Religion and Ethics Forum
Religion and Ethics Discussion => Christian Topic => Topic started by: Roses on October 27, 2019, 08:45:06 AM
-
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-50197296
Apparently the RCC is considering allowing some Catholic priests to marry and therefore relaxing the celibacy rule. Why can't it scrap it for ALL priests, it obviously can't be that wrong for a priest to marry? It is about time that church sorted itself out or died a death, which would be preferable, imo.
-
If you ask a catholic, they are likely to say that priests do not marry because they need to devote all their time to the needs of their parishoners.
A look at history shows that it was a move made in early medieval times to prevent priests from bequeathing ecclesiastical property and money to their children.
-
If you ask a catholic, they are likely to say that priests do not marry because they need to devote all their time to the needs of their parishoners.
A look at history shows that it was a move made in early medieval times to prevent priests from bequeathing ecclesiastical property and money to their children.
We now live in the 21st century, although the RCC seems to be stuck in the dark ages. All priests should be permitted to marry if they wish to do so, and permitted to enjoy a sex life with their partner, using contraceptives of course if they don't want to have too many kids, or any at all.
-
Some RC priests can marry - not only converts from the CofE, but in certain circumstances in areas where their denomination has deemed ity necessary. No, I don't agree with celibacy - well, enforced celibacy anyway, but there ase circumstances when the RCC church allows it to be broken.
-
Some RC priests can marry - not only converts from the CofE, but in certain circumstances in areas where their denomination has deemed ity necessary. No, I don't agree with celibacy - well, enforced celibacy anyway, but there ase circumstances when the RCC church allows it to be broken.
The RCC has permitted married Anglican priests who had converted to that doctrine to remain as priests. I still don't understand why they don't completely do away with the celibacy nonsense, priests should have a right to a partner like clergy of other denominations.
-
I'm sure it will happen, it's almost inevitable.
-
I'm sure it will happen, it's almost inevitable.
One hopes so.
-
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-50197296
Apparently the RCC is considering allowing some Catholic priests to marry and therefore relaxing the celibacy rule. Why can't it scrap it for ALL priests, it obviously can't be that wrong for a priest to marry? It is about time that church sorted itself out or died a death, which would be preferable, imo.
A special dispensation can be given to a priest to marry, but it has never been the norm for priests to marry, not in the East or the West. As for allowing already married men to enter the priesthood, that is a completely different question.
-
If you ask a catholic, they are likely to say that priests do not marry because they need to devote all their time to the needs of their parishoners.
I think many catholics would favour allowing priests to marry and I doubt the reason you provided would come up very often - rather I though the main reason given was that they were, in effect, married to the church/god, which is not the same as needing to be able to devote all their time to their parishioners.
-
A special dispensation can be given to a priest to marry, but it has never been the norm for priests to marry, not in the East or the West. As for allowing already married men to enter the priesthood, that is a completely different question.
The RCC should allow ALL priests to marry if they so wish, forcing them to be celibate is WRONG!
-
If you ask a catholic, they are likely to say that priests do not marry because they need to devote all their time to the needs of their parishoners.
A look at history shows that it was a move made in early medieval times to prevent priests from bequeathing ecclesiastical property and money to their children.
Citation? That sounds highly debateable to me.
-
The RCC should allow ALL priests to marry if they so wish, forcing them to be celibate is WRONG!
Eh? I was under the impression men entered the priesthood freely.
-
Eh? I was under the impression men entered the priesthood freely.
Presumably they accept Scripture.
So; where, in Scripture - God's word to man - does it forbit God's servants from marrying?
-
Eh? I was under the impression men entered the priesthood freely.
Philosophical question - are you freely able to permanently give up a basic human right?
-
Eh? I was under the impression men entered the priesthood freely.
Many were forced into it in days of yore, I believe.
-
If you ask a catholic, they are likely to say that priests do not marry because they need to devote all their time to the needs of their parishoners.
A look at history shows that it was a move made in early medieval times to prevent priests from bequeathing ecclesiastical property and money to their children.
steveh:- Citation? That sounds highly debateable to me.
I have heard what HH said too.
This Guardian article touches on it and speaks generally about the subject of unmarried clergy:-
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/nov/07/brazil-bishops-pope-francis-married-priests-celibacy-clergy
-
Philosophical question - are you freely able to permanently give up a basic human right?
Obviously yes, for there are many people who are able to commit to celibacy, priests, monks and a host of other people, religious and not. Those who find they can't are free to leave the priesthood should they desire to marry. I don't see what the problem is.
-
Obviously yes,
I don't think it is obvious at all - and remember my question said 'permanently' so irrevocable. To my mind consent is only valid if it can be withdrawn in some manner, unless it is clearly impossible so to do - for example to reverse the consent to an operation to amputate a limb.
for there are many people who are able to commit to celibacy, priests, monks and a host of other people, religious and not.
And here is the nub of the problem - there maybe some, perhaps many who can, but there are others, also perhaps many who cannot and are unable to maintain their celibacy and therefore look to routes to satisfy their natural sexuality desires.
Those who find they can't are free to leave the priesthood should they desire to marry. I don't see what the problem is.
Again it isn't that straightforward - leaving the priesthood isn't like leaving your electricity supplier. Priests consider it a calling, a vocation. The church is set up to provide a kind of family for the priest. To leave it to turn your back on all that - it must be an incredibly difficult decision - there are extreme levels of soft control and power that prevent priests from simply walking away. To be genuinely 'free to leave' there must be no pressure or coercion, overt or covert, that acts as a barrier to leaving. I don't believe that is the case for priests thinking of leaving the priesthood.
-
I don't think it is obvious at all - and remember my question said 'permanently' so irrevocable. To my mind consent is only valid if it can be withdrawn in some manner, unless it is clearly impossible so to do - for example to reverse the consent to an operation to amputate a limb.
And here is the nub of the problem - there maybe some, perhaps many who can, but there are others, also perhaps many who cannot and are unable to maintain their celibacy and therefore look to routes to satisfy their natural sexuality desires.
Again it isn't that straightforward - leaving the priesthood isn't like leaving your electricity supplier. Priests consider it a calling, a vocation. The church is set up to provide a kind of family for the priest. To leave it to turn your back on all that - it must be an incredibly difficult decision - there are extreme levels of soft control and power that prevent priests from simply walking away. To be genuinely 'free to leave' there must be no pressure or coercion, overt or covert, that acts as a barrier to leaving. I don't believe that is the case for priests thinking of leaving the priesthood.
I agree with your post.
Enforced celibacy, may possibly have lead to the terrible sexual abuse problems, which have beset the RCC over the years. However, that doesn't in any way excuse the priests who perpetrated that crime.
-
I agree with your post.
Enforced celibacy, may possibly have lead to the terrible sexual abuse problems, which have beset the RCC over the years. However, that doesn't in any way excuse the priests who perpetrated that crime.
You keep spouting that bollocks. It's still bollocks.
-
You keep spouting that bollocks. It's still bollocks.
And you know that for a fact because?
-
And you know that for a fact because?
If you're saying celibacy leads to buggering boys then yes, it's bollocks.
-
If you're saying celibacy leads to buggering boys then yes, it's bollocks.
I said it MIGHT play a part in sexual abuse, I didn't say it did for sure. As far as I am aware the RCC is the only dogma which has insisted it priests were celibate, and is the one with the biggest problem concerning paedophile priests. Celibacy isn't a normal state of affairs for most people, and all clergy should be permitted to have consensual adult partnerships if they so wish.
-
You keep spouting that bollocks. It's still bollocks.
I'm not in the habit of jumping to LR's defence, but in this case, I think she may be right. Priestly celibacy may be attractive to some paedophiles as a cover.
-
I'm not in the habit of jumping to LR's defence, but in this case, I think she may be right. Priestly celibacy may be attractive to some paedophiles as a cover.
Surely though what is being suggested by LR is that the enforced celibacy causes the paedophilia?
-
Surely though what is being suggested by LR is that the enforced celibacy causes the paedophilia?
Whichever way round the causal connection is, I think there probably is one. Actually, though, having re-read LR's posts, she doesn't actually say that, only that there is likely to be a connection.
-
Whichever way round the causal connection is, I think there probably is one. Actually, though, having re-read LR's posts, she doesn't actually say that, only that there is likely to be a connection.
I think that 'Enforced celibacy, may possibly have lead to the terrible sexual abuse problems' is certainly easier to read as causation.
As to whether there is a connection, at this stage all I'm seeing is anecdote, no figures. Perhaps it's just the RCC is the biggest Christian denomination? I think a stronger case needs to be made for the claim
-
I think that 'Enforced celibacy, may possibly have lead to the terrible sexual abuse problems' is certainly easier to read as causation.
As to whether there is a connection, at this stage all I'm seeing is anecdote, no figures. Perhaps it's just the RCC is the biggest Christian denomination? I think a stronger case needs to be made for the claim
Well, actually, I agree. It's only a tentat4ive suggestion that there might be a connection. There's a good case for ending it on other grounds, though.
-
Well, actually, I agree. It's only a tentat4ive suggestion that there might be a connection. There's a good case for ending it on other grounds, though.
Yep, agree with that.
-
Surely though what is being suggested by LR is that the enforced celibacy causes the paedophilia?
I did NOT suggest that. ::)
-
I did NOT suggest that. ::)
Then what did you mean when you wrote 'Enforced celibacy, may possibly have lead to the terrible sexual abuse problems'?
-
Then what did you mean when you wrote 'Enforced celibacy, may possibly have lead to the terrible sexual abuse problems'?
I didn't say it was definitely the case at all, I just suggested that it might have encouraged some priests to carry out sexual abuse as it was more prolific in the RCC than other denominations. Not only have priests abused children they have abused women too, so I believe.
-
I didn't say it was definitely the case at all, I just suggested that it might have encouraged some priests to carry out sexual abuse as it was more prolific in the RCC than other denominations. Not only have priests abused children they have abused women too, so I believe.
And that's suggesting it as a cause. I haven't stated that you did categorically say it was the cause.
-
I'm not in the habit of jumping to LR's defence, but in this case, I think she may be right. Priestly celibacy may be attractive to some paedophiles as a cover.
Maybe, but that's a different point altogether.
-
As I said earlier, if a priest can't celibacy then he can freely leave the priesthood. As for suggestions it might lead to sexual abuse, I don't buy that, he has a hand.
-
As I said earlier, if a priest can't celibacy then he can freely leave the priesthood. As for suggestions it might lead to sexual abuse, I don't buy that, he has a hand.
Won't it become hairy?
-
As I said earlier, if a priest can't celibacy then he can freely leave the priesthood.
As I said before I don't believe that is true in practice - there are significant overt and covert pressures that make it difficult to leave the priesthood, not the least of which is that you instantly lose your home ... and your livelihood ... and, in effect, your family.
-
I hope all RCC priests will be permitted to marry if they wish to do so, I cannot see any good reason why they should be required to be celibate.
-
I hope all RCC priests will be permitted to marry if they wish to do so, I cannot see any good reason why they should be required to be celibate.
As was pointed out previously the cost to the RCC would be significant, given that there would be an expectation that priestly stipend and accommodation would need to be suitable not just for the priest but also his family. That would be a huge increase and also the RCC (certainly in the UK) doesn't have appropriate family housing, unlike the CofE.
-
As was pointed out previously the cost to the RCC would be significant, given that there would be an expectation that priestly stipend and accommodation would need to be suitable not just for the priest but also his family. That would be a huge increase and also the RCC (certainly in the UK) doesn't have appropriate family housing, unlike the CofE.
So basically it is down to pounds and pence not doctrine.
-
So basically it is down to pounds and pence not doctrine.
I think there would be an attempt at justification on doctrinal grounds, but as has been pointed out, the requirement for celibacy and banning priests from marrying isn't something that has been there from the inception of the church - it was brought in in 1123 I think. And one of the key reasons was financial - married priests left their wealth to their families, children - with celibacy then the wealth would come to the church.
So just as bringing in celibacy and banning married gave the church a big cash injection, scrapping it would hit the RCC coffers too.
-
I think there would be an attempt at justification on doctrinal grounds, but as has been pointed out, the requirement for celibacy and banning priests from marrying isn't something that has been there from the inception of the church - it was brought in in 1123 I think. And one of the key reasons was financial - married priests left their wealth to their families, children - with celibacy then the wealth would come to the church.
So just as bringing in celibacy and banning married gave the church a big cash injection, scrapping it would hit the RCC coffers too.
The RCC had better start selling off some of its treasures, to accommodate married priests.
-
I'm not in the habit of jumping to LR's defence, but in this case, I think she may be right. Priestly celibacy may be attractive to some paedophiles as a cover.
I don't know that priestly celibacy would be much of a cover. However I agree that paedophiles and other types of ''philes' are often attracted to the religious orders whose work is to care for children and teenagers. There are other professions - teaching, medicine, social work, residential social work, prisons, prob'ly more - that give plenty of access to vulnerable children and teens.
I don't think LR meant that celibacy causes sexual deviation, that happens with people who are not celibate such as married with children!
Selling off Vatican treasures would be a drop in the ocean. Far better for the treasures to stay where they are so they can be seen, many tourists absolutely love going to places like that and are happy to pay to do so; the treasures earn their keep.
I've said I would like priests to have the opportunity to marry. What I do dread is when priests stay single and face all sorts of people wanting to know why and lining up introductions - and he really wants to be single. Which I daresay a few Catholics will find odd. Instead of wondering if the priest has ever sampled the fruit, they'll be wondering what's wrong with a priest who is allowed but chooses not to.