According to the Suddeutsche Zeitung, in 1970 several theologians wrote to the German Bishops asking that the requirement that all priests in the Latin Church to be celibate be discussed. Among the theologians were Karl Rahner, Walter Kasper, Karl Lehman – and Joseph Ratzinger, currently Pope Benedict XVI. This letter was quietly and discretely filed away and was recently leaked to a reform group in Regensburg.
They wrote that they did not desire to prejudice the decision of the Church, but that they thought that the long-standing tradition of clerical celibacy should be reconsidered in the light of modern historical and social conditions “neuen geschichtlichen und gesellschaftlichen Situationen,” such as the ever-increasing lack of priests, “dieses akuter werdenden Priestermangels.” They also pointed to the Eastern Catholic churches, which ordain married men.
In particular, they wondered whether such a requirement of celibacy was prudent in the overheated sexual atmosphere of the modern world. They questioned the formation of priests. If a candidate said he had no problem with celibacy, did he really know his own desires? They also thought it important to consider “the psychological instability of many young men in today’s sexually overwrought society,” “die psychische Labilität vieler junger Menschen in der heutigen sexuell überreizten Gesellschaft.”
The signers indicated that celibacy was closely connected to the priesthood, but that refusing to discuss the current discipline seemed to show more faith in the power of formal authority “an die Macht einer formalen Autorität” than in the power of the recommendation of celibacy in the Gospel “die Kraft der evangelischen Empfehlung des ehelosen Lebens um des Himmelreiches willen.”
Ratzinger has changed his mind over certain issues over the course of his lifetime – this is neither surprising nor dishonest. However, he should explain how he went from point A to point B, especially to those who are at point A.
Celibacy, like fidelity in marriage, is difficult for men. Male sexuality is unruly, and always ha been. However, the situation in the modern world may make celibacy almost impossible for men who are otherwise good candidates for the priesthood. The omnipresence of Internet pornography and the availability of contraception have perhaps permanent changed the sexual milieu which young men develop.
In his epistles Paul goes back and forth between recommending celibacy for the unmarried and widowed and thinking that, since the world is not going to end immediately, it would be better for people to marry and for the married to abstain from relations at most for a time, lest they be tempted.
The Eastern Churches have married clergy, and despite all Vatican protestations to the contrary the Eastern Churches are second-class members of the universal Catholic church. They are not allowed to ordain married men in countries where the Latin rite predominates. Their patriarchs rank behind cardinals and do not vote in papal elections. And there are many other such slights which indicate that the Eastern Churches are tolerated rather than treasured.
The pope should not change the disciple of celibacy on his own – he should consult with the bishops of the world. Even if Benedict thinks it might be a wise idea to sometimes ordain married men, he may hesitate for two reasons:
First, once the disciple of celibacy was abandoned, it would be almost impossible to reinstate it if it turned out that, for all its problems, celibacy indeed provided a spiritual dynamism to the clergy of the Latin Church.
Second, if the discipline of celibacy were abandoned, it would raise expectations of changes in other matters which are far more serious, such as the ordination of women.
So I suspect Benedict will do nothing and let the next pope handle the problem. The next pope will also do nothing, and so on. Perhaps the Third Vatican Council will take it up in 2300.
“Celibacy, like fidelity in marriage, is difficult for men.” I would say that chastity is arduous, but adultery was rare, at least up into the mid-1990s. Some history: the Kinsey propaganda machine by the lat 1960s had convinced the public that adultery, fornication, and homosexuality were quite common. Hollywood, too, sure helped to create this impression. In 1994, however, the NORC group at the Univ of Chicago published findings indicating that in any 12 month period, only 3.6% of married men commit adultery. The life-time rate of adultery at the time was 20%, or 1 in 5 men. Which means that once you commit adultery, you are very likely to commit is again. BUT 80% of married men were never unfaithful to their spouse WHILE they were married. (These findings stunned the research community at the time because they believed Kinsey.)
These rates may be changing. The belief that sexual promiscuity is common is still wide-spread—despite the NORC finding—and it may have reached a point of creating a nearly irresistible self-fulfilling prophecy.
It will be interesting to see if this article is picked up in the US press.
Wives, however, must not be perceived as some kind of receptacle for lusts that her husband otherwise cannot control, especially married priests.
Coming from a tradition that has a married priesthood (Traditional Anglican) we know this prejudice is out there.
As one Ukrainian Catholic priest said to me once, “Does it occur to them that my wife might help me be a better priest?” in ways that have nothing to do with sex?
Chastity–whether inside marriage or in celibacy is hard. IN fact, unless someone is a-sexual and suffering from lack of certain hormones, it is impossible without supernatural help.
But so then is the Christian life in general.
Deborah Gyapong
…refusing to discuss the current discipline seemed to show more faith in the power of formal authority…than in the power of the recommendation of celibacy in the Gospel…
Leon, I think that’s the heart of the problem. Too many Catholics essentially view celibacy as a doctrine or dogma that cannot be changed, rather than as a discipline that can be changed. Besides, if celibacy is indeed a “gift,” then can any earthly ecclesiastical authority mandate such gifts? The key word here is “mandate.” The Church has learned all too often and to its great distress that many priests just don’t have this gift. Trying to force such a condition on them mitigates against their fundamental essence as individuals. They cannot be true to themselves and, thus, foster resentment and anger against the party (the Church or, unfortunately, God) they view as responsible. No wonder so many priests are messed up! I’m not saying that *all* priests are, of course, but former priests have told me about the dysfunction in the profession.
According to Scripture, celibacy is a good thing and should be encouraged. E.g., Mt. 19:12
But there is nothing in Scripture that links celibacy to ordained office. Nothing. Not a single thing. (In anything, it’s the reverse. E.g., 1 Tim. 3:2, Tit. 1:6, 1 Cor. 9:5.)
Insisting on celibacy for the priesthood is completely unnecessary.
According to the Rev. Donald Cozzens in his 2000 book The Changing Face of the Priesthood, the Roman Catholic Church had a disproportionately high percentage of gay priests and nearly half of all seminarians. Richard Sipe has made estimates between 25 and 45% of American priests are homosexual in orientation. Bishop Jerome Listecki when an auxiliary Bishop in Chicago estimated “perhaps more than 10%” of priests have a homosexual orientation.”
Author and sociologist James G. Wolfe estimated that 48.5% of priests were gay.
During 1990, Rev. Thomas Crangle, a Franciscan priest in Passaic, N.J., mailed a survey to 500 randomly selected priests. Of the 398 responses, about 45% said that they were gay.
What is the true percentage? I certainly don’t know but it would be a safe bet to say that it’s way higher than the general population. It’s probably safe to assume that there are plenty of homosexually orientated Bishops and Cardinals that are in positions to thwart any attempts to make celibacy optional. The last thing a group of homosexuals would want is to be made a smaller minority in their community/organization. If the Church would change the celibacy requirement then the percentage of homosexuals would drop down to the level in the general population.
Most heterosexual men are repulsed by homosexuals and homosexuals would certainly feel less welcome in a priesthood dominated by heterosexuals.
I know about Saint Damian in the 11th century and his condemnation of homosexual sin in the clergy. I also know that St. Basil and St. Benedict make reference in their monastic rules that monks should not pay attention to attractive novices. So, in terms of having homosexual priests and religious, we’re not dealing with anything new. What I wonder is whether the percentages always been so high throughout time, and are they as high everywhere in the world. My instincts tell me “no”. As well, my admittingly imperfect knowledge of both Church history and the conditions of the Church in other countries tells me “no”. Fianlly, this is not only a matter of concern for Catholics but of western Christians in general. Witness the recent scandals among evangelicals and the noteriety of High Anglican clergy.
The Latin Church and the married priesthood | English Catholic
[…] agree with everything he says, but I his observations interesting. In this post entitled Ratzinger asked for discussion of clerical celibacy he […]
“Trying to force such a condition on them [i.e., priests] mitigates against their fundamental essence as individuals.”
The problem is not “being forced.” In the Latin Church celibacy is a requirement as are many other norms required in the seminary. A candidate, before joining should know himself well enough to decide whether or not he has this gift. Otherwise: “The Church has learned all too often and to its great distress that many priests just don’t have this gift.” Rather, the individual priest either has been unfaithful to a solemn promise, or had too little self-knowledge or self-sincerity, or was not brave enough to leave the seminary and choose the married state. Analogically, the same thing happens in many annulment cases. Who “forced” them to get married to the wrong partner? It’s a sign of the times.
Fr. Michael, it’s also a problem for Eastern Christians, as the Orthodox sex-abuse scandal in the United States has proven. The ultimate question isn’t whether ordained ministers of any faith will engage in sexual sin; it’s how to hold such people accountable, how to provide comfort and justice to the victims and how to forestall future acts of abuse.
Back to celibacy, it seems to me that ordaining married Protestant ministers who convert to Catholicism undercuts the whole theological rationale for celibacy. Of course, nobody should expect such ministers to divorce their wives when they become priests. Even so, the distinction between married converts and celibate priests essentially creates a caste system within the priesthood. What say you, Fr. Michael?
Fr. Koening, Reading Abuse Tracker will inform everyone that sexual abuse happens in all religious groups if adults are not vigilant. Perpetrators can be both married men and married women. About five years ago I learned of a married clergywoman of my acquaintance in my former denomination who was publicly disciplined for impropriety with an adult. This did not surprise me as that denomination has also abandoned Biblical rules regarding sexual contact. So, why not experiment?
I have often wondered if the publication of the abuse in the RCC has to do with its greater size among the denominations. The RCC has certainly not abandoned the Biblical rules, but it is composed of weak human beings just like any other group of worshippers.
It seems to me that if celibacy were not a requirement, there would be a much larger pool of qualified men from which to ordain priests. One of my girlfriends is married to a deacon with a spotless record. Now that their children are grown why should he not be priested? He should not have to wait for her to die in order to be eligible. They certainly have set an example of a good Christian marriage, something we all need to see in this day of rampant divorce.
Full disclosure: I am distantly descended from married clergy: therefore, I would never feel comfortable in a celibacy only type of group.
I am familiar with the Evangelicals scandals. To what notoriety are you referring to among the High Anglican clergy? My inquiring mind wants to know.
The dropping the celibacy requirement may have little impact on sex abuse. The John Jay Report suggested that other religious denominations seemed to have comparable levels of abuse, and an analysis of the Australian Anglican Church report on clerical abuse showed about the same levels. As to the question of homosexuality, here too, some protestant denominations are becoming quite open to homosexuals, and their presence is becoming more prominent–witness the turmoil in ECUSA these days.
I agree that dropping celibacy will have no impact on abuse, but it may change the nature, because the priesthood will no longer be such a great cover for homosexuals. As for the gift of celibacy, true that a person needs to discern, but who can discern when he enters formation at 11, or even 18? A very large number of those just ordained for the Legion entered between 11 and 13, I believe.
Truthlover, many priests-to-be enter seminary when they are far too unformed and inexperienced to have any realistic idea of what they are getting themselves into; and many are indeed effectively coerced into the priesthood by family expectations, high-pressure recruitment tactics, and personal sexual problems which make lifetime celibacy seem like a welcome refuge. To dismiss all of this as nothing more than manifestations of the candidates’ own faithlessness, insincerity, and cowardice strikes me as both callous and unfair.
It is good Catholic teaching going all the way back to St. Paul that one of the primary responsibilities of ecclesiastical leaders is to discern the charisms of the faithful and put those charisms to work in service to the people of God. Nowhere is this discernment more important than in the selection of the next generation of clergy; and it is also good Catholic teaching that the assistance of the Holy Spirit is readily available in the exercise of that discernment. So how is it that for several generations now (and, in fact, throughout much of Catholic history going all the way back to the days before Constantine) the hierarchy of the Church has been so grievously derelict in its execution of this grave responsibility?
Instead of blaming seminarians for being unsuitable candidates, why not blame the bishops who recruited them, and the seminary directors who admitted them, in spite of their unsuitability? Instead of blaming failed priests for taking vows they could not keep, or for not being able to keep those vows after they were irreversibly made, why not blame the seminaries that graduated them and the bishops who ordained them? Especially when (as case after case has shown during the abuse scandal) there was abundant evidence long before ordination that such candidates were simply unsuitable for the priesthood in the first place.
I have known some very fine priests in my time. But I have also encountered far too many priests who were moral, intellectual, psychological, and spiritual disasters, and were that way long before they were ever ordained. How did these guys even get into seminary, much less make it through ordination? Was no one paying any attention at all?
Let’s put the blame where it belongs: On those who had the power and the responsibility to populate the priesthood with the best the human race has to offer, but often turned such people away and instead admitted candidates who were at best mediocre, and at worst the spawn of Satan.
Great discussion! Joe, I agree that the ordaining of married former Protestant ministers to the Catholic priesthood creates a situation that seems odd. Why can married converts be ordained and not married men already catholic?
Though I believed I was called to celibacy before entering seminary and am happy in this call, I’m not sold on the idea that the Latin-Rite Priesthood has to remain barred to married men (who aren’t converts). And I tend towards the “right” of the Church spectrum. I know many orthodox Catholics who feel the same. I have had conversations with good, solid Catholic men who indicated they would be open to priesthood if celibacy were not a requirement. Defenders of the present discipline like to point out that vocations (to priesthood) are on the increase in certain dioceses in N. America and Europe, as well as Africa and Asia. Our diocese is one that’s blessed in this way. In ten years we’ve gone from three seminarians to twenty five, and they’re good young men. The problem is that many will inevitably drop out (two have in the past month) and the remaining number will still not be enough to fill the spots retirement and death will soon leave open. In Africa, celibacy is often observed more in the breach, and even in the solidly Catholic Phillipines many priests have a concubine or girlfriend. As well, what is the reason for the large number of vocations in the developing world? Is it simply a matter of greater faith than is found in the developed countries? Might it not in many cases be a case of what the Irish used to express in the saying “If you’re a priest you’ll always have a jug of milk and a loaf of bread.”? A friend of mine from Nigeria told me this is very much a concern of his bishop.
Of course, if we begin ordaining married men on any kind of large scale, changes will have to occur. Catholics will actually have to tithe (!) to support the priest and his family. Priest will no longer be as availible as (Latin) Catholics are used to having them. Bishops will no longer find it as esay to move their men around. Etc.
Janice, High Anglicans are rightly or wrongly seen by some as having a high percentage of homosexuals.
Mary Anne: The abuse by the Catholic and Anglican clergy (in the one study published in Australia) was largely homosexual. The married Anglican clergy were molesting male youths evidently in a manner and extent similar to the Catholic clergy.
Sardath’s comment about recruiting unsuitable candidates has some merit. But consider also what the National Review Board said that some seminaries actually cultivated a gay attitude, and this was a significant contributing factor to the abuse. At the root of the “gay” attitude is repudiation of authentic prayer and spiritual formation. Gayness springs from sensuality and is anti-spiritual. Ascetical prayer is an antidote to gayness, as shown by Peter Damian, among others. Hence, the rise of gayness in the clergy occurred because of decline in authentic ascetical prayer. If authentic ascetical prayer returns to the seminaries the gays will simply leave the serminary.
Rick, in my area’s seminary it ‘s already happened. St. N. returned to orthodoxy and a solid curriculam some years back and offers a strong community life. There are terrific women professors on the faculty who bring a feminine dimension the guys appreciate. There is also a priest-psychologist availible for consultation.
Mind you, as we’ve discussed in earlier postings, there’s a range of “homosexualities”. The type that’s described as “gay” is gone (from our seminary). I’m sure some other types remain. So long as those representing these can embrace chastity and are integrated and mature, I have no problem.
I still worry that many of our guys are very young and wonder how well they’re able to discern a life-long commitment that goes against the grain of human nature.
Father Michael Koening: Despite all of the bad news that seems to surround the Vatican and the bishops, there are some very positive indicators of a return to authentic spiritual formation in SOME seminaries. I very much agree with your concern about the relative youth of many seminary candidates. The pagan sexuality that has taken root in our culture finds its way into the psyche at a very young age–even among kids who are trying to live Christian lives—and because of their relative inexperience, that they carry with them undetected into the seminary.
Ratzinger Asked for Discussion of Clerical Celibacy – church news
[…] problems, celibacy indeed provided a spiritual dynamism to the clergy of the Latin Church. … clergy issues – Google Blog Search Related Reading: Ethical Dilemmas in Church Leadership: Case Studies in Biblical Decision Making […]
What would happen to the religious orders if the celibacy requirement were dropped? The charism of monks and friars depends on celibacy and living together in community (without wives). I know celibate monks and married priests co-existed in the early medieval Chruch and still do in the Eastern Church, but I don’t know if that would really be viable in the modern Church. (And what about nuns?)
I meant to write “I don’t know if that would really be viable in the modern West.” I didn’t mean to make the (all too common) error that the Eastern Church is not part of the Church!
Twitter Trackbacks for Ratzinger Asked for Discussion of Clerical Celibacy [podles.org] on Topsy.com
[…] Ratzinger Asked for Discussion of Clerical Celibacy podles.org/dialogue/ratzinger-asked-for-discussion-of-clerical-celibacy-409.htm – view page – cached According to the Suddeutsche Zeitung, in 1970 several theologians wrote to the German Bishops asking that the requirement that all priests in the Latin Church to be celibate be discussed. Among the theologians were Karl Rahner, Walter Kasper, Karl Lehman – and Joseph Ratzinger, currently Pope Benedict XVI. This letter was quietly and discretely filed […] […]
I am surprised that we have not found in this combox the comparison of marriage between a man and a woman and marriage of a priest to his spouse, the Church.
The mystical dimension of that marriage between a priest and the Church is essential to understand celibacy in the priesthood, much like I give myself solely to my husband the priest gives himself solely to the Mystical Body of Christ.
A celibate priest gives me hope; his sacrifice of himself for Christ is a bridge between this life and the life to come. Making that statement public by his clothing that he is not available is highly significant in that he is setting himself apart to be exactly that bridge.
I believe that if the Catholic Church were truly authentic and were to preach what she is supposed to preach, men would not have a problem to discern that they gladly give their life for their “spouse”. But too much in this Catholic Church is going wrong, it is a watered down, almost completely protestantized church. No wonder we “need” married clergy now.
Mum26, perhaps you do not find the comparison you suggest because mandatory celibacy was not instituted until centuries after the church’s creation…and was instituted to keep Church property in ecclesiastical hands, instead of risking it being transferred to family members.
Btw., instead of quoting the leftist Sueddeutsche Zeitung, it would be a good idea to search kath.net for stories and comments.
Here, for instance, is an interview with Mauro Kardinal Piacenza, Dean of the Congregation of Clerics, which explains exactly and in much better words what I have tried to raise further up. The priesthood is a sign of contradiction, a bridge between the world and Heaven, and can only be authentically lived through the Holy Spirit.
http://www.kath.net/detail.php?id=29938
Mum26, Thank you for the link. The purpose of a blog is to examine all events and opinions about them with as little labeling with regard to left, right, center etc. as possible. Accuracy is the goal.
I was pleasantly surprised when I read Pope Benedict’s Christmas message to the UK which was linked by an article on Abuse Tracker this past season. Everything His Holiness said about the nature of Jesus and the Christmas season was exactly what I had learned in a Protestant Sunday School circa 1960. I hope he was not watering down anything.
Unfortunately, the BBC took a lot of abuse from secular people for allowing His Holiness to speak in the first place. Really sad.
I notice that the Eastern Rites are often referred to here. Years ago I read a book on Marriage in the Orthodox Church by the late Fr. John Meyendorff, a recognized scholar who taught history, I believe, at Fordham University. He was a married Eastern Orthodox priest. He wrote that the reason the EO do not allow priests to marry, but do ordain men who are already in a stable marriage is that no man in the state of courtship can be considered emotionally stable to such a degree that he can shepherd other peoples’ souls.
No matter what the ecclesiastical group, I hope that all make such decisions that guide their adherents into leading lives which are in accordance with the teachings of the Christ.
pope benedict xvi, pope john paul ii | your resource for images of Jesus
[…] Pope John Paul II to be beatified May 1 Pope Benedict XVI has approved a miracle attributed to his predecessor, nudging John Paul II one step closer to sainthood. Read more on CTV Toronto Anyone can also check out this related post: http://www.podles.org/dialogue/should-the-church-ever-punish-401.htm Additionally on this topic you can read: http://www.podles.org/dialogue/faz-taz-schools-and-fools-405.htm Additionally you can check out: http://www.podles.org/dialogue/ratzinger-asked-for-discussion-of-clerical-celibacy-409.htm […]
Some parts of the letter that are rarely cited in the news: “there are also good theological grounds for the connection of the freely chosen unmarried state and the priestly office”; “the unmarried priesthood will remain an essential form of the priesthood in the Latin Church.”
I’ve translated the whole letter at:
http://www.pathsoflove.com/blog/2011/02/ratzinger-et-al-called-for-reexamination-of-clerical-celibacy/
itz high time that the catholic church is open to make the celibacy plan optional….as the coverup in rather rich nations is worse it will be worst and very easy to cover up in the case of economically backward and culturally stigmatic nations like africs..the fear still remains in sending their kids to the convent or the seminary for the fear of getting their abused or otherwise…time to think and act constructively..there’s no point in denying that these things happpen or these things are not prominent ..but y is it that there is this forced celibacy ..we find it nowhere in the bible to be mandatory…it is not mandatory that all the people in the ordained office should inherit this gift…be practical…it is with so much pain that i write this ..let us not consider that this breach is not happening…just because some one else is not doing and every one else out there is doing…exceptions cannot always be examples…
Optional celibacy really needs to be considered.
I am a conservative person who has believed since the age of 18 that priests should marry if they desire. How wonderful for the Roman Catholic Church to have a married priest speaking to his parishioners concerning issues on marriage, love, the family unit, etc. Parishioners would really connect to their priest. A married priesthood is not the answer to the scandalous problems of the Church, but it certainly couldn’t hurt.