Where Orthodoxy has had difficulties in the area of sexual abuse, they have usually occurred in monasteries or involved other celibate clergy.
...
Having seen the way priesthood is lived in both the Catholic and Orthodox churches, I do believe that the Orthodox discipline--which allows priests to marry before ordination--is the better one, for pastoral reasons. One argument made for celibacy has been that the commitment to celibacy frees someone to love all people in a way that the commitment to marriage does not. On the contrary, if you are not capable of loving one person deeply, in a committed way (this need not mean a sexual way), you are not capable of loving anyone, much less everyone. Catholic priests are not notably more loving or generous than the Orthodox priests and Protestant ministers I have known--not to speak of doctors, nurses, counselors, and other people whose work demands compassionate involvement with others.
...
To make it a part of the job description for every priestly candidate is a mistake, I think, because it unnecessarily limits the number of people willing to undertake the life
...
I mentioned the pastoral benefits of a married clergy. One Orthodox priest said to me, "The Catholic system can produce some saints and some real neurotics, but what it doesn't produce is a priest who lies awake at night worrying about his furnace, like everyone else in his parish." That was meant to be funny and is a half-truth, of course--there are celibate priests who also have to worry about furnaces--but it makes a good point. I have had parishioners tell me that they would find it impossible to confess to a priest who was not married, who had never had teenage children--how could he relate to their spiritual condition? It is not that there are never any celibate exceptions to this rule, but I do think a married priesthood makes more pastoral sense for ordinary parish ministries.
...
As the revelations continue, it is clear that some bishops have also been personally involved in the sexual abuse of young people. Perhaps one reason for the secrecy with which these cases have been surrounded is the possibility of blackmail: Blow the whistle on me, and I'll let everyone know about you.
3 hours ago
3 comments:
All of that is true, but the basic issue is that mandatory clerical celibacy confuses and conflates two distinct vocations operating on two separate axes: a vocation to the priesthood and a vocation to monasticism (celibacy is not a vocation in and of itself but a part of the monastic vocation). While one person may indeed have both a monastic vocation and a vocation to the priesthood, another may be called to the monastic life but not the priesthood (in the East, it is quite normal to be a monk or nun but not a cleric), while a third may be called to marriage AND priesthood. Thus, mandating that all clergy normally embrace one aspect of a separate vocation in isolation from the totality of that latter vocation is in effect to limit the Holy Spirit.
Far and away the best Catholic confessor I ever had was a married Anglican use priest. It was easy to confess to him because he made it clear he could relate to what he was hearing and he shared the same struggles. Celibate confessors usually seem so distant, as if I speaking to someone from across the Grand Canyon. It is as if they are positively terrifed to admit that they struggle with temptation themselves. Why would anyone want a plaster confessor?
Amen to the post and the comments.
Tawser, my favorite confessor is an ex-Anglican married Latin Rite priest. He's far and away the best confessor I've ever found for the same reasons you've cited. Unfortunately he's hard to get a hold of for confession. Still, it's awesome when I have a chance to confess to him.
Fr Greg -- I agree that the Eastern Christian vocations model more clearly defines roles and abilities within the Body of Christ. However, the tangle between a celibate secular priesthood and a celibate religious priesthood in Western Christian practice is almost impossible to separate. It's interesting how many orders that were founded on the premise of lay monks living in community with only a few ordained members were quickly moved towards ordination of almost all the male religious. The Franciscans are a great example of this phenomenon. I'm convinced that the medieval emphasis on patronage and endless votive Masses, as well as the decline in concelebration in the West, contributed to the blurring of monks and secular clergy. That's a classically Lutheran/early Reformation perspective, but whatever.
Post a Comment