guarantees of success. Now we will further have to clarify that we do not recognize adulterous marriages or feigned same-sex marriages. I suspect, given the pressure from the Obama administration, that clergy will eventually have to forfeit their civil authority over marriages in order to distinguish the sacramental covenant from the civil legal contract. Once the definition of marriage diverges, we cannot be party to something in which we do not believe. This may already be happening in light of no fault divorce. I would also not be surprised if the government should seek to compel clergy to witness same-sex marriages. The rights of the Church are very much threatened. I pray that our bishops and priests will have the courage to face fines and imprisonment. The latter is quite possible, if the Church’s stand against homosexuality should be judged as a violation of civil rights laws and as hate-speech.

Further, the priest has been involved in the Catholic gay, lesbian, bi-sexual, transsexual community. He knows full well the canonical restraints upon Catholics and does not care. All this is to say that the video is deceptive propaganda. He is a liar. Even when he throws out crumbs of feigned respect to Church discipline, they are lies. If you are familiar with his work in Collegeville, then you would know that he also rejects the “proles” (open to human generation) element that is essential to the covenant of marriage. He literally believes that anal intercourse consummates the bond. It is in light of all this that I said that he is a heretic regarding the sacrament of marriage.

In regards to disciplinary measures, they may actually be in the works. Had he been a secular or diocesan priest matters might have been easier. The Benedictines tend to protect their own and have a rather progressive track record in his particular community. One of them (Fr. Anthony Ruff, OSB) recently attacked the corrected translation of the Mass at the national Call to Action convention. They also honored the Lesbian Buddhist-Catholic you mentioned and the pro-abortion Catholic Maryland governor was also in attendance. There are a lot of trouble-makers to go around these days.

Orthodox and traditional churchmen have a higher capacity for suffering in that they love the Church and seek to be obedient while the other side really does not care; liberal breakaway groups, as with Archbishop Milingo and Washington’s own Father George Stallings, were also censured and even faced excommunication. In this sense, there is some parallel. I suspect that many in the Church find the contemporary situation almost overwhelming given the pervasive dissent. During this silent and not so silent schism, there is also the worry that the wrong action might lead the ignorant or weak of faith out of the Church. You are right, not all shepherds are to be trusted. But we must also be careful NOT to spread calumny and to hurt good men who are doing their best.

Pope Benedict XVI seems to be hoping that attrition and orthodox replacements among the clergy might hold the answer. My worry is that he, himself, is not a young man. I have found an almost uncharitable delight in how Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone, the new Ordinary for San Francisco is making the gay establishment squirm and fret. They were pouting the other day because he outlawed drag queens at fundraisers! Really?

Again, do not be fooled. He might say that “…for committed, same-sex couples is not the Sacrament of Matrimony,” but he really does see it as analogous. Remember, sexual activity outside of marriage is a mortal sin. There is nothing equivalent to it. As a priest he knows this. He is talking out of both sides of his mouth. The Bishops are right on this one. So-called same-sex marriages are indeed a threat to the genuine covenant of marriage, natural or sacramental. There is no loop-hole or escape clause that would allow Catholics to support institutional sodomy.

STEPHEN:

Thanks for the background. In this video he seems to take the stance of…”who cares what the state of MN deems as ‘marriage’ since the Church only recognizes sacramental marriages anyway?” He argues the flip side of religious freedom by stating that the Church should not dictate to the state how it defines “marriage” as civil and Church marriages are separate entities and (in his mind) serve different purposes.

FATHER JOE:

The secular sphere in the public forum would not appreciate marriage as a sacrament. Rather, the point of intersection between the Church and state is the traditional view of marriage as a “natural bond.” The growing division between the Church’s view of marriage, as well as that of natural law, is the reason why someone like Bai Macfarlane has campaigned heavily for traditional marriage and against no fault divorce. Some of her supporters would claim that the conflict or opposition between the civil and ecclesial view of marriage has reached a breaking point, in both the heterosexual orientation and its permanence. They argue that clergy should opt out entirely from working within the system. They suggest that the priest who witnesses any marriage for the state has corrupted (by association) the Catholic understanding. This argument becomes even more defensible if society should formally equate same-sex unions with heterosexual marriages. While priests will not officiate at the feigned marriages of homosexuals and lesbians; will the truth be compromised by our continuing partnership with government in witnessing marriages and signing civil licenses? But what is the alternative? Priests in Europe and Asia often find that in the dual ceremony-system, couples tend to cohabitate if there is any extended duration between the vows before a judge and those before a priest.

The priest errs seriously, by his own admission, for failing to fault the homosexual lifestyle as sinful. Indeed, he seems to praise and to encourage the commission of evil. People of the same gender can be friends but they cannot be spouses. A legal fiction will not make it so.

Filed under: Anti-Catholicism, Apologetics, Bishops, Catholic, Celibacy, Church, Conscience, Discipleship, Faith, Family, Homosexuality, Magisterium, Marriage, Morality, News, Politics, Priests, Sacraments, Sexuality, Sin, Social Justice | 8 Comments »

Was Peter, the First Pope, Married?

Posted on May 1, 2012 by Father Joe

peter333 QUESTION:

You claim that Peter was the first Pope, and yet Scripture attests that he was married. Since this great apostle could be married, why not all bishops and priests?

RESPONSE:

Restricting ourselves to the Gospels, no doubt you are referring to Peter’s mother-in-law. We read in Luke 4:38-39: “After he left the synagogue, he entered the house of Simon. Simon’s mother-in-law was afflicted with a severe fever, and they interceded with him about her. He stood over her, rebuked the fever, and it left her. She got up immediately and waited on them.” See the story again in Mark 1:30.

The Catholic Church does not deny that Peter was married. However, note her general absence in the New Testament texts. We do not even know her name. We only encounter the mother-in-law, never his wife or any children. Indeed, throughout the Gospels and the Acts of the Apostles, references are made to Peter’s activities and travels; but, only a vague intimation by Paul in 1 Cor. 9:5 that he had a right to travel with his “believing wife.” If it were not for this mention in the epistle, one might suppose that Peter was a widower. Tradition suggests that his wife was martyred. It is peculiar that although the wife would ordinarily have cared for the needs of guests, Peter had to rely upon his wife’s mother.

However, granting that she was still around (somewhere); she evidently assumed a secondary role in his life behind his leadership of the infant Church. Indeed, her insignificance in the biblical witness would seem to provide weight to the supporters of priestly celibacy. Like Peter, bishops and priests might do better to serve God’s people without the distraction of wives and children. Jesus gives his sheep to Peter. Pastors similarly love Christ and care for their flocks. This is the emphasis of Catholic ministry, our family in faith.

This post was never meant to be a defamation against Peter’s wife. I have also edited it to avoid any peripheral discussion about whether or not the tradition can be trusted regarding her martyrdom; given that some authorities speculated that she might have died earlier and/or that there might have been a second bond. It is probably best that we accept the tradition at face value.

Here are early testimonies for the martyrdom of Peter’s wife:

CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA (died around 215 AD)

(THE STROMATA, 7:11)

So then he undergoes toils, and trials, and afflictions, not as those among the philosophers who are endowed with manliness, in the hope of present troubles ceasing, and of sharing again in what is pleasant; but knowledge has inspired him with the firmest persuasion of receiving the hopes of the future.

Wherefore he contemns not alone the pains of this world, but all its pleasures.
They say, accordingly, that the blessed Peter, on seeing his wife led to death, rejoiced on account of her call and conveyance home, and called very encouragingly and comfortingly, addressing her by name, Remember the Lord. Such was the marriage of the blessed and their perfect disposition towards those dearest to them.

Thus also the apostle says, that he who marries should be as though he married not, and deem his marriage free of inordinate affection, and inseparable from love to the Lord; to which the true husband exhorted his wife to cling on her departure out of this life to the Lord.

Was not then faith in the hope after death conspicuous in the case of those who gave thanks to God even in the very extremities of their punishments? For firm, in my opinion, was the faith they possessed, which was followed by works of faith.

EUSEBIUS (around 265 AD to 340 AD)

(ECCLESIAL HISTORY, 3:30)

1. Clement, indeed, whose words we have just quoted, after the above-mentioned facts gives a statement, on account of those who rejected marriage, of the apostles that had wives. Or will they, says he, reject even the apostles? For Peter and Philip begot children; and Philip also gave his daughters in marriage. And Paul does not hesitate, in one of his epistles, to greet his wife, whom he did not take about with him, that he might not be inconvenienced in his ministry.

2. And since we have mentioned this subject it is not improper to subjoin another account which is given by the same author and which is worth reading. In the seventh book of his Stromata he writes as follows: They say, accordingly, that when the blessed Peter saw his own wife led out to die, he rejoiced because of her summons and her return home, and called to her very encouragingly and comfortingly, addressing her by name, and saying, ‘Remember the Lord.’ Such was the marriage of the blessed, and their perfect disposition toward those dearest to them. This account being in keeping with the subject in hand, I have related here in its proper place.

DISCUSSION

GERRY:

Thanks for all your insights, Fr. Joe. They are priceless! I’d like to let you know that I look forward to reading the “feeds” from your blog site. God Bless!

KARL:

Who would sit in judgment for all the annulments? Certainly the Pope does not have the time and men who cannot keep their houses in order (like those divorced and seeking annulments) certainly should not sit in judgment of each other and their wives.

What would happen to a bishop who abandoned his wife? Should he continue to serve as a bishop? Who would pay for the divorce, alimony and child support settlements? Who would get the Cathedral, the wife?

Anyone who thinks it is wise to have a married clergy is likely naive, foolish or has difficulty keeping their mind off their private parts. Oops, or Orthodox or one of the Uniate Rites.

ALEXANDER ROMAN: As a Ukrainian Catholic, I wanted to take great exception to a comment on that refers to Eastern Catholics as “uniates.” That term is pejorative and offensive – that it is used by a Latin Rite Catholic is not helpful.

FATHER JOE:

Churches of the East do not permit dating priests. They have to be married before ordination. Only single men become bishops. There is a different sense of priesthood between those who are celibate and the ones who are married. The first married Episcopalian priest in the U.S. who became a Catholic priest is now divorced. His wife left him, saying that nothing in the Episcopal church prepared them for what his life would be like. She gave him an ultimatum, leave the Catholic priesthood or she would leave him. He is now a divorced and celibate priest.

CATHOLIC GIRL:

Catholics and Protestants arguing for a married Priesthood (or worse those who propose that Mary was not a perpetual Virgin) miss the point with their literal interpretations.

Catholics are not literalists (although most Protestants are). We hold the Bible as no more or less important as Church tradition and teaching. Remember who put the Bible together – the Catholic Church. Who better to understand and interpret the meaning?

The important part of the message about St. Peter is that he – Peter – represents the Church. Christ was returning to the Father and so he gave Peter a duty as the first Pope and left us with the Church as the visible symbol of his love. He specifically said that he would be with the Church until the end of time and gave it the “keys to heaven,” what they bind on Earth is bound in Heaven.

He knew Peter was not perfect – after all, he denied he knew Christ three times. He did expect and continues to expect that we follow him and that means that unmarried persons should remain celibate – as he did.

Only the Catholic Church has the keys to the kingdom. Pope Benedict says that the tradition will not be changed. The Church isn’t a democracy and those that don’t agree are simply not Catholic. So he’s the boss and that discussion is closed!

MARK:

The Church has never taught the two sacraments are incompatible; neither did Our Lord. That the Church has chosen to promote celibacy in the model of Christ should be sufficient for the discussion.

“In essentials, unity. In non-essentials, liberty. In all things, charity.”—St Augustine

FATHER JOE:

It is probable that his wife later suffered martyrdom but her absence from the Scripture texts is still a significant fact. Except for the fact that Peter had the right to bring her along, there is little or nothing that can be cited to show that his wife actually did participate in his most important missionary journeys.

You are right that the sacrament of marriage and that of holy orders are not intrinsically incompatible with each other; although, there is early evidence of tension. Many of the Popes and saints over the centuries have written about celibacy in the priesthood and religious life as if it were the best course to pursue. Could it be said that just as there was an organic development of doctrine, that celibacy for priests reflects a positive evolution in discipline as well, also under the guidance of the Holy Spirit? I think so. Indeed, there is growing evidence that priests who were married during the apostolic and patristic age were expected to practice perpetual continence after ordination.

ANGELA:

I personally believe that leaders of the church should be able to get married if they want; but I think it is great when they are capable of remaining celibate. I guess I feel if God has called you to become a priest, then he has also called you to become celibate since that is in accordance to what priesthood is.

I no longer attend a Catholic church, although I grew up in one. I have met some great priests and some not so great. I have also met some great married pastors and some not so great. It does talk about how it is better for a man to remain celibate unless you are incapable. I believe if a man can do this successfully he will be greatly rewarded.

Unfortunately, if a man is choosing to go into the priesthood and have lust issues, they may want to consider what going into the priesthood really means. He should either first address such issues or consider the possibility that maybe God wants him to be a leader of men in a different way that allows marriage. He should not necessarily change denominations if he feels his faith corresponds more greatly with Catholic belief systems; but there are so many ways to be a shepherd among men and yet be married.

That being said, I still admire the man and woman who can devote their hearts, minds, and souls solely to God and remain pure in heart, mind, body and soul.

JAKE:

Peter was a [expletive deleted] and his wife was well to be rid of him. Peter is well said to be the founder of the ‘mother of [expletive deleted] church’. Women were nothing more than cattle in the [expletive deleted] bible and the men, including jayzus were perverted [expletive deleted] [expletive deleted]. The catholic church is indeed the true church of jayzus. If priests aren’t [expletive deleted] each other, they are [expletive deleted] innocent children and being paid by stupid people to do so.

FATHER JOE:

I must report your IP number (Atlanta) to the authorities for misuse of this forum. Sorry, but you forced my hand.

JAKE:

Peter=child molester
jayzus=[deleted pejorative word for homosexuals]
catholic church=mother of [plural expletive deleted]

FATHER JOE:

Jake=Bigot

LUCIA:

It is an interesting topic and one I am not sure I yet fully understand. It is my understanding that the vows of celibacy from the priesthood all the way to the pontiff are a matter of the disciplines of the Church. Its necessity is established by the Authority of the Church based on the inspired judgments of the Church.

Thus it is possible that the Church can change its mind on this point for its own reasons, or make exceptions to the rule. For example I know that in cases of Eastern Catholics, those from the predominantly Orthodox regions which are now in full communion with Rome, there are exceptions allowing married priests. None of this creates a problem.

So to my thinking, if as Clement of Alexandria and Eusebius relate, Peter was in fact married as an apostle/bishop it doesn’t matter. If the Church then later decided that it would require celibacy of priests and all the clergy in the higher ranks as well then that is the rule. The rule established by the authority of the Church. If Peter was not married as a bishop likewise it remains a discipline the Church has established and maintained for good reason. And one which, in limited cases to which it makes exception.

Do I understand correctly? Thanks.

FATHER JOE:

Sounds like you do. Priests promise celibacy when they are ordained transitional deacons.

MD:

Lucia has the simplest answer but the most profound.

CO:

First of all, the Bible refers to Peter’s mother-in-law. My assumption is that there is a wife and the Scriptures do not tell me different…meaning, he was married. My concern, however, is the belief that he was the first Pope. If you are basing it on the fact that Jesus said that on this Rock I will build my church, and he was speaking to Peter, Christ is the Rock, not Peter. Peter in the original Greek is petros, which in interpreted… “pebble.”

FATHER JOE:

Actually, in common usage the word PETROS could mean more than pebble. The reason why that word is used instead of the more common Greek word for ROCK is because Greek words have gender. Peter is given the male version of the word. In itself it is a transliteration of the Aramaic which makes no distinctions about ROCK. Peter is literally a chip off the old block, Jesus Christ, who is the foundation stone of the Catholic Church. Peter is Rock because Jesus is ROCK.

Filed under: Anti-Catholicism, Apologetics, Bishops, Catholic, Celibacy, Faith, Marriage, Priests, Religion, Sexuality, Uncategorized | 11 Comments »