Celibacy: Beautiful and Wrong

Palamas,

NB: Neither arrogance nor ad hominem attacks make arguments. I have no objection to ending the discussion, and will do so on a note that is not ad hominem.

You can find discussions of violations of nonprofit status by the RCC and certain Fundie churches all over the web. And not only by said institutions. The numbers of persons setting up streetcorner "churches," applying for, and receiving tax exempt status, grows apace in urban areas. One finds their equivalent in what's left of the "country."

There are ways around the current throwing away of money to Religionism. Churches, synagogues, mosqs can claim as exemptions the work they do for charitable purposes.

End of discussion.

Fin

And any further discussion of the tax code is clearly pointless, because you apparently don't understand the nature of legal language in the American system.

Farnaz: Sounds like you want to go from living in a society in which the religious persecute non-believers, to one in which non-believers persecute the religious. But this is America, where neither is acceptable. The tax exemption for religious organizations was designed specifically to prevent both the favoring of one religion over others and the forced secularization of society that you seem to favor. I'm sorry that you can't accept the rationale behind a foundational practice of your adopted home.

Palamas,

The first two paragraphs you quote quite specifically prohibit activities routinely engaged in by the Fundies and the RCC.

I admit it goes both ways. Look, for instance, at former President Bush consulting the former Pope on stem cell research.

What did this man's views have to do with American law? Why not ask Phil, the mail man? Or Judy, the accountant?

NO tax exempt status for institutions of organized religion. What may have worked once no longer does.

Taxation abused is destructive for all. Taxation in the US needs to be reformed further, and it will be. IN the meantime, pay up or shut up. Sayeth she, who wishes to live in a secular society.

By the way, you should know that the reason for the tax exemption for churches and other religious organizations is because the power to tax is the power to destroy. When first given at the nation's founding, they were not a grant of special privilege, they were a form of protection.

I have no use for theocracy. But there's a big difference between churches seeking to offer input on legislation and controlling the process. This is not Iran, or even close to it (I assume that's the country to which you're referring, please pardon my error if that isn't correct).

Farnaz:

What you are quoting is not "the code," it's a Web site with shorthand information. On the page you cited, the reference is to ALL 501(3)(c) organizations. In the same area of the site, specifically:

http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p1828.pdf

there is a guide especially for churches that states:

"In general, no organization, including a church, may qualify for IRC section 501(c)(3) status if a SUBSTANTIAL part of its activities is attempting to influence legislation (commonly known as lobbying). An IRC section 501(c)(3) organization may engage in some lobbying, but too much lobbying activity risks loss of tax-exempt status. [all caps added]

"A church or religious organization will be regarded as attempting to influence legislation if it contacts, or urges the public to contact, members or employees of a legislative body for the purpose of proposing, supporting, or opposing legislation, or if the organization advocates the adoption or rejection of legislation.

"Churches and religious organizations may, however, involve themselves in issues of public policy without the activity being considered as lobbying. For example, churches may conduct educational meetings, prepare and distribute educational materials, or otherwise consider public policy issues in an educational manner without jeopardizing their tax-exempt status."

Churches may not devote a SUBSTANTIAL part of their resources to influencing legislation, but they may do so.

Hello Palamas,

Let's go to the sourc: The IRS. Let's look at the Code.

http://www.irs.gov/charities/charitable/article/0,,id=96099,00.html

These tax exemptions for religious institutions that seek to legislate American laws are wrong, simply wrong. Take it from one who comes from a quasi-theocratic state. Wrong, Palamas, and dangerous.

Farnaz wrote:

"As for the other churches, those that seek to overturn legislation, prevent gay marriage, thwart stem cell research are in violation of the provisions."

This is incorrect. There is nothing in the tax code that prevents churches from working on policy issues. As an IRS agent wrote in a missive to Touchstone magazine's blog Mere Comments:

"So, for example, the Roman Catholic Church is absolutely free under its 501(a) or 501(c)(3) status to have bishops send out pastoral letters to be read from parish pulpits, advising the faithful that "life" issues such as abortion, euthanasia, ESCR, etc. are of paramount importance, and that RCs should vote in accordance with the teachings of the Church. What the RCC may not do is send out letters saying "a faithful RC must vote for [or against] McCain [or Obama]" , or, similarly "a faithful RC must vote for the Republican (or Democratic) Party." Likewise, the NCC can send out letters telling its members to vote on the basis of a "peace and justice" agenda to end immediately the war in Iraq, defend abortion, support gay marriage, etc.; but it too cannot tell its members to vote for Candidate A or Party X.

"These restrictions are somewhat (not completely) similar to those regulating political activity by government employees under the Hatch Act. Government employees may, on their own time as private citizens, vote and work for partisan political campaigns. What they cannot do is use the government workplace, government resources, or their government positions for any partisan political activity (specific candidate or party). Likewise, clergy and members of churches may vote and work for partisan political campaigns. What they cannot do is use the workplace or resources of their non-profit organization, or their official position within it, for any partisan political activity (specific candidate or party)."

You can find the rest of his letter here:

http://merecomments.typepad.com/merecomments/2009/05/the-irs-churches-politics.html#more

Palamas,

First, I didn't go off topic. I presented an issue, which does go to public affairs, as an example.

Second, the provisions for tax exempt status specifically prohibit using one's clerical position to influence votes. That is in the law, itself. If you doubt me, look at it on the web. We've been through this issue on the blog before. The actual provisions have been posted.

As for the other churches, those that seek to overturn legislation, prevent gay marriage, thwart stem cell research are in violation of the provisions. It is for this among other reasons that I object to tax exempt status for religious institutions. And point taken. Why single out the RCC on these matters?

Thus far, Quinn and Meacham have invited judgement on intra-denominational Catholic, Jewish, and Islamic matters. So far, Hinudism, Bahai, Animism, Paganism have remained exempt. Of the various denominations of Protestantism, only Fundamentalisms have been treated in this way.

It is, I think, highly inappropriate. The blog is supposed to be concerned with religion and public affairs. Catholic rites, rituals, practices are a matter for Catholics to address.

Farnaz: I agree with you that the question of priestly celibacy is a matter for Catholics and Catholics alone.

But you go off-track (as well as off-topic) when you write:

"Whether the RCC, which continually violates the provisions for tax-exempt status should be permitted to retain that status is a question of general interest. While I don't approve of nonprofit status for organized religions, in general, I most particularly disapprove of it for those religious institutions that lobby to influence legislation and use the "pulpit" to influence voters.

This is specifically prohibited by the provisions for religious tax exemption, yet the RCC violates it endlessly in an effort to end choice, prevent same sex marriages, and thwart stem cell research."

You are incorrect with regard to the tax code, which only prohibits churches from endorsing candidates. It doesn't prevent clerics from doing so in a private capacity, and it absolutely doesn't prohibit churches from seeking to influence legislation. If you doubt the truth of what I say, please check with Americans United for Separation of Church and State, and they will corroborate me.

Oh, and by the way, the RCC doesn't seek to influence legislation any more than do the mainline churches, all of the large denominations of which have lobbying agencies in Washington, and which also do so collectively through the National Council of Churches.

What I cannot understand is why this question was posed. IMO, this is the business of Roman Catholics and no one else.

Why should the rest of us care, and why should what we have to say matter to Catholics?

Whether the RCC, which continually violates the provisions for tax-exempt status should be permitted to retain that status is a question of general interest. While I don't approve of nonprofit status for organized religions, in general, I most particularly disapprove of it for those religious institutions that lobby to influence legislation and use the "pulpit" to influence voters.

This is specifically prohibited by the provisions for religious tax exemption, yet the RCC violates it endlessly in an effort to end choice, prevent same sex marriages, and thwart stem cell research.

This matter goes to religion and public affairs, the purported theme of this blog. The celibacy, or lack thereof, of Catholic clergy most assuredly does not.

Rabbi Wolpe understands the gift of grace; Jews as well as Christians experiences God's grace in their lives. And yes, grace can help a person try and live with the requirement of celibacy. But why demand so much from so many for whom this is simply a very difficult calling, which they devote much struggle to maintaining? Not every man or woman called to priesthood is called to celibacy...or the reverse!

As a Lutheran pastor who is unmarried and celibate, I have freely chosen this route, but most of my clergy colleagues have family, and in many ways, I think they are more able counselors. I can never understand on an emotional level what spouses understand, or know what it is to unconditionally love a child they have raised from birth. I have to work hard to compensate.

I also remember John Cardinal O'Connor, when he said, when asked about celibacy, at his age, the issue of a sexual partner no longer had much of an urgency in his life, but that he missed the human companionship he witnessed among his Protestant Chaplain colleagues in the Navy. Someone to share a day, with its hard work and ups and downs is a gift. Those who have given this up pay a price.

A senior Navy RC Chaplain did a study of the problems of RC Chaplains in the military: they have a higher rate of offenses against the UCMJ than their other Chaplain colleagues. He attributed it to the nomadic life of the military, which removes Chaplains from the sort of support networks they experience in the civilian world, where family and life long friends may be near-by, compounded by the lack of immediate relationships that other Chaplains share in their immediate families.

The Roman Catholic Church would gain a net positive by opening the priesthood to both married men and women. Many gifted people are being lost to the clergy, and many of the faithful are unable to have the access to a rich sacramental life because of this shortage.

Pr Chris

There is'nt anything wrong with being a cilibrate priest, if it is freely chosen, it is'nt. The Catholic Church goes against the wishes of Jesus Himself who recognized human needs. The Church would rather starve the needs of its faithful, than go against some needless traditional teaching. The Church is blind to the needs of its people. The Holy Spirit is leading the Church in another direction yet it fails to recognize this. If people would only Love one another.

What Rabbi Wolpe does not understand, because he does not share in it, is the gift of Grace. Grace changes the forward horizon from the realm of the humanly possible, to tha which is helpful by God's grace.