Catholic Priests and Their Right

Catholic Priests and Their Right to Marry

This paper addresses the question of whether Catholic Priests should be allowed to marry. In light of the past decade, where we have heard continuing news stories of revelations by victims of priests who are not in actuality celibate in spite of their vows, it appears that the question may be moot. Priests seem to choose to be celibate or not to be celibate in spite of their vows to remain so, and it appears that an alarming number of them have, in actuality, chosen to remain sexually active. It is a matter of common knowledge that most men are beset with the effects of male hormones from puberty on and it is only with great difficulty that they can refrain from expressing their sexual urges, whether it be in intimate moments between a willing couple, or, more tragically for priests who cannot control their urges, secretly and stealthily in the stalking of young men or women with whom they associate as a result of their positions in the church.

In Matthew 19:10-12, Jesus addresses celibacy: "The disciples said to him, 10 "If this is the situation between a husband and wife, it is better not to marry." 11 Jesus replied, "Not everyone can accept this word, but only those to whom it has been given. 12 For some are eunuchs because they were born that way; others were made that way by men; and others have renounced marriage because of the kingdom of heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it." In these verses, Jesus is quoted as saying that not everyone can manage remaining unmarried and only a special person can handle such a situation. Jesus seems to be referring to eunuchs specifically for the most part, but may have been speaking of anyone who may have renounced marriage. In Jesus' day there were many eunuchs among slaves, as it was the custom for some masters to castrate slaves. Knowing this makes it a feasible query to ask if it would be better for someone who cannot partake in sex to not marry.

It is probably Paul's writings, however, and not Jesus' teachings, that has dominantly led the Catholic Church to make decisions regarding celebacy, as it did in 1074, when Pope Gregory VII said anyone to be ordained must first pledge celibacy, as "priests [must] first escape from the clutches of their wives." Before that date, for over 1000 years ago, (a distant 1000 years following the founding of Christ's church) most Catholic priests were married. Not only that, but popes were married as well, and early popes had many children. After 1054 the Church sent priests' wives to be sold into slavery and their children were forcibly abandoned in order to maintain a celibate priesthood (FutureChurch, http://www.futurechurch.org/fpm/history.htm).

In 1 Corinthians 7:1, Paul speaks of the "matters you wrote about," saying "It is good for a man not to marry. 2 But since there is so much immorality, each man should have his own wife, and each woman her own husband. 3 I wish that all men were as I am. But each man has his own gift from God." Paul is speaking of himself in this last verse, as being celibate: Paul obviously considered his celibacy a "gift" and clearly says that all may not have this "gift." He goes on to urge those who cannot control themselves to marry, rather than to burn with passion.

Then follows a long discussion about the pros and cons of marriage vs. remaining celibate. Paul declares that if one does not marry (as he has obviously chosen), then one can devote one's whole life to the service of God, rather than be distracted with family matters. However, he admits that one might be flirting with disaster if one does not marry when he or she cannot contain their sexual urges.

The reason for this discourse is revealing. Paul is addressing a conflict which has arisen in the church of Corinth, where the ascetics, in reaction to the flagrant sexuality present in that corrupt city, were claiming that all sex is evil and that one must abstain from all sex, even within a marriage, unless it is solely to have children, in order to be pure and enter the kingdom of heaven. Paul is gently reminding both sides (those who would marry and those who claim that sex in a marriage is evil) that one may choose to enjoy sex within the marriage union and that neither side is absolutely correct. It is within the context of this conflict that Paul makes the statement that "it is good for a man to marry." He never makes the statement that it is bad for a man to marry. He leaves the door open for those who serve in the church to marry if they desire to do so.

Not only does he leave the door open, but Paul seems to assume that the leaders of the church will be married in1 Timothy 3:3-13) "1 Here is a trustworthy saying: If anyone sets his heart on being an overseer, he desires a noble task. 2 Now the overseer must be above reproach, the husband of but one wife, temperate, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, 3 not given to drunkenness."

Indeed, what might be considered as backing up the argument that priests ought to be allowed to marry if they choose is Paul's argument in 1 Timothy 4, beginning in verse 1: "The Spirit clearly says that in later times some will abandon the faith and follow deceiving spirits and things taught by demons. 2 Such teachings come through hypocritical liars, whose consciences have been seared as with a hot iron. 3 They forbid people to marry and order them to abstain from certain foods, which God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and who know the truth."

Scholars who have studied the New Testament often make the statement that, although it brings responsibilities which may distract from the Lord's work and complications in some measure, marriage may actually open doors of service to families in the church life and help a priest express or control his sexuality appropriately (Deffinbaugh, 2008).

On May 6, 2009, a Catholic Priest in Miami was publicly accused of having an affair with a woman, when he happened to be photographed lying on the beach in a bathing suit with a woman who was also dressed in a bathing suit. To respond to the horror of his parishioners, he admitted that, though he loved the woman, he had sinned. Archbishop John C. Favalora promptly relieved him of his duties at St. Francis De Sales Church and apologized for the "scandal" on the Miami archdiocese web page, as well as to radio listeners and parishioners.

Favalora said. "Father Cutie made a promise of celibacy and all priests are expected to fulfill that promise with the help of God. Father Cutie's actions cannot be condoned despite the good works he has done as a priest" (CNN, May 6, 2009).

Cutie apologized in an online statement, saying he "wants to ask for forgiveness if my actions have caused pain and sadness.... I assure you that my service and dedication to God remain intact" (CNN, May 6, 2009).

Shortly after the "scandal," Father Cutie (pronounced Koo-tee-ay) joined the Episcopal Church, which allows its priests to marry and declaring he intended to continue proclaiming the word of God and his love for God. Archbishop Favalora expressed deeply disappointment. He said that Father Cutie's actions created a grave scandal within the Catholic Church and harmed the Archdiocese of Miami, which led to division within the ecumenical community and the community at large. He said the announcement that Cutie was leaving the Catholic Church deepened the wounds.

Yet earlier that week, Favalora had said that Cutie could no longer perform a priestly sacraments or masses, and that they would be considered "invalid," and he must continue to abide by his vow of celibacy."

"Father Cutie is still bound by his promise to live a celibate life, which he freely embraced at ordination," Favalora said. "Only the Holy Father can release him from that obligation." (CNN May 11, 2009)

Commentators on this scandal on the worldwide web called the current position of the Catholic Church "outdated" and called for changes in Church policy on celibacy. The debate has continued to rage on, with one side calling the priest's abandonment of his vow moral degeneration and an example of how the fabric of our society is unraveling, while the other side noted that "if you go back in history back to the early popes, it was OK for a priest to get married and have a family. The Catholic Church later changed the law. It just so happens that when the priest would die all of his money and real estate would go to the church. Hmmmmm. Isn't that something to think about?" Still, many faithful commented that the Roman Catholic Church has required celibacy from priests since the 3rd century and never wavered in that policy. They reminded readers that Father Cutie joined the priesthood under those rules, with full knowledge of the requirements of priesthood, but that he placed himself above church law (Mayo, May 14, 2009).

Still earlier, in 2006, the Catholic Church in Australia became embroiled in a debate over whether the small and struggling Catholic Church there should cease insisting on clergymen's celibacy when a priests' association said that doing away with the requirement might reverse the decline in the number of priests. More than 40 bishops in Australia and half the Catholic clergy (1,650 in number) wrote to the Vatican's Synod of Bishops requesting they consider changing the requirement to allow married priests to be ordained and to allow priests who had left the church to marry to be reinstated. Father Hal Ranger pointed out that in Australia many priests converting to Catholicism were married and were allowed to remain married while serving as ordained priests. He urged the synod to examine the position that priesthood is a gift, and celibacy is a gift, but that they are not the same gift (Goodenough, Jan. 28, 2006.).