Bookmark and Share
My Photo

FROM the EDITORS:

  • IMPORTANT INFORMATION:
    Opinions expressed on the Insight Scoop weblog are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the positions of Ignatius Press. Links on this weblog to articles do not necessarily imply agreement by the author or by Ignatius Press with the contents of the articles. Links are provided to foster discussion of important issues. Readers should make their own evaluations of the contents of such articles.

NEW & UPCOMING, available from IGNATIUS PRESS

















































































« Monsignor Ronald Knox on Saints Thomas More and John Fisher | Main | Bishops offer public support for Bishop John M. D’arcy »

Monday, June 22, 2009

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451b7c369e20115713e51f2970b

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference TIME "renews" the celibacy debate. What's the point? :

Comments

Fr Don Malin

Makes me think that possibly we should also see headlines like:
LAW ABIDING COP CAUGHT SPEEDING: RENEWS QUESTION OF VALIDITY OF SPEED LIMITS--film at 11!

Ed Peters

Time, etc., can carp about celibacy, I guess, but they can't debate it. The only place it can be "debated" in any meaningful sense of the word is at the highest levels of ecclesiastical authority, where, I suggest, the celibacy issue is non-existent.

Fr. Cutie simply adds his name to a centuries' long list of priests who promised one thing and did another. His conduct no more raises anew the question of celibacy than would spousal misconduct "raise anew" the "question" of matrimonial fidelity.

Josh

First, Ms. Sullivan needs to get her facts straight. For the first thousand years, priests, bishops, and popes, could not get married. However, married men COULD be ordained. Carl, you note that in the Eastern Church, after a priest's wife dies, he cannot remarry. The same is currently true of a deacon ordained in the West. In fact, it has always been the Church's teaching that the state (not sure if this is the right word, however, in my meaning, married or single) one is ordained in is the state he remains for life.

If the discipline (which needs to be contrasted against doctrine) of the Latin Rite of the Church regarding a celibate priesthood were to change, priests would still not be allowed to be married, but married men might be admitted to the priesthood.

Funny though, the best evidence Ms. Sullivan could have used to justify a married priesthood would be to document the current vocations boom going on in the Anglican Church today...oh wait, nevermind.

David

Just posted a few minutes ago, here is an unbelievably insulting article by Ruth Gledhill on the soon to be released Encyclical.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article6555937.ece

Maria

I'm so sick, tired, and disgusted of hearing how these grown men keep whining and moaning about how they can't have sex. This is what it boils down to, after all, sex. Not love, intimacy, companionship, sacrifice, family, children. To love is to sacrifice. They had no love for the Christ they professed to represent. In the end, it was all about them. If they were not faithful to Jesus Christ, they will not be faithful to anyone. They are not asking of priests any more than they ask of me as a single woman or any single man out there. As a single woman who is chaste, I don't go around crying to everyone how bad I have it. How sad and pitiful. Not manly at all! Mr. Cutie was just a media star and Archbishop Rembert Weakland is disgusting. What an embarrassing successor to the apostles. Next thing you know, this will turn into the new civil rights fight, yuckkk!

David

What really angers about Gledhill's article is that I can see already that the paper is preparing the ground for another attack on the Catholic Church. If there's anything at all that even appears wrong with the Encyclical, however small, it'll be used to hammer the Pope.

Ed Peters

What Josh said. And Maria.

Nick Milne

Perhaps I'm not reading it carefully enough, but what about the Gledhill article is so "unbelievably insulting?" I'm just not seeing it. Has it been changed between the time of its posting and now, maybe?

I am sure David is right that the Times and every other paper will be all over any perceived problems with the encyclical with their typically uninformed reportage and commentary, but I do not see such hostility in the article in question.

Rick

Regarding Sullivan's claim that "1.Celibacy was not always the practice of the clergy." I think that we can make an argument that celibacy while not always the practice was the norm, and marriage the exception. The Synod of Rome and the Councils of Elvira and Carthage, all in the 4th c., call all married clergy to perfect continence with their wives. All cite this as the teaching of the apostles. Fr. Jaki points out in his book on priestly celibacy that Council of Trullo (7th c.) was the first council of any type that allowed married priests to use their conjugal rights.

Tom

Wow. I don't know what to tell Abp. Weakland, but if God's not enough to fill his "emptiness," I'm not sure a human lover is going to be up to the task. How'd you like to be that guy? "Well, God wasn't enough for me, so now I'm counting on you."

Kala

The same is currently true of a deacon ordained in the West.

As far as I am aware some deacons [all who have asked?] have been given permission to remarry by their bishop after their wives have died.

Gail F

I don't read Time but I glanced through last week's issue at a doctor's office today. There was a superficially well-written but carefully neutral one-page piece about Wichita, KS, and how the people there want to stay out of the abortion debate (hint to writer: staying out of it is really taking a side) and a really stupid extract from a new book by Robin Wright, "The Evolution of God," about how to solve all problems among Jews, Christians, and Muslims by making everything be a "non-zero-sum" situation rather than a "zero-sum" situation, whatever that means. The theory is that there is a "code" in the scriptures that proves how the idea of God changed in all three religions depending on circumstances -- sometimes it was okay to get along with people of other religions (when everyone benefited) and sometimes it wasn't (when the opposition could be wiped out). No one has ever noticed the code, though, until now.

How anyone could entertain such a silly idea is beyond me. (Sometimes, apparently, these situations arise themselves, and sometimes we will have to engineer them -- now there's a great idea.) But the scariest part is that people who believe this stuff are, in the end, the people who get killed whenever it's "zero-sum time" for the other side. In the end, it is not natural for people to care so little about everything that anything is fine. And if the "good" people are the ones who don't care, guess who will be the ones who care? Doesn't anyone see this??? Apparently no one at Time does.

Marie C. Mundra

The Catholic Church bases her mandate of priestly celibacy on the example of Jesus Christ in His own life. Catholic men are not forced to be priests in the Catholic Church. It is a choice one makes for the love of God. It is a calling or vocation. “Many are called but few are chosen” Those chosen to the priesthood, willingly and lovingly sacrifice having a wife and biological children and worldly possessions so that they can fully give themselves to God in the service of His Church and God’s people.

The duty of a husband is firstly to his wife and children. If husbands and wives are faithful and mutually love and sacrifice for each other there would not be so many divorces. The duty of a Catholic priest is to give God to the world and to take the world up to God by his life of sacrificial prayer and works. He is called to be a spiritual father of many and faithful to his spouse the Church.

Ordained priests are chosen from among men of faith who live and intend to remain celibate "for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. Called to consecrate themselves for life, with an undivided and joyous heart to God and his ministry, they sacrifice that which is good, choosing celibacy as a sign of new life to serve God’s people. There is a direct connection that exists between Christ and the priest. A priest’s chaste celibate love for the church is a sign of Christ’s presence to the faithful. He makes Christ present through his sacramental ministry at the altar and in the confessional and is acting, not simply in the name of Christ, but in the person of Christ…he is “another Christ”, whose total gift of self to the church as spouse, is an integral part of his priestly life making him a spiritual father to countless souls.

Father Cutie’s problems started when he forgot that he is firstly a priest and not when he met a woman. Had he been faithful to his priestly calling, by a steadfast life of prayer, sacrifice and obedience for the love of God and souls he would not have thrown away the gift of his Catholic Priesthood. Again, no man is forced to become a Priest in the Catholic Church.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Ignatius Insight

Twitter


Ignatius Press


Catholic World Report


WORTHY OF ATTENTION:




















Blogs & Sites We Like

July 2014

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
    1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30 31    
Blog powered by Typepad