Monday, June 29, 2009

Married Priests too Liberal?

Rent a Priest (http://rentapriest.blogspot.com/) has had quite a few good articles recently on married clergy and priests with families in African countries. They are worth checking out. It seems that in many parts of Africa, priests knowingly have families and as long as they are not too open about it, it is accepted. The most recent posting cites a priest who left the Catholic Church to openly marry his girlfriend/nun, because he felt it was dishonest not to be open about it.

Weakland also addressed the issue of a married clergy regularly in his book. So why does the Roman Catholic rite persist in not having a married clergy (with very few exceptions)? Only two reasons come to my mind. Sex and liberalism. At least with former clergy that I have met that are married, most seem to have a more liberal bend. While allowing married priests would not guarantee a more liberal clergy, I think it is a fear. There is also a persistant fear of sexual issues from the Vatican and I do not think that bishops want priests having sex. How would it look if your parish priests was using condoms? The few priests that are allowed to be married are converts from other denominations. In most cases, they are coming to the Catholic Church because they want to be a part of a more conservative church. Hence, the current married clergy are often more conservative.

And although I know that a married clergy has not solved the clergy shortage in other denominations, as conservative Catholics like to remind us, Catholics are different. Maybe it would work for us. It couldn't hurt, could it?

A Faithful Catholic

8 comments:

Mark said...

Does the Church recognize sex? I thought as a priest you had to be born sans "equipment." Jack

Dad29 said...

Perhaps instead of posing loaded "guesses" about the rationale for celibacy, you could look up what recent Popes and Cong. for Priests officials have actually SAID about the matter.

(Hint: it ain't "liberals")

Terrence Berres said...

"Weakland also addressed the issue of a married clergy regularly in his book. So why does the Roman Catholic rite persist in not having a married clergy (with very few exceptions)?"

Didn't he publicly say early on that if an otherwise qualified married candidate came forward, he would press the issue with the Vatican? There's nothing in the book about anyone ever taking him up on the offer.

CatholicSoldier said...

Dad,

Don't you know that's how Jack operates?

You can't use scripture with him (he discounts it or laughs it off).

You can't use Church fathers with him (they are just too old).

You can't use the 2000 year Continuity of the Church (that's just not cool).

You can't use great Catholic writers like Chesterton (because, they just aren't the same as St. Weakland).

In reality, I have finally come to the realization that Jack is one of the people who just isn't worth one's time. Don't cast pearls before swine.

Anonymous said...

Gads, CS, what a fould mood you must be in!!

BTW, you never answered my question about the different gospel versions of the "Who am I question" Jesus ask of Peter.

Please throw me one more pearl. Jack

Andrea G said...

Dad29 and CatholicSoldier. I give you both props for continuing to refute the heretical statements on this blog and of some of it's commenters. However, I would advise to guard your energies for more useful battles. These "Catholics" are looking for a different religion, not centered on God but rather centered on them. Plus, they are no danger to the Truth. If people inside the Church haven't been able to destroy it, I don't think these men are much of a danger. JMJ †

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.