Father Cutié's Indulgences

Yes, celibacy is a discipline rather than a dogma and could be changed. In the case of Father Cutié it is difficult to have too much sympathy. He had a courtship of at least eight years; before taking his bride, the Church, fourteen years ago. He promised to be faithful--celibate. In my mind this is no different than the man who cheats on his human wife. Eastern Catholics whom are married may become priests, but priests may not marry.
I cannot understand the woman who wants the priest. If he is not faithful to this spouse why would she ever believe he will be faithful to her?

I believe priests in the public eye develop a “rock star” mentality and are sorely tempted. I will pray for both these people.

I don't wish to say that the article isn't interesting, but I'm not quite sure what it has to do with religion and politics and/or religion and public affairs.

Isn't this, rather, an internal Catholic matter?

Besides bringing telecommunication technologies to the Mass, increase the priest talent pool by eliminating the "signficantly stupid" ban on having female and married priests. The "scriptural references" supporting such a ban has been declared to be "null and void" by most contemporary biblical scholars. These scriptural embellishments were add-ons by scribes/translators post-Jesus based on the historical conditions in the early Church. It is time to bring our Church out of third century mentality.

Lest we forget, celibacy is 'dogma' only in the Roman branch of the Catholic church. The Eastern Orthodox clergy are and have been free to marry and raise families at their discretion.

The Vatican enclave is becoming an increasingly bizarre example of retrograde authoritarian thinking in direct conflict with the perigrinations of modern thought. Human consciousness may be approaching a perigee of change, closing in on an actual evolutionary leap - but religion of all stripes continues to actively resist the natural process of evolvement.

Why else does one suppose the great Jesuit philosopher and anthropologist Pierre de Chardin was forced to contend with Vatican censorship and forced silence, for much of his illustrious career as a seminal thinker? In our present case, Friar Cutie is not so much an thinker as a doer.

In the news today we see the 'expatriated' American bishop Burke speaking out 'ex cathedra' by proxy against Obama the sinner, in between deep breaths no doubt - as he comes up for air after smooching the papal derriere e.g. in reference to the upcoming Notre Dame visit and honorary doctorate, etc. Very old news indeed.

What a horrible fellow that Obama is, being pro-choice, supporting stem cell research, and probably even plugging the use of birth control among the poor and disenfranchised. Surely the depraved spawn of Satan and all that.......

Yes indeed, Father Cutie has a point - celibacy really out to be voluntary in a post-medieval world. All the sneaking around and otherwise 'perverse' activity on the part of the clergy has done much to discredit the validity of all those sacred vows that priests and nuns are required to take....and so very often fail to honor in the course of human events. But then, that's what the confessional is for, no??

Believe it or not, algebra is older than the Bible and time does not make it obsolete.

Try to change algerra and all future buildings will collapse. Many societies will burn because many has actually changed the Bible.

There is one category of priests who have never and will never be permitted to marry, that is the religious order priests for whom celibacy for the kingdom of God is a defining aspect of their vocation. The secular (diocesan) priests have been obligated to celibacy for many centuries although it wasn't always that way. It really was always preferred however, in keeping with the teachings of Jesus and of St. Paul and of many Church Fathers, encouraging celibate chastity as a special good which imitates the virginity of Christ and is even a participation in His self-gift. This is something that I can testify to the beauty and reality of, and truly it is a gift.

Those who lack this gift or the humility, stability, self control and capacity for unselfishness to be whole and loving as celibates, must pray for these goods, and/or realize that they do not have a vocation to be priests in the Roman Rite today.

We live in an age of comfort and easy gratification. The celibate priest today "doesn't make sense" to people, and at the same time he's a powerful and very much needed reminder that real love is something other than sexual gratification. He's a source of hope that YES it is possible to make an unselfish gift of oneself, that such great love is not an impossible dream. Much like marriage, celibate chastity is not always easy or comfortable to be faithful to. But dedicated celibacy for the kingdom of God is my own choice for my life (as a 30 year old Catholic laywoman), and I value the gift of our priests, through whom we have the Eucharist, as an inestimable treasure.

In regards to Fr. Cutié, he is a vowed celibate and he committed adultery, and still he does not seem very humble or very deeply contrite, and that is serious. Either he will reaffirm his priestly vocation and accept the Church's will that he be celibate and chaste and rediscover the meaning and value of that, or he'll leave and marry and hopefully be a faithful spouse. I hope the former and that's what I'm praying for, forgiveness is very possible. Let him give hope to everyone in his media audience who's struggled with temptation, and who's wandered, that it's possible to have a real conversion, and show people more than ever what love really is.

Spidermean2 aka Spiderman aka Canyon Shearer, Bible Thumper, Fortune Teller and Severely Brainwashed in that Old Time Religion,

What "voodooer of the hoodoo" blessed you with such stupidity in the field of fortune telling and interpretations of said stupidity??? You almost sound like those strange Baha'ists.

The reality of it all is that the "pew sitters" and "bowers" are coming to grips with the flaws in their religions/cults and in ten years the religions of today will be unrecognizable or extinct as the "pretty and ugly wingie flying thingies" are finally buried in the piles of utter stupidity.

What is "unselfish" about celibacy? What is "selfish" about the desire for a loving, intimate relationship with another human being?

Good grief.

I think one of the reasons the church does not give priests the option is that half of their belongings will go to Miss Priest in case of divorce or separation. In fact, weren’t priests allowed to marry in the beginning and later denied because of this?
Anyway, it sounds absolutely inhuman to endure life today in complete solitude.

Dear David Waters,
Editor,On Faith.

Celibacy is against Human Nature.

Dear David Waters,
If it is your picture,let me admit you are more handsome than Brad Pitt and Kevin Costner.

Canyon Shearer,
*The Bible is not for you.Dont change it*
No,The Bible is for everyone and nobody can change it.The World is flat and doesnt move.

*The Vatican things they know better*
No,Vatican doesnt thing.Vatican is sure they know absolute truth,because the Pope,Holder of the Keys of Heaven,is the vicar of Son of God(Apollo was Son of God Zeus for thousands years)

Factory Girl 5 / Doug White,

*Isnt this an internal Catholic matter*
No,if anyone else Cult disturbs Society and Civilization,everyone can critisize and declare opinion about the matter.

Romeo,

I am the one who asked, "Isn't this an internal Catholic matter?"

Frankly, I think it is. What the Catholics choose to do about their clergy is, in my view, up to them.

It has no bearing on public affairs.

Juliet

The Baha'ists refused Father Cutie's request for membership. Why is that??

Something about one or more of the following Baha'ist rules:

10. No nooky!! No way, no how!

9: No booze! No, you might be having fun and you wouldn't
want that.

8: No politics. No, you wouldn't want to involve yourself
in a good, healthy way that might actually improve the lives
of the people in your community.

7: Suffering. Yes, suffering. No Baha'i gathering is complete without the friends recounting how they have suffered for their faith.

6: Silly Christians go to church. There, through outmoded
'rituals' usually led by a 'clergymen' which Baha'is don't
have, they often find themselves enriched and revitalized.
Some even think they have communed with their God. If only
they knew that if they were Baha'is they could go to a 19 day
Feasts, a dreary, boring business meeting usually punctuated
by some personal arguments. Some go on all night.

5: Ridvan meetings: YES THEY DO GO ON ALL NIGHT. WE WILL
GET SOMEONE TO BECOME THE TREASURER WHETHER THEY LIKE OR NOT, DAMNIT!

4: You get to do all sorts of things you don't want to do,
like be the treasurer and spend the next year haranging the
friends for money.

3: LSA Meetings. They are held at least once a week, they
last for several hours.

2: You get hit up for money, you get hit up for money. The
new world order needs money, your money, it's an honor to
bankrupt yourself for the Faith.

1: You'll never have to bother your silly little brain by
thinking again! All that hard brainwork had been done for you by the great "Babs"."

http://www.geocities.com/baahith/Topten.html

Now, the plight of the Bahai in Iran, that does have to do with public affairs, David Waters.

Despite endless protests, their situation is not good.

Neither is the plight of Jews in Europe. BAD.

Religion and public affairs, anyone? These are good topics, not whether or not Catholic priests and nuns should marry. That is up to the Catholics to decide.

All non-Muslim religions and cults like the Baha'ists are persecuted in the Third Axis of Evil aka the theocracy of Iran.

On a related topic note, are imams/clerics celibate?? If not, are they allowed to beat their wives?? Ditto for the all-male members of the Baha'ist UHJ (Universal House of Justice)??

First, regarding "Should Roman Catholic priests be held to a higher (or at least different) ministry standard? Is it time for the Church to drop chastity from a priest's ordination vows? "

Time to buy a new thesaurus, Waters. Celibacy is "promise" to live as an unmarried person as part of a priestly vocation. This, as Bill Donahue noted, is a regulation of the Roman rite of the Catholic Church, not a universal requirement in all other rites.

Chastity has two related meanings. The more narrow meaning is a perpetual "vow" to live without any genital sexual expression for the remainder of one's life in complete sexual continence. It is a significant part of vowed life of professed priests, sisters and brothers.

The second meaning of chastity relates to the obligation of all Christians to live lives of sexual continence according to their states of life: married spouses are faithful to each other, single folks live either in anticipation of their future spouses or in perpetual continence, and priests and religious live the promise or vow they have3 made.

The first form of chastity is taught by Jesus in the Sermon on the Mount (i.e., the teaching on adultery) and is refined by subsequent questions of the apostles. It is taught by Christ as a more perfect form of the moral life. That teaching is lived and taught in the chaste lives of many in the early Church, most notably Paul and John the Evangelist. One finds precursors of Christ's teaching in John the Baptist, again unmarried, and the consecrated lives of the Essene community.

Regardless of one's sexual orientation, even in secular ethics (Aristotle is a notable example) one's humanity is founded in the rational ability to govern all of one's passions, including one's sexual drive. To deny this is to lower one's self and all humanity to a sub-rational plane above which we cannot rise. It also dishonors the chaste lives lived by millions in human history and in today's world.

It's my understanding that the issue of celibacy was up for grabs in the first 1000 years of the church (not to mention the historical evidence suggesting that women had a significantly more prominent role to play in the Eucharist). And even after this period, history will show that a good percentage of priests were married during the 14th century. To fulfill pragmatic needs, some women were ordained, and carried out much of the job requirements. And yet the Church survived all of this.
And we have married priests today: Lutheran and Anglican pastors who have been ordained as Catholic priests are not required to unload their spouses. The Church survives this, too.
Why not establish an order in which priests can marry? And maybe one in which women can lead the celebration of the Eucharist? Let's say they have some limits on their authority as well. Would the world fall apart? I don't think so.
I can imagine Christ in heaven, rolling his eyes and sighing at all the hubbub over this fairly minor issue.

Again, celibacy among the Catholic clergy is an internal matter and is nobody's business or concern except that of the Catholics.

This question should be posed by a Catholic panelist.

The persecution of the Bahai, to which the UN, EU, US, England, etc., and the single-celled Catholic, ccnl, have called attention (the one-celled Catholic posted on the arrest of the seven Bahai leaders) is a matter of religion and public affairs.

So is the current plight of European Jews.
_________________________
I will say this. Celibacy was never accepted in Judaism, including during the pre-Rabbinic era. Neither before Jesus lived, if he lived, nor during his lifetime, nor after.

Sexual preocuppations, including celibacy, were a part of Greek culture, as was pedofilia, which became a source of debate very late. Pefofilia was accepted, viewed as a way for a man to "instruct" a young boy.

Foucault is a good source on this.

The ability to have children was seen as a blessed obligation of Jews, seen this way always, is still seen this way among many, seen, by Jews, as a gift from the deity.

That said, the question of priestly celibacy, whether nuns, who don't "look like Christ" should marry, is a matter for Catholics.

For the rest of us, really, it's not our business, and who cares.

Asking again:

Are imams/clerics celibate?? If not, are they allowed to beat their wives?? Ditto for the all-male members of the Baha'ist UHJ (Universal House of Justice)??

Since when are Catholic priests celibate? Untold thousands of victimized children would surely tell you otherwise.

Catholicism - oh that the pope would get saved !

Celibacy is not Biblical. Period, end of story !!! Even according to Catholic records The first and most important Pope ( St. Peter ) was married for crying out loud.

Catholicism - oh that the pope (and Oprah) would get saved !!!

First and foremost, celibacy is NOT Biblical !!!! End of story.

Second, ( and I hate to answer a fool according to his own folly, but) even according to Catholic dogma, the first pope ( St. Peter ) was married - for crying out loud....

The future Catholic Church in America is the Episcopal Church which is why so many former Roman Catholics are now Episcopalians, and so many former Roman Catholic priests and nun are now Episcopal priests and bishops.

God made man and the Church set rules. First of the Father Cutie is nice looking. I just had to say that. Now when we look at the history of the Catholic Church we see Priest that did have sex even Popes had sex with woman but were silent. Nuns had babies they killed at birth to cover up what was happening. We know how Priest were chosen and how other religions started. We know the truth about the Church. It's not God's Law it's the Church's Law. Be fruitful and multiply and we know all of God's children have to answer to God not Priest or Pope is any different then you or I in the eyes of God.

Why? As an openly gay man in a committed relationship, I prefer a Catholic Church run by self-hating homosexuals who hilariously try to lecture the world on marriage, sexuality, and contraception. What a freak show!

Former black Archbishop Eugene A. Marino of Atlanta and former Auxiliary Bishop of Washington, D.C. engaged in an affair with a female lay minister, which became public knowledge in 1990. Marino resigned on 10 July 1990 and cited "spiritual renewal, psychological therapy and medical supervision" as the reason. He then took a six-week long period of counseling. Retaining his title of archbishop, Marino quietly returned to Michigan and took a post as chaplain at the Sisters of Mercy in Alma up until 1995. From this posting until his death in 2000 he worked in a counseling program at St. Vincent's Hospital in Harrison, New York, counseling on sexual behavior and substance abuse.

Father Alberto Cutie is not the only Priest to have an alleged affair with a woman. I am sure other Catholic Priests have had sexual affairs with both men and women. The Catholic Church should allow Priests to marry and have children. As a non practicing black Catholic, Archbishop Marino was a role model for me during the seventies and eighties when I was a practicing Catholic. I left the Catholic church, because it's a racist institution, many of it's Priests are homosexuals/pedophiles, and the Catholic Church supported slavery.

Asking again:

Are imams/clerics celibate?? If not, are they allowed to beat their wives?? Ditto for the all-male members of the Baha'ist UHJ (Universal House of Justice)??

Ego in the Service of Libido?

The boys in my 8th grade class who became
priests were over-socializes "momma's boys"
who would rat you out in a second.

I never knew a father who wanted his son
to become a priest, did you?

Those priests who abused young boys were
perfect products of Catholic education
IMHB. They denied any "impure thoughts"
until Ego became in the service of Libido.
It makes sense they would choose young
boys, as that is where their stage
of sexual development was fixated.

Ask Bill Clinton, Eliot Spitzer, Johnathan Edwards etc. if testosterone trumps reason.

Seems like celibacy is not a practical idea, but as you like.

What *I* amd wondering about is why these people are still trying to impose 'celibacy' on *others* when they can't keep an oath on their *lives* and still expect monkeying the politics to bring us some benefit...

Idea out of left field here:

How about becoming adjusted to *sex* before claiming to 'command' it, then wondering why funny things happen in the sheepfold?

The sign that reads "Celibacy no! Choice yes! 21st century," should change the digits: just make it 13th century and you're all cool. The church allowed priests to marry for a thousand years.

A thousand.

Time to admit the mistake and come clean about human sexuality.

I have to say I on't even *get* the Christian idea of sx in the first place. Lipstick has repeatedly been applied, but it seems to mostly be about, 'It's a sin unles you have male heirs and sufficient pain and shame is involved.'

Then there's excuses like 'controlling teen sex...'

This is stupid. Without the forbidden fruit fetishism about it, controlling (ie stopping) teen sex could be like controlling teen dancing: allow anyone to talk about it. They'll have a care how they go about it. :)

*Really* dumb to overcook it like that, then expect the clergy to push 'celibacy' without it getting kinky.

Can'[t say I actually see what's so all-fired *difficult* about celibacy, either, if someone doesn't set us some weird tensions.

Personally, I think your society is all about making sex *hard* and *marketable.*

Make people so touch-starved they're desperate for anything, then sell them the spanking for some shame if they don't have babies. Or pretend they might.

Act like the whole world's dependent on some kind of sterile, prepackaged version of sex, then sell boner pills and insist that everyone's straight and must be sexually-restrained.

Whatever, you know? Was there some kind of spiritual goodness in there somewhere?

I mean, *forget* about if priests ought to be telling anyone *jack* about sex, Christian sociey, .... Don't suppose you've noticed how few of y'all who love to claim we need more religion and less regulation about *chemicals* Terrified someone's gonna have the wrong kind of sex, and ...can't seem to get it up?

What?

The First and Second Lateran Councils made it very clear that priestly celibacy must be imposed to prevent priests from transferring Church property to their wives and children. No other reason has ever been given by any official Church body. Any discussion of priestly celibacy must address these two Church councils objections to marriage.

See, the way I look at 'Christian' society, is it's not about sex or celibacy, got people terrified of uncontrolled sex drives and buying pills just to get a stiffie.

I think you just get off on *shame* and take it out on the rest of us.

What if sex is *worship* and if it's that, it needs none of this nonsense and funny costumes?

I don't know what does it mean that a priest "is married to the church", nor do I know if celibacy is "dogma" or "policy". And perhaps allowing priests to marry will indeed change one set of problem with another. So here is what I would propose to the Catholic Church.

Given that human sexuality is real, and so many attribut the problem of priests abusing children to the issue of celibacy, and that the "poverty vow" means that married priests cannot support their families, why not do away with celibacy but still forbid priests to marry. However, they are free to do whatever else sexually as they can find legitimate partners, at least until the poverty vow is removed. For those who think this proposal is outrageous, please look up the meaning of nephew and niece in the dictionary. Then you will see what is proposed here has been in practice eons ago.

Mr. Waters, you need to let the Vatican know about this. They will listen to you because you know what you are talking about.

Celibacy is a SIN. Man is Man, whether priest or not. Men have desires that the catholic church cannot control: remember Adam and Eve? Eve is the creator of life. Man should never forget that, including all those in the vatican. How much prayer is going to keep a priest from desiring a beautiful woman. Many priests end up abusing children, because of the mighty twisted catholic made-up laws that only fit the purpose of the vatican hierarchy and its' fanatic followers. Everyone seems to be forgetting what happened in Boston and Los Angeles, because of the sinful act of CELIBACY. CATHOLIC fanaticism and antiquity has to come out of the 3rd century, or catholicism will come to an END.

If I had to bet, I would say that sometime in the next 45 years the Catholic Church will adopt a celibacy similar to that of the Eastern Orthodox churches: those already married may become priests, but unmarried priests may not marry, nor may married priests become bishops. This would be done primarily as part of of an attempt to reunify the two branches before the 1000 year anniversary of the split in 1054.

As long as he doesn't shag little boys like his buddies, he should be allowed to have consensual sex with other adults as normal people do.

Its just ridiculous.

Using sound Roman Catholic reasoning, no one should have sex after child bearing is done, after all that is what sex activity is all about and only what it is about.

We spend way too much time dealing with life the way "Jesus would"! I think it's natural for men to take a wife...it may keep them away from the altar boys!

While I think celebacy is a vestige of the Middle-ages and has no bearing in 21st Century life, among other religions including in Thai Buddhism, monks are expected to give up the "earthly pleasures" when they take their vows. Father Cutie could join another brand of Christianity, namely some Protestant Sect if he can't live with the rules of Catholicim. Under this current Pope, it is unlikely there will be any change in the Church's dogma. That's why, except in Africa and in South America the majority of people don't believe the Church has any relevance.

There was a factual error in the original reporting that presented arguments against priests marrying. Parochial priests do NOT take vows of poverty. This fact was brought out in some civil litigation where the priests were defendants.

As much as I can empathize with the young priest, it does seem the priesthood is not for him. There are other roles in the Church, and other Christian churches where he can love God and woman. The Church has been this way for centuries and frankly if it's not for you, try something else. On a human level it is quite unnatural for man to be celibate, that comes with the commitment.
If you're not willing, or unable to keep that commitment, then own up to it and move on to a ministry that is better suited for you. Many, many young men who considered the priesthood have done just that, and are now loving fathers and husbands, and still find time to practice their faith in ministries which take advantage of their God given talents. So, bless you father, now be honest with yourself and work in another ministry to show your love for God and His people.

P.S. to the critics of the Church, we respect your opinion, but again, you have other churches to choose, or you can choose no church, it's America - religious TOLERANCE remember? Or did you spend too much time in algebra and calc and not enough in learning you country's Constitution. Whatever the case - God bless you real good.

It is not the requirement for celibacy that is evil. Most priests and nuns will have sexual intercourse or other fomrs of relief since sex is human need just like eating and sleeping.

Instead Christianity should stop the lies it tells, that Jesus was god or Son of God and that he rose from the dead etc. Christianity like Islam has been responsible for the most number of mass massacres but in recent years has evloved into a more peaceful religion.

Now if it stops claiming divinity for Jesus and stops making claims that there is only one God then it will become a more enlightened faith.

My great uncle was a Roman Catholic Priest who lived with a woman who was is house help. The rumor is he fathered one or even two kids with her. He was always against the celibacy and was never ashamed to speak against it. This was back in 1960s and 70s. Celibacy makes perfect sense, since all your wordly possessions are given to the Church and not passed on to your offspring. That's why it was introduced in the Roman Catholic Church. The Roman Catholic Church would be better off with married priests rather than with sexually repressed men with pedophile urges.

While I do not defend his actions Mullah Muhammad, the founder of Muhammadanism aka Islam, was somewhat more enlightened although he went to the other extreme by having sexual sexual intercourse with children, some as young as nine years of age. He did not encourage or require celibacy of mullahs who succeeded him even though he made adultery legal by allowing Muslim men to have four wives at a time and an unlimited number of concubines. Unfortunately Mullah Muhammad's rulings have exposed Muslim women to a lifetime of rape.

When a Muslim man marries he buys his wife for a bride price called MEHER and the wife has allow him entry into her body in any which way until he decides that he does not need her any more.

In actuality every Muslim wife has been pushed into being a prostitute by Mullah Muhammad.

This just further illustrates what a bizarre joke the catholic church really is. They claim to be christians, and believe in the bible, but they refuse gods first commandment. That is, go forth and multiply.
Celibacy is simply not natural or normal human behavior. Attempted denial of the dictates of human biology leads to the kind of perversion that has become synonymous with the catholic church.

The Catholic Church needs so much help in order to bring itself up to the 21st century that the question of celibacy is but a drop in the bucket.

I left the Catholic Church when I was old enough to understand the depth of the Church's ignorance and I was quite young adult at the time.

Considering that the Rev. Albert Cutie took the vow of celibacy and didn't keep it, he should be dismissed, period. He is not exactly a kid, he understood the vow he took and choose not to keep. Let Rev. Handsome go, then the chuch can decide if it ever wants to enlighten itself for the present century or hang on to it's old and backward ways....

Ignorance is the mother of misinterpretation of the Bible. Please, read carefully the letters of Saint Paul. He himself was celibe.

Many comments made in this section are base on materialistics opinions.

This is typical of what we do here in our once great Country.We will change anything to justify our sinful behavior. When you signed a contract and promise to follow the rules, you have no other choice. You just can't change the rules in the middle of the game, simply because you are totally uncapable of abiding by the rules. Today, they want to do away with the celibacy vow. What will it be tomorrow? You broke the "vows", you need to be punished. Once this is accomplished, go to school and become a doctor, a lawyer or a construction worker. You do not belong in the Church. How dare you have an affair with a divorce woman, who has a 15 years old son and then on a Sunday morning, go preach "moral values" from the pulpit?

1. Celibacy should be a choice, not a law. And yes, it is an internal Catholic agenda.
2. There are many men and women in every culture and "religion" who choose celibacy because they believe by so doing, their soul/spiritual energy will increase, aiding their own spiritual evolution.
2. Sex is part of human life. Sex is the most beautiful gift human "material" life has to offer. If you can embrace it, sex is the material equivalent of spiritual ecstasy. "As in heaven, so below." Spiritual ecstasy is akin to sexual orgasm, but without the body.
3. Do not equate sex with love. Sex is sex, and it is beautiful in itself. But it has nothing to do with love. Love is a spiritual expression of compassion and intimate connection. It exists outside of sex. We too often equate "love" with attraction and desire - good things in themselves, but keep them in perspective.

Paul was celibate because he was a prude and he also thought the end of the world and therefore second coming was imminent.

e.g.

An excerpt from Professor Bruc Chilton's book, Rabbi Paul-

"He (Paul) feared the turn-on of women's voices as much as the sight of their hair and skin..... At one point he even suggests that the sight of female hair might distract any angel ("pretty wingie talking fictional thingies") in church attendance (1 Cor. 11:10). Simply add Paul's thinking about women to the list of flaws in the foundations of Christianity.

Professor Chilton btw is a Professor of Religion at Bard College and a priest at the Free Church of St. John in Barrytown, NY.

Hmmm, do you think maybe that Mo's scribes simply enhanced Paul's thinking about women when they wrote the koran??? Absolutely!!!!

the reasons why the catholic church established its celibacy policy was because it wanted to amass riches and fortune (material things). From the New Testament church 'they had everything in common' and the people (converts to Christianity) brought all their properties to the Apostles-so now the church was beginning to have gold and silver-remember when the Apostle Peter said to the paralytic'gold and silver i have non, but what i have i give to you, get up and walk.' The man was healed right then and there-eventually the church traded 'that' for the gold and silver.
Anyhow, the policy for celibacy was placed because the new leaders of the church (priests) had wives and children, the priest was the leader of the church and the administrator of the coffers(money). When the priest died, usually the eldest son would take over-and of course the family would be taken care of. The Catholic church didn't like that-they were and still are for amassing fortunes. Sad but true, how she traded the Gift of the Holy Spirit for silver and gold.
I think its time to go back to the roots, to o back to a type of new testament church-the majority of churches have fallen-

Of course all Roman Catholic should be allowed to marry. There are already thousands of married Roman Catholic priests. Churches of the Eastern Rite are part of the Roman Catholic Church (not the Eastern Orthodox Church, whose clerics also are allowed to marry). The Eastern Rite churches allow priests to marry. Eastern Rite churches are located in the Czech Republic, Hungary, Slovakia and the Ukraine. Throughout the world, there are other married Roman Catholic priests. Most of these are men who married after they were ordained into other denominations (primarily Anglican/ Episcopalian). When these married priests converted to Catholicism, the Pope gave them special dispensations to remain married. There are probably about 100 such married Roman Catholic priests in the United States.

The Constant Weader at www.RealityChex.com

As long as the "Church" is run by a group of old men running around in dresses and dogmatically professing immaculate conceptions and virgin births, forget about the pleasures of sex and companionship (unless of course you like children).

For centuries, closeted gay men have retreated into the Catholic clergy precisely because the church's policy on celibacy has provided them with a respectable cover for their failure to marry. It's no coincidence that the vast majority of cases of clerical pedophilia involve Catholic priests, not Anglican or Eastern Orthodox priests, who are free to marry (or not, as they choose.)

So the cutie priest doesn't like the rules of the Catholic church?
No problemo.
Just segue over to the Episcopalians, Baptists, et cetera.
Last I heard, the Pope's army wasn't incarcerating anyone who wanted to leave - - so leave already.
Of course, if cutie simply left quietly, what would the anti-Catholic cabal and the uber-liberal media do for yet another Catholic-bashing spiel?

bfjam: "to the critics of the Church, we respect your opinion, but again, you have other churches to choose, or you can choose no church, it's America - religious TOLERANCE remember?"

Really? We have other churches to choose? How does that work exactly? I've chosen not to be a Catholic or ever to go anywhere near a Catholic Church or Catholic priest. But when my legislature debates whether the secular, civil law should acknowledge same-sex unions, a parade of bigoted, self-hating, celibate freaks in pointy hats shows up to lecture the world about what the secular civil law ought to be. WHEN CATHOLIC BIGOTS RESPECT EVERYONE ELSE'S FREEDOM OF RELIGION, THEN MAYBE I'LL RESPECT THEIRS! But don't you dare claim some privilege from criticism and then turn around and use the power of the secular state to shove your dysfunctional religion down everyone's throat.

The Jewish Sabbath should be changed to Sunday. Rabbis should all be woman. Circumcision should be cut out. Jews should be baptized. Jews should celebrate Christmas like the rest of us normal people. Oh, and, uh, Roman Catholic Priests should be allowed to marry.

In keeping with the current application of Civil Rights to changing and redefining State definitions of marriage to be between man and woman, man and man, woman and woman, RC Priests should be allowed to marry their gay/lesbian/homosexual partners but only after years and years of cohabitation. After all, Priests got to know if their partners are good in bed before tying the knot.

Also, RC Priests, in keeping with current marriage and family state laws, should be allowed to divorce and remarry, setup prenuptial agreements, litigate child visitation rights (Sorry but can’t take them on Sundays), adopt African orphans, … and… you know what’s coming… ALIMONY.

And while we are at it, let’s allow Buddhist Monks to marry their rice bowls, Hindus kill and eat sacred cows, and allow Evangelists, God forbid, to preach using the word F_ _ _.

Finally and most importantly, Roman Catholic Priests should be allowed to marry so that they can regularly experience the great joys … and ecstasy of … MOTHER-IN-LAWS.

Whether the Catholic Church has important and valid reasons for reversing itself on the discipline of priestly celibacy is a separate question from the real issue this article addresses. But with regard to this article, I think it's very foolish to assert that the Church should allow priests to marry because some of them can't control themselves. Under the same logic, one could say that the Church should consider doing away with the requirement that married people be faithful to each other because some married people cheat on their spouses, or that the IRS should no longer require waiters to report tips on their taxes since so many of them do not.

Any Catholic man who marries promises absolute fidelity to his spouse and commits himself to remain totally celibate except within his marriage. Often, married men face many very strong temptations with other women in their lives, but the Church requires them to learn self-mastery and train themselves in the self control needed to make faithful decisions regarding their sexuality. The same is expected of priests. Why should we expect priests who have not yet attained a mature self-mastery over their desires and impulses to be able to control themselves just fine as married men?

The real problem with this whole argument is the assertion that human beings are incapable of controlling their sexual desires and will sooner or later lose control and act out. Vast numbers of faithful married people and celibate priests alike prove this assertion wrong. Sexual self control is possible. The questions that should be raised by Fr. Cutié's behavior are, "Why was Fr. Cutié not able to control himself and be faithful to his promise of celibacy?" and, "Why do so many people in our society—single, married, and celibate—have so much trouble developing mature sexual self control, and what do we need to do to improve the situation?"

Farnaz1Mansouri1 wrote:
What is "unselfish" about celibacy? What is "selfish" about the desire for a loving, intimate relationship with another human being?
Good grief.
-------------------------------------
Finally somebody gets it! People server others because it makes them feel good about THEMSELVES. This doesn't take anything away from their service, but they should stop acting like they are doing it all for others. You serve others because it completes something in YOURSELF, not the person you serve.

Of course, in the Pope's case, he does pretty well pretending to serve others. To bad he doesn't serve the people his pedophile army have victimized.

The Church is a fairly unhealthy place, and celibate priests are but one symptom. While I have seen many good men and women involved with the church, the general outcome of church dogma and policy being dictated by a set of men in Rome is not a good one. It's too bad that the Church really isn't a force for good in the world, but an organization that spreads, fear, hate, and has a proven history of protecting child molesters.

The best thing that could happen with the Church would be for it to be marginalized into irrelevance. The best thing a priest who disagrees with the Church could do is to leave it and do good works in his own name.

Father Cutie, should address the graduating class at ND.

Another nail in the coffin of the pre-scientific "comfort food for the mind" that is religion.

Sorry, we don't need priests or shamans anymore to placate the gods.

A priest's sins can be forgiven but a valid marriage cannot be annulled.

Priestly celibacy is not a blank excuse for misconduct. The case of Marcial Maciel, the disgraced founder of the Legion of Christ order, was a serial abuser and a fraud, as well as the father of a few children with mistresses. His order is now under investigation.

Changes in whatever the Catholic church wants to do about celibacy would not have made this madman a better person. He was sick from the start, and the church got fooled and manipulated.

"Again, celibacy among the Catholic clergy is an internal matter and is nobody's business or concern except that of the Catholics."

And abortion, pre-marital sex, contraception, gay marriage.... is a matter concerning the people involved and is nobody else's business, especially not a superstitious cult. When religion minds it's own monkey business and scams, maybe we can get on with reality.

Whether priests are married or not may seem important. More important is whether they know or not that they are preaching nonsense.

Who cares about "holy men of the cloth" doing the nasty thing with women, married or not? But it would be nice if Catholic priests took a vow of celibacy when it comes to having sex with little choir boys.
But I digress . . .
I read an article in JAMA that suggests that men refraining from sex with woman or with themselves have a higher incidence of prostate cancer, which stands to reason seeing that this gland is directly involved in semen production. So from a strictly physical (and probably mental) health viewpoint, all men should find a way to "keep the juices flowing"--with the exception of the Pope since he probably doesn't have the time to . . .
Other than these points, let me say once again that religion has long outlived its usefulness. There is no longer a need to believe in fairies, angels, ghosts, shamans, oracles, spooks or gods (not that there ever was a real need). One can be a genial, likable and reasonable human being these day without being prompted or forced by a god into behaving in such a manner. And that's what religion is all about, isn't it? Controlling behavior, right?

As a recovering Catholic with 12 years of Catholic "education," I joined the United Methodist Church about 15 years ago.

When my son was born and when my marriage was in trouble, I was so grateful to have a minister who was married, had his own children and grandchildren, and could relate to what I was going through.

Watching my nieces' baptisms in the Catholic Church, the priest holds the babies gingerly, looking deathly afraid of crying or some excrement. These poor, celibate men know nothing about my brother's life and struggles and their work as counselors for their clergy must be unhelpful and difficult indeed.

The Church SHOULD change its policy and might attract a lot more caring and compassionate servants, among women clergy as well.

DOES HE HAVE A POINT?

No he doesn't. Caught infraganti is not a point.

This guy is the Latino equivalent of John Edwards, the 'psychic': an opportunist.

He has done NOTHING that merits the publicity he's getting. All he has done is promote himself.

But that's what this society needs, wackos who come out the woodwork to entertain us while we decompose as society at the speed of light.

Priests take a vow of poverty, but poverty is relative. They usually have very nice room and board provided, which accommodates a fairly demanding work schedule.

If priests were allowed to marry, it's likely the priests and families wouldn't want to live in a rectory. The church would have to pay a living wage and provide health benefits to kids and spouses. They'd have to allow days off, family leave, etc. Too expensive. It's easier to have a stable of willing servants who don't require much and do what they are told.

Don't get me wrong, I admire priests and their vocations. I was raised catholic, and do understand the pull. But now that it's not the only refuge for devout gay men, it makes sense to me that ranks are dwindling.

I think there should be a place for married priests. A man should not have to give up or go somewhere else to be clergy if he also has or desires a family. The church loses good people this way. They should allow women also, but that's a different argument.

They could change the policy, and perhaps will, but there are several factors to consider:

1. Ensuring that the change is not misinterpreted as the beginning of a crumbling on every front where people are clamoring for "change", primarily on questions of morality. Some Catholics believe the Church should "open up" and approve of any sexual activity an individual chooses to engage in. In other words, they want a Catholic look and feel to their worship without any moral demands. Those people must not be encouraged to think they can achieve such a goal within Catholicism. If they cannot be dissuaded, they should convert to Episcopalianism instead.

2. Whether to grant permission to existing priests who have already made a vow of celibacy to enter into marriage after careful consideration. Tricky question, but on the whole probably acceptable.

I see no problem with allowing married men to be ordained. At the same time, I do think it is very important to allow individuals who do not feel called to marriage to be ordained.

The world in our time hates chastity. If you tell some people to control their sexual activity, they think you are absolutely crazy. Having celibate clergy is a great witness to the fact that it's possible to live life according to traditional views of chastity and self-control. Many people today think it's impossible. It isn't.

Catholic Priests should be allowed to marry. How can a priest help a family if he does not live a family life?

Episcopal (Catholic in all but name) Priests marry and Episcopalians also ordain women.

Jesus certainly sampled the joys of a married life (whether or not he was married...).

Let Catholic Priests marry. Pragmatically it will also drive up the lagging ranks of priests.

The day will come when Catholics have a modern Pope, one educated in the late 60's or later. And that will begin a transformation of the Catholic Church. Married Priests, women priests and gays. Further, the stance on birth control will change radically in a world with challenged food resources and opportunity.

With old school men like Ratzinger at the helm, the Church will remain adrift.

As to the literal notion of "pontif", please, change the dogma and labels.

Celibacy is unnatural, you would think most intelligent people would understand that. For some reason Catholics lack even common sense and reasonableness.

The author is incorrect in stating that all Roman Catholic priests take vows of poverty. Only those who are members of religious orders and are ordained take vows of poverty. Diocesan priests do not take vows of poverty.

Addressing only the question of removing celibacy in order to increase the number of priests - faster, and probably better, would be opening the priesthood to women.

Nice article. Catholic priests should be REQUIRED to be married.

As it stands now, selection for celibate men, men that don't like women, goes against normal evolutionary behavior.

So this policy immediately selects for abnormal men. Freaks to be unkind. Whatever the problems of marriage, at least the priests won't be doing little boys.

The ONLY reason priests are celibate is that in the 11th century, the church got tired of paying benefits to the dependents of priests who died. It was a money saving ploy. The rest of the "reasons" are just BS.

I posted a comment last night, and it was removed. I think that is very interesting, because my comment was basically that many Catholic priests are not "celibate" and there are a lot of former children/victims to prove it. So what's offensive about that comment--the fact that I made it, or the fact that it happens to be true? Until the Catholic Church can admit to its sins, it will be very hard to take it seriously, especially when it comes to sexual matters.

I will be fascinated to see if the denial-enablers omit this post, too.

This matter is in the Spiritual realm, celibacy is meant to allow man in human form to be the administer of love to all others, i.e. male and female.

Sex gets in the way of all things Spiritual, espeacially when it is man who is at the head of a church, be it Catholic or otherwise...

Same goes for woman and celibacy for woman is even rarer than man, though that is not to insult woman. Woman is love and does not actually need any help from God in the way of Spiritual matters, though that does not mean that God has nothing to do with woman and love...God made woman the way she is in order for our Spirits to move from one body to the next, as in "choose the womb carefully" from the "Tibetan Book of the Dead".

Priests (so called) who are unable to abide to celibacy do not understand what is actually their calling, which is why so many of them get and got into trouble in the present and the past, as we all know from history.

Prita46 commented:
"What's the difference between a married catholic priest and a celibate catholic priest? They still belong to Satan's institution which is the Catholic church."

An extreme view. It is not only the Catholic Church, history is full of accounts of the role of all organized religious organizations in backing ruthless heads of states in their self-serving looting, killing expeditions and exploitation of the gullible. While I don't accept the church's position, I don't believe in satan either.

The celibacy position is a joke. It is wrong because it is forced on to those who want to serve the church.

Sexual urge is very basic and one cannot just ignore it by prayers and cold showers. The widely reported cases of pedophilia by priests are examples of the failure of the requirement for celibacy.
Undoubtedly, there are some among the men and women who are content.....don't feel deprived, but the thought of the rest of them living in a state of denial is sad.

In the early Church, as already indicated, ordination of married men was the norm. Sacred Scripture confirms this; St Paul prescribes to his disciples Titus and Timothy that candidates for ordination should only have been married once (cf. 1 Tim 3:2.12; Tit 1:6). We know that Peter was married and perhaps others of the Apostles. This seems to be implied in Peter's question to Christ - 'We have left our homes and followed you'. And Jesus replied, 'Truly, I say to you, there is no man who has left house or wife or brothers or parents or children, for the sake of the kingdom of God, who will not receive manifold more in this time, and in the age to come eternal life' (Lk 18:28-30; cf. Mt 19:27-30).

Here we see the first obligation of clerical celibacy, that is, continence in relation to the use of marriage after ordination. This was the original meaning of celibacy - the lex continentiae or absolute continence in relation to the generation of children. This is how it is defined in all the first written laws about celibacy, dating from the fourth and fifth centuries. Candidates for ordination could not commit themselves to live continence without the prior, express agreement of their spouses, since as a consequence of the sacramental bond they had an inalienable right to conjugal relations.

May I be so bold as to point out that clerical celibacy is based not on religion but on corruption?

Celibacy was instituted during the Middle Ages to counter what I think was called "simony", the practice of priests and bishops bequeathing church property to their legitimate offspring. By outlawing clerical marriage, any offspring were made illegitimate and so ineligible to inherit property. Thus the property remained under church ownership.

From what I remember from church history classes, not only were married priests the norm during the early years of the church, but so were female priests.

So a whole bunch of what is being treated as "religious tradition" is nothing more than the results of power-grabbing in years gone by. Nothing that hasn't been changed in the past, and could just as easily be changed again.

every human including nuns and priest should be allowed to have (straight or gay ) sex and the same goes for marriage. you have only one life so enjoy it!! there is no here after so take it while you can and forget about all that other hokus/pokus!!

Why does the media continue to talk with Donohue? And why continue to talk about celibacy, papal authority etc. and the Catholic Church? This Church is firmly entrenched in the fourth century and will never be responsive to the needs of its community.

Forget religion...be responsible, be charitable, be compassionate and caring. You will be fine and not in need of the guidance of any institutionalized church no matter their particular belief system. All systems serve to continue the system. They have nothing to do with what is best for the person.

Priestly celibacy policy began as an effort to preserve the church's assets that were being lost to priests' children. Obviously that policy has been wildly successful. Is there any (financially) richer institution than the Catholic Church?

The Catholic hierarchy has evolved into an entrenched 'boys club' that is about nothing more than money and power. That's why they don't want women anywhere near the decision-making machinery of the Church by allowing priests to marry nor allowing women to take Holy Orders. Of course, none of this is on a conscious level.

The Church hierarchy has become antithetical to the teachings of Jesus. If Jesus could see what his beloved Church has become, he would roll over in his grave.

P.S. How many priests do you know who live in 'poverty'?

Who is the catholic church and its clergy trying to deceive their parishioners or themeselves.The pediphile scandal across the country coupled with the cultural diversity within the catholic churches has created chaos for so many.To stand in a church and listen to a priest give a homily takes a lot of patience and courage.The new wave of catholicism seems to be the selective acceptance of pediaphilia,adultry,and racial slurs.No longer is it a case of who is catholic but what catholic "family" has the most sexual deviance within it and has been allowed to manipulate their way through the maze of parishes who still have the old school approach in dealing with these subjects:"keep your mouth shut and don't get caught,if the wife can't handle it,then make sure she is taken care of".In other words the criminal element still exists and still has been allowed to be the driving force in getting what they want done,done.Some things just will never change. And even if one isn't catholic,any church seems to accomodate these people and their challenging methods of terrorism.

You've all missed the point. Priest should be allowed to marry because even they cannot be fully saved without a wife. The man is not whole without the woman, neither is the woman whole without the man.

The creation story is to teach us what we should prioritize and what our God has commanded us. Just like Adam and Eve were married and commanded to multiply and replenish the earth, so are we.

The Holy Catholic Church is the oldest Christian church in the world. It has many ancient traditions. No other church can say that. It is the largest church in the United States and the world. No other denomination can come close to it in size or number. In fact, most mainline protestant denominations are shrinking, ecspecailly epsicopals, and the Catholic Chruch is growing. For the last 2,000 years people from outside and inside the bride of Christ, the Holy Catholic Church, have tried to destroy her, but they all have failed. Here she stands 2000 years later, still strong with 70 million Catholics in the United States and close to 1.2 billion in the world. When Jesus gave Peter, the first pope, the keys to the gates of heaven, he said "Not even the gates of hell will prevail". Jesus knew evil will try to hurt and destroy HIS church, but evil will not prevail. I pray for all my Christian brothers and sisters, that they will find the wisdom to follow Jesus and come to HIS church and stray away from Satan.

Not ALL priests take a vow of poverty. Some orders, like Franciscans, do; others do not. Diocesan priests do not.

Catholic priests who serve in the Military (Chaplains) are paid based upon their military rank. If they belong to an order which requires a vow of poverty, they turn their salary, minus reasonable living expense, to the order. If they do not belong to an order requiring that vow of poverty, they may use their salary as they see fit.

Nobody could force a man or woman to live a life of true chastity against their will, it takes generosity for someone to choose not to have sex with someone they're not married to, nor to masturbate nor fantasize nor look at pornography, and not to cheat. Yet this is actually what is required of EVERY Catholic, not only vowed celibates, but bachelors, widows/widowers, and married people too, who must be continent except with their spouse and in openness to having children if they are married (though it is very permitted to plan childbearing wisely and carefully and make use of the infertile periods of a woman's cycle, which today is possible with great accuracy; do a web search for "natural family planning"). The majority of respondents on this thread who are so hostile to the idea of celibacy or seem to think it is "impossible" probably have not learned the self control necessary even to practice the chastity required for married love as a Catholic. The chastity of celibates should bear witness to a desire that exceeds the powerful natural desire for sexual union, that is the desire for union with God, and the desire for heaven. We would say that those who've made their "god" to be sexual pleasure, or material posessions, or power, are a. enslaved to these things and b. looking for heaven in all the wrong places. Our desires and our capacity EXCEED all these finite things. God alone suffices.

The ground rule is obvious..if you don't like it don't join.
Most opponents of priest celibacy seem to be female.Something to do with vanity,can't live without us,or whatever?
Perhaps many married men,in this day and age,would prefer priest celibacy if given the choice.Better than nagging,boredom,pending divorce,alimony etc,etc.
Where's the nearest seminary?

Priests married until the Church came down on those priests who were accumulating wealth and passing it onto their decendants, not exactly the Churchs' intent. The Church then decreed priests could not marry - this was approximately 1,000 AD.

This requirement is out-of-date and not relevant. Sure, one can point to the failures of those few who do not observe their marriages in other religions, but the reason for this celibacy rule is no longer relevant.

Let priests marry and the Church will undergo a long-needed uplifting. I cannot believe how many ex-catholic preachers there are - a real shame and loss of good people.

Same for nuns - some of the most unselfish and good people there ever were. And I might add, superb teachers.

Here's an idea: Start the process by allowing one order the option to marry and see what happens - the results may be very, very positive.

Remember when clerical celibacy came in? It was during the high-living era of the Renaissance popes, who enjoyed wealth, splendor, and overt, promiscuous sexuality. (Some made their sons Cardinals as teenagers!) Objective: Keep the wealth within the Church, by forbidding the humble priests from marrying and creating families, which would have siphoned off wealth from the Vatican.

Anything that would allow the Church to free itself of its Medieval neurosis over sex would be welcome. The best place to start would be to allow priests to marry. Kills two birds with one stone. First, by allowing for a priesthood composed of men with a healthier view of sexuality and second by beginning to relieve the Church of its bugaboo with sexual pleasure somehow interfering with reverence for God.
Can't happen too soon actually..

Sure it's just a policy, and yes it may change someday. Today, because of priests like this one, no. Woman aligning themselves with this faction, just the same as groupies with rock stars. The issue is father knows the rules, knows his vows, and he chose to break them. I cannot imagine that he wouldn't choose to break any other vows he took if he so desired.

Could be the church is meant to reduce itself to those who follows the rules and those who accept it as she is. As for the rest, why there is always the way its always been. Depart and form another ones that suits and supports your current whims. Eventually we shall have a system not unlike the tower of Babel. Only this time its us who break off and gather together again in the path that we design and not of God's design. Just do it in good faith my friends, with a clear heart if possible, and He will understand. Remember to continue being in denial though, that's important to feeling righteous.

Yes, priests should be allowed to marry. If rules do not ease in the Catholic Church ,there will be no church in the next 25 years. I have a brother in law who is a deacon who would make a wonderful priest. There are thousands like him in the church. Good Catholci men and fathers who love their church and their God. These are not Jesus's laws but man made laws. I think they can and should be changed so that our church can live.

The oath of celibacy like the Catholic Church is phony. Priests who are normal find many ways to enjoy sex. As we know, unfortunately, many of them choose to have sex with children. Others find plenty of compliant nuns. Still others find women in the parish willing to serve "God". The rituals of the Church are colorful and are part of the show which permits the church to frighten Catholics into giving the church money.I remember as a boy how much I looked forward to CYO on Sunday evenings. Great place to meet a girl if the local priest hadn't gotten them all.

I absolutely believe Reverend Cutie should uphold the rule of celibacy for priests!

We need to breed these wacko religious nutballs out of the human gene pool as soon as possible!

On the other hand, if we let them have sex with women, maybe then they'll leave the children alone.

I am a Catholic who believes the hierarchy started this celibacy lunacy to avoid the possible children from inheriting instead of it going to the RC Church.

Cutie >>>go for it. Maybe this will be the straw that broke the stranglehold on Our Church.

While we are making changes, WOMEN to be ordained as well.

THEN and ONLY then will I resume attendance at MY Church.

I now am a member of an Episcopal church...does not feel like my home but better than Catholic ...when Bush was endorsed by the hierarchy, my husband and I said "...THAT is it...." Have had enough.

Of course the Catholic Church should allow priests to marry, just as it should also allow women, single or married, to be priests. Not only would this vastly increase the pool of potential priests, but it would result in priests who have some real understanding of the lives their married, single & sexually active, married with children, parishioners lead, and the problems they have.

In the best of all possible worlds, there would be NO organized religions of any sort. But I'll save that rant for another post.

Whew!!!! It is true that this 'Cutie matter' is an internal issue for the Roman Catholic Church.

Certainly no other can change the dumb rules re celibacy and women being discriminated against re ordination.

This is OUR issue. Protestants and all other faith traditions will affirm their own rules.

"...We shall Overcome some day...." Give those old men time to go on their journey to the 'other side' and we will then become more humane.

Wish us the best, please.

WOW....this guy acutally had an afair with an ADULT WOMAN and was ejected. How many child molesting preachers are still at work in the Catholic Church?

Lugaucho tiene corazón, pero no usó el condón.
Lugaucho tiene corazón y así el cambio nos llegó.

It will perhaps be recalled that the Renaissance popes instituted celibacy for priests because they didn't want married priests accumulating wealth for their families; the wealth was supposed to flow to the Vatican. The Renaissance popes lived luxuriously; made no pretence of celibacy themselves; sired numerous children, some of whom were named Cardinals in their teen years.

The whole celibacy gig was founded on greed, pure and simple; it should be (but probably won't, be abolished, due to the weight of the Church bureaucy.

Lugo tiene corazón.
Lugo has heart.

That was the theme song of Bishop Fernando Lugo when he ran for President of Paraguay.

Now he has been revealed as father to perhaps three children. It is a joke.

Of course, Catholic Pastors/Priests and Nuns should be allowed to Marry. There is no biblical prohibition on marriage for pastors/priests. The Apostle Peter was married as the Bible notes that Jesus healed Peter's mother in law. Marriage would allow Catholic Priests to have a natural God ordained life-partner and family. It would also provide a healthy sexual release for them within the healthy confines of marriage. Of course, some could commit adultery, but at least they would have a healthy release that would hinder all of the perversity that is currently going on. Further, they could actually teach practical and biblical truths on marriage and child rearing with some personal experience like protestant' have been doing forever.

Lugaucho tiene corazón, pero no usó el condón.
Lugaucho tiene corazón y así el cambio nos llegó.

"Lugaucho," being a contraction of Lugo (President of Paraguay) and gaucho, slang for a "playboy" or male wh*re.

When a priest abandons his vows, he may be admired but at the same time discredited.

I have yet to hear or see one media journalist question why it's ok for them to protect and keep child molesters in the Catholic church but not some guy having a legal relationship. I'm still waiting Vatican. Explain yourselves. Perverts who molest children ok, a priest with a consulting adult not ok.

TRUE CHURCH:

"... outside and inside the bride of Christ..."

The bride of Christ????? Right! That must have been Maria Magdalena. Or is Christ the bride???? Does that mean it was female after all????

I have submitted a brief, biblical defense of priestly celibacy, but it has not been posted. Meanwhile, others have been allowed to post the most vicious attacks on the Catholic Church without support for their opinions. Why the double-standard?

Prior to the 12th century priests could marry. Although there were some ill reasoned theolgoical discussions floating about, the ultimate reason for the doctrine was economic. If a priest owned land, and many did, and he was married, his eldest son inherited all. If he was celibate his mesne lord, typically his bishop, inherited all. Voila. Mandatory celibacy. Sadly the Vatican still lives in the 12th century perpetuating psychogically unsound practices.

"...priests (who also take poverty vows) don't make enough money to allow them to support families..."

But couldn't the wife work to support the family? Or would that undercut the sexist macho Christian husband's authority over his wife?

"Prior to the 12th century priests could marry...the Vatican still lives in the 12th century..."

Returning the Dark Ages seems to be all the rage today among Catholics as well as among Protestant and Muslim fundamentalists.

"...the Renaissance popes...didn't want married priests accumulating wealth for their families...The whole celibacy gig was founded on greed..."

Aw, those were the "good, old days", when each woman on average had 10+ children, and even though most of the children died in infancy from curable and preventable diseases, there were still enough children who survived so that each family could give, at least, one youngest son to the priesthood and most of their daughters to the convents.

Then the Renaissance, followed by science and the Enlightenment, came along and messed everything up.

It seems more than mere coincidence that this discussion of priestly celebacy, Fr. Cutie's "indulgences," his appearance on at least one major network news department's morning program and the History Channel's excellent -- albeit curious -- program on the Illuminati should flow through the media on the very week that the film version of Dan Brown's "Angels and Demons" is opening nationwide in movie theatres. Methinks the Hollywood publicity industry has reached it's apex in marketing. It's alright though. I find it all very interesting.

I approach this discussion as a Protestant. Since the invention of the printing press, Roman Cathlics have been fighting against an antiquated dogma derived from those with personal biases not necessarily coming from above.

To require priests to remain celebate is asking way too much and is not biblically mandated.

For Roman Catholics to be so far ahead of religious thinking on evolution and to be so far behind religious thinking on marriage of priests is quite a mystery. Of course, then how does the church deal with the sisters (nuns)?

In the year 1400, the Heresy Act was passed in England by the Catholic Church. It wasn't too difficult to understand; the punishment for READING THE BIBLE was death by hanging.

The Holy men believed that all kinds of trouble would be abroad if the plebs were permitted to come to their own conclusions about the holy word.

Judge for yourself how far they have come in the meantime. Fr.Cutie is lucky he is living in an enlightened era.

And about the abolition of celibacy by priests. Don't be a silly boy.

It's not about sex .... it's about property rights and wives and children... all messy stuff that the holy fathers should not have to bother themselves with.

Wake up.

In the year 1400, the Heresy Act was passed in England by the Catholic Church. It wasn't too difficult to understand; the punishment for READING THE BIBLE was death by hanging.

The Holy men believed that all kinds of trouble would be abroad if the plebs were permitted to come to their own conclusions about the holy word.

Judge for yourself how far they have come in the meantime. Fr.Cutie is lucky he is living in an enlightened era.

And about the abolition of celibacy by priests. Don't be a silly boy.

It's not about sex .... it's about property rights and wives and children... all messy stuff that the holy fathers should not have to bother themselves with.

Wake up.

I strongly believe the church should drop the celibacy requirement, as a matter of common sense. But if the real issue here is increasing the number of priests, there is something the Catholic church might consider first--recruitment.

The Catholic church at least in this country, has next to nothing in the way of a recruitment policy. I speak from experience. I was raised in a strong Catholic family, went to church every Sunday, had first communion, confirmation, CCD education every week, etc.,etc. As a senior in high school, I had applied to a dozen different colleges, and could have told you all about the opportunities for vocational school, or military enlistment that were available to me.

Yet I would not have been able to tell you how one becomes a priest. No one approached me about the possibility. No one ever explained the process or even broached the idea.

Getting modern kids to consider a life of poverty, obedience, and yes, chastity might be a tough sell. Still I think before the Catholic church begins tearing away at centuries-old traditions to increase headcount, they might want to at least try asking.

If the people who call themselves Christians would read the Bible, they would find the answers to the question of marriage for the clergy. The apostle Paul said, "This is a true saying, if a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work. A bishop then must be blameless, the HUSBAND OF ONE WIFE, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach; Not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous; One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity;" (1 Timothy 3:1-4)

In 1 Corinthians, Chapter 7, Paul addresses the pros and cons of remaining single or marrying. He points out that being single was better for doing the work of Christ, but he was emphatic that it was a personal choice. He said in verses 8-10, "I say therefore to the unmarried and widows, it is good for them if they abide even as I. But if they cannot contain, let them marry: for it is better to marry than to burn." I suggest that one reads the entire chapter.

Also, in 1 Timothy, Paul states that, "Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron; Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth" (1 Timothy 4:1-3).

Roman Catholicism is a cult and they have made a haven for pedophiles and homosexual priests. Practically all they teach is contradictory to New Testament scripture.

TO BE CONTINUED

CONTINUING
God said we were not to make unto ourselves graven images or to bow down to them. Did you ever see a procession of catholics carrying a statue of the Virgin Mary down the street, weeping and wailing and throwing flowers on the image? The Word says that there is only one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus. It also tells us to come boldly unto the throne of grace that we may obtain mercy (Hebrews 4:16). Jesus said to come unto Him and He would give us rest. Roman Catholicism has you praying to a myriad of their canonized saints asking them to intercede for us. If they had a personal relationship with the Lord they would see the error of their ways.

Catholicism has raised Mary to the deity of Christ by saying that she was born without original sin (Immaculate Conception). If that was the case, Mary could have gone to the cross as a propitiation for our sins. No need for Jesus to have come. Mary, herself, said, "My soul doth magnify the Lord, And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour" (Luke 1:46,47). Now, someone who is sinless doesn't need a saviour. They also teach that Mary was a perpetual virgin. Mary had other children and the Word says that Joseph "... knew her not TILL she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS." If I told you that I never drove a car TILL I was 16, wouldn't you naturally assume that is when I began to drive? If the Bible says that Joseph knew her not TILL she brought forth her firstborn son, then....well, I'll let you figure it out.

When Paul and Barnabas were in Lystra, Paul healed a man who was impotent in his feet. Immediately the people supposed them to be gods and brought oxen and garlands unto the gates and wanted to do sacrifice to them. Paul and Barnabas rent their clothes and cried out to them saying, "Sirs, why do ye these things? We also are men of like passions with you, and preach unto you that ye should turn from these vanities unto the living God, which made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and all things that are therein:" (Acts 14). Now, contrast that with the Roman Catholic church with all their pomp and ceremony. The pope and bishops are robed in gold gilded finery. People bow down and kiss the pope's ring and pay homage unto him.

Need I go on? This has gotten too long and I haven't even touched on their confessionals; their teaching of purgatory and holding Mass for the dead; their doctrines of works versus grace; their holy communion; their practice of granting indulgences and doing penance; their calling their priests "Father", etc., etc., all of which are contradictory to New Testament teachings.

I pray that all who truly desire to follow the Lord would come out from under their bondage and would get into the Word to discover Truth through the power of the Holy Spirit. In Christ's name. Amen.

Your comment is awaiting moderation.
It is inhumane to expect EVERY candidate for the priesthood to be celibate. Considering Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, sex (a gift from God) is as necessary for most humans as breathing and eating. It is a very rare human who willingly wants to sacrifice this normal appetite because of his vocation. Christ never imposed it upon His apostles. This idea was concocted in Medieval times because it is expensive for the Church to support wives and children and the Church was very poor at that time. How it evolved into the “necessity” so more time is available for Church duties, I cannot imagine. Many other religions do very well with allowing their ministers to get married. The Catholic Church is hurting for vocations because of this rigid and abnormal man-made rule, and in turn, the numbers of Catholics are dwindling. Numerous parishes in the lower income areas, where the congregations desperately need the charitable works and instruction, have no priest, and most Catholic schools have been closed or consolidated. There are only enough priests to manage the bigger, wealthier parishes. This virtually "forced" celibate life-style is also responsible for many priests having affairs, turning to alcohol as an escape, and the lifestyle rules create an invisible safe haven for pedophiles to use as a cover.

Sex is a normal human need, and squelching this outlet will find its out in some unusual way! Hopefully, someday soon, we will have a Pope with the wisdom to change this ridiculous and selfish rule. The Catholic Church is one of the richest institutions in the world, and it can well afford to support normal lives for its priests; GREED is a capital sin! What would (or did) Christ do?

I am a practicing Roman Catholic with 16 years of Catholic education. Numerous other Catholics, educated or not, also want this foolish requirement changed for the good of their priests and parishioners.

As a former Catholic, I agree. Priests were not celibate up until the late Middle Ages, when the Pope realized that bishops were giving their bishoprics to their sons, rather than take orders from Rome. Oops.

One way to attract priests to take Holy Orders, and to retain the ones that you already have, is to release them from the ridiculous requirement for celibacy. It's about as antiquated as indulgences and the Tridentine Mass.

CELIBACY HAS ++++ NOTHING ++++ TO DO WITH ++++ ANY ++++ PREACHINGS OF JESUS.

WE REALLY HAVE NO IDEA IF JESUS HIMSELF WAS CELIBATE OR NOT.

WHAT WE DO KNOW IS THAT WHEN ++++ INHERITANCE LAWS ++++ REQUIRED PRIESTS TO PASS ON CHURCH PROPERTY TO 'THEIR HEIRS' [LIVING PEOPLE DO NOT HAVE HEIRS -- YOU MUST DIE FIRST TO HAVE HEIRS],

THEN

AND ONLY THEN

WAS CELIBACY REQUIRED FOR PRIESTS.

Once again, are imams/clerics celibate?? If not, are they allowed to beat their wives?? Ditto for the all-male members of the Baha'ist UHJ (Universal House of Justice)??

A lot of lame, unenlightened comments. Fr. Cutie should simply have left the priesthood if this is how he felt rather than go off track. How can you respect this woman? Leave the priesthood then kiss on the beach. It really is not that difficult.

This particular priest has more to answer for than just whether or not he wanted to associate with women. Miami's South Beach is not exactly the place one would choose to practice vows of poverty and serve humanity. The Catholic Church need look no further than to the Orthodox world to see how Christianity would look with a married priesthood, which has somehow functioned quite well on its own away from the Latin church for over a millenia.

Normal or abnormal no longer qualifies as a means for discussing differences in sexual conduct, due mainly to homosexual objections. But talking about what works and what does not may be even better. And it's in this area that the Roman Catholic requirement of celibacy for its priests manifests its greatest weakness: it doesn't work well in human behavior. The sex drive is simply too strong. When deliberate attempts are made to suppress it in adults, especially males in whom aggressiveness is more prevalent, misbehavior results, not to mention the perpetuation of ignorance about what does work well in the fulfillment of sexual desires and relationships. Father Cutie is on the mark.

I cannot imagine caring less what is Catholic dogma today and it silly rules require.It is not the church of Jesus but of group led by patrearchy bent on maintine nothing more than the of supppsedly ceebate guys to maintain their power over so many people. It is almost criminal.
If this cult did not have the influence it does in this country (my God, how many media people take this cult seriously), I could not care less what is their latest condemnation of many of God's creation.

"...Donohue continued, they're just going "to exchange this problem for another one. Look how many rabbis and imams and ministers who are married and cheat on their brides."

So, look at how many Nuns, Priests, Bishops and Cardinals cheat on their vows. Don't know about Donohue but I'd much prefer the local priest cheat on his wife versus molesting my children.

Additionally and in the ongoing hope of purging the Catholic Church's priesthood of sexual predators, a few father Fathers just might be able to work some miracles along that line, God doesn't seem to be getting much help from the current crop.

Peter, who Catholics famously call the first Pope, was married. Many Popes through the centuries had wild love lives and bore many children.

But the Catholic Church is about power and money, not about truth and the Gospel. So who cares if its priests are married or not.

When I was in college, I dated a priest. The only thing is, I didn't know he was a priest until I went to Easter mass and saw him delivering the serman. He had told me when we met that he was in forensics.

All priests, gay and straight, deserve to be permitted to have open, healthy, normal, consensual adult relationships recognized by the Church and/or the State.

"Indulging himself"? What does that mean exactly? Was he getting a foot massage or were they screwing? More clarification, please. I hardly think fornicating is the appropriate method for changing a long-held tradition. Furthermore, I would question why all the town ladies want this tradition overturned; are they in line for their own foot massages? One must wonder.

He knew what the vows were when he decided to be a priest. Strange to me that someone would get up in church and tell their flock what they should or shouldn't do meanwhile he's doing what he shouldn't do. I guess he thinks it okay to "do as I say not as I do".

Don't be a priest or at least be honest and speak against the chasity vow before not after your affair and you're caught.

I never believed in celibacy, it goes against one of God's first comissions to man and it goes against nature. How can you withstand a natuarl, God given desire? God created WO-man for man, to be a help mate an completor. God did this because he saw that man was alone on the earth. Instead of giving man another man to be intimate with, he gave hime WO-man. Thus creating the ability to reproduce among humans and replenish the earth as God commanded. If only we would take the time and read the Holy Bible and believe its divinely written words.

There are married Catholic priests. Married Episcopal priests who convert to Catholicism are "received into the church" and are allowed to remain married and serve as priests. I believe Catholic priests if they are so inclined should be allowed to marry. The problem here is more a money issue. Married priests would have to be paid a higher salary and adding a wife and children would add an additional burden in the cost of health benefits. Perhaps now the Church may allow married priests in light of the huge amounts of money being paid out in lawsuits and 'hush' money' because of pedophile priests.
Celibacy is not unique to Catholicism. In India men who aspire to spiritual perfection do not have sex so that this energy can be use for higher purposes and be directed upwards to higher
spiritual centers in the body. This celibacy is chosen not necessarily out of a moral sense, but as a practical and known fact in spiritual life that if this energy is expended from a lower chakra, it will not rise to the higher chakras and thus limit the person's spiritual growth.

She's divorced.

In other words, two of the churches' biggest prohibitions he busts in one
move..
Maybe if he declares he's agnostic that congretation will anoint him pope.

After reading many of the comments here the hate that has been heaped upon the Catholic Church and its followers is despicable. With no other religion would this be tolerated. No one would dare defame Islam or Buddhism or Judaism because they would be labeled as racist or bigots. But, for some reason, it perfectly acceptable to rail against the Catholic Church with such hate and disdain.

It also annoys me that people argue against policies they haven't even tried to understand. If you understand it and disagree, fine. But if you are not informed on what you are talking about, keep you uninformed opinion to yourself.

No, the Church is not perfect. Jesus left it in the hands of humans so by default, it will be flawed. However, it is the Catholic Church that Jesus Christ Himself commissioned, and no non-Catholic Christian church can lay that claim. Catholicism is the original form of Christianity and was around for 1,500 years before Martin Luther decided to split.

The fact that so many people disagree with the Catholic Church must mean it's doing something right. After all, the Church answers to a Higher Power than us humans, and usually it is human society as a whole, in its imperfection, that has the tendency to stray OFF His path, not on.

I grew up Catholic on Long Island in the 1960's. We had a young priest in our parish from Boston who was rather dashing, politically liberal and had a voice just like Bobby Kennedy.

He eventually met a nun and they both left the church to get married.

I know that doesn't sound exciting, but what if this couple were permitted to remain the church, married? Like "It's A Wonderful Life," we'll never know how they could have benefited the parish and the people in it.

If the Church would drop the celibacy dogma, at least make it voluntary, I bet you'd see an increase in dedicated men of all ages who want to serve.

It would also give the Church more credibility for things like marriage counseling.

The Catholic Church is like any other club - if you don't like the rules, don't join. Given the statistics, it looks like the priesthood is on its way out anyway.
Fr. Cutie would be better off moving to the Episcopal church where he can marry rather than creating an embarrassing scene for himself and the Church.

I never did quite understand why an organization that doesn't participate in marriage should exercise such control over the institution. My grandfather was a catholic priest in the 1920s and was excommunicated when he participated in a revolt which questioned and sought to change the church's stance. My grandmother must have been quite a rare bird since she married two priests in her lifetime. Contrary to our family's wishes, the catholic church insisted that she be given a black mass upon her death. I'm really proud of her and wish I could have kown her better!

In my experience, there is a strange dynamic that goes on in Catholic parishes where I have been a member. Popular, attractive priests have a "groupie-like" following of single, lonely women. If the priest pays attention to any new, single women who join the parish, the jealously, protectiveness and backstabbing are staggering. I think that any one of these women I have met over the years would leap at the chance to date/marry the priest, even if it meant his leaving the priesthood. Maybe this high school-like behavior would stop if priests could get married.

The celibacy rule clearly needs to be reviewed and priests be allowed to marry. Having said that, the case of Fr. Cutie here seems to present a sexual opportunist, failing his flock and his women. You can't be handing out holy communion one minute, and then a little while later think you're making a Neville Shute movie, making out with some divorcee on a beach, touchie-feelie-wa-wa-wa, surrounded by your parishioners, marone! He's conflicted in the extreme, this padre. Keep him away from your daughters, Miami diocesans. He'll have an agent and book / film contract soon anyway, be on Oprah, the whole nine ecclesiastical yards to fame & fortune, you watch.

When I took a church history class at a Jesuit university, I found out that priests were once married, but during the middle ages when priest were married and had a wife and kids, when the priest died the heirs had a claim on the Catholic Church for property. This is why the Catholic Church stopped the practice of priest being married because they did not want to give up their property! Father Cutey should have learned that along time ago in the seminary he went to for his training. While Father Cuttie is correct that he believe he should be able to get married and have a church, he is the wrong religion to do that. Maybe, he should convert to a Russian Orthodox or a Polish National Catholic order where the priest are allowed to married, but I think culturally him being Hispanic that would be a big step!

I sincerely hope, as an ex-Catholic, that the celibacy requirement for the priesthood is dissolved. I have met so many married non-catholic clergy (Men and Women) who are just as qualified to be spiritual advisors and church leaders as were the priests who confirmed me. (Who have since left the church because of their sexuality). One of the main reasons that I am an EX-Catholic is that the church has refused to deal with reality of the human existence.

My reality is that my father was a priest up until I was 18 years old. I know for a fact, that now he is more ashamed that he fathered two children by a Negroe women, than he fathered two children while he was a Roman Catholic Priest. So what is the problem here, again?

If priests are considered "married to the Church", then it isn't an infallible truth that marriage is to be between one man and one woman. Unless priest are no longer men. It's too confusing for logic to sort out.

Am I the only one who finds it curious that the church threw the book at a priest who had a relationship with an adult woman, while refusing to act against pedophilia.

byrd3: A black mass is a satanic ritual. You must be thinking of something else.

As to Spidermean2, I think he better rethink what he stated about no religions surviving in the next few years. If we have no God and no Preachers and Priests to guide us, I guarantee the world will be in CHAOS. We can't live and exist in a peaceful world without believing there is a higher power and it's certainly not mankind. Without God and His Son Christ Jesus, our world will be going straight to Hell, and that's exactly what Satan has in mind. If we have a choice to follow God and go to heaven, or follow satan and go to hell fire, i'll choose God everytime.

To elizdelphi,

I read your comments with much interest and, quite frankly, much skepticism. To label celibacy as a "gift" is like labeling voluntary starvation as a "gift". What makes it a gift is simply the church's way of classifying what is really an unnatural way of life. In fact, it reminds me of George Bush when he proclaimed that America doesn't torture and that water boarding was not torture.

Just calling something -- like a gift -- does not make it so. In fact, you stated as much when you said at times it was difficult to remain celibate. When is a gift difficult?

I'd be interested in knowing whether celibacy and the dogma preventing priests from being married has as much to do with economics for the church as it does anything else. When a priest has no wife or family, when he dies, who inherits his possessions?

My children have never had a parish priest they could understand clearly. They may as well be speaking Latin.

Recruitment of domestic married priests and priestesses (do I dare wish) would be enhanced by dispensing with the archaic rules.

My favorite line on the Chastity, Poverty and Obediance came from a guy who visited the archbishop's residence and was shown to an ornate waiting room that had a bar stocked with rare scotches and liquors. While sipping his 18 year old MacCallum he commented, "If this is the poverty - Bring on the chastity!".

The Catholic Church should maintain priestly celibacy because of the reasons stated to do so in the article. If a man would be willing to be a priest only if he's allowed to be married, he doesn't consider the priesthood as a high enough calling, and both he and the Church will be better of with the arrangement. Unless I'm mistaken, the Eastern Orthodox Church allows priests to remain married if they are married prior to ordination, but otherwise precludes its priests from marrying once ordained.

from Evelyn Bonds: had the last paragraph been the first, I would probably not have read any further. Who or What exactly made Peter the Apostle a pope? I thought that Peter was head of All the Christian faith community, not Just the catholics.

The policy of celibacy of priests and nuns is man-made and it is NOT a law handed down by God. You will find that no where in the Bible.

Father Cutie was caught frolicking with a WOMAN. More power to him. At least we know that he's a normal, hot-blooded man and that he wasn't caught with an innocent minor who would be scarred for the rest of his life.

Stupid statement award!

I'm nominating this one:
"If we have a choice to follow God and go to heaven, or follow satan and go to hell fire, i'll choose God everytime. "

What kind of loving god would permit anyone to go to hell?!?!?!? Good luck with that.

"SWMUVA: For centuries, closeted gay men have retreated into the Catholic clergy precisely because the church's policy on celibacy has provided them with a respectable cover for their failure to marry. It's no coincidence that the vast majority of cases of clerical pedophilia involve Catholic priests, not Anglican or Eastern Orthodox priests, who are free to marry (or not, as they choose.)"

Well, let's be clear on this: For one, it's not actually true that a majority of cases involve Catholics: it's the fact that it's *institutionalized* in certain ways that makes it particularly damaging and perhaps scandalous.

Pedophilia, per se, is completely irrespective of the perp's sexual orientation, Pedophiles mostly target children cause of *power* stuff. For them, often, boys just make easier targets, often, cause girls are more protected and boys are more easily-silenced. Also the religion itself values virginity in girls enough that there are 'protections' there, where molesting young boys is put on the same level as like, masturbation or adult consentual homosexuality, or the other things that they tried to make very bad.

In the Church, there's the additional problem of *pederasty,* and this also occurs in heterosexually-identified priests just about as often as in ones who are gay: the fixation *there* comes from the religion actually *arresting sexual development* at early teen ages, and the clerical celibacy tends to turn any sexuality at all into some big drama that's not even *about* the victims as humans, ...I've seen these people operate, and they do go after girls, too, if they think said girls won't be listened to. Boys are just more easily silenced because of the same homophobia that may have led to the priests' damage in the first place.

Christian understanding of sexuality per se are *not* literate in the use of sex as a *dominance* behavior, particularly a form of 'religious dominance' behavior.

*Pederast* priests are in a position of being both corrupter and 'redeemer' in a world they happen to hold all the keys to.

Like with most predators, what their healthy sexuality would be is very secondary. It's all about *them.*

Dogmas and structures that put people in such positions... that's what seems to lead to these things. It's all about *them,* and their 'sin drama'.... not the targets. The targets are interchangeable.

Bios: "Anyway, it sounds absolutely inhuman to endure life today in complete solitude."

That assumes that the priest is alone. He isn't. He has his parish and the companionship of Christ and the saints.

The only reason that celibacy seems "inhuman" to modern eyes is because modern society is overly-sexualized. In a world where virginity past the teenage years is treated as a joke, the oath of celibacy is seen as either a ridiculous anachronism or worse, proof of sexual aberration.

Several posters have mentioned that celibacy is an invention of the 12th century. While that's when we start seeing a centralized attempt to enforce celibacy, the concept dates from St. Paul's first letter to the Corinthians (Chapter 7). The first efforts to officially impose celibacy on the clergy date from the Council of Elvira (c. AD 300). So the tradition has deep roots, even if it honored more in the breach than in the observance.

In the end, it takes mental discipline to be celibate. Sadly, it seems that discipline is lacking everywhere, including the Church. Here's hoping that cooler heads prevail...

This is actually revealing, too:

"Jameon: Father Cutie was caught frolicking with a WOMAN. More power to him. At least we know that he's a normal, hot-blooded man and that he wasn't caught with an innocent minor who would be scarred for the rest of his life."

Interesting what's 'normal' about that 'hot blood.' Actually, girls are more likely to suffer *physical* abuse in a violent sense, and it occurs a lot in protestant sects because of certain more misogynistic aspects, but it also happens in Catholic situations.

With boys, actually, the 'scarring for *life* is mostly done by the community at large... they're more likely to be seduced, duped, and pressured.... The abusive clergy use the homophobia they *also* invariably try to cultivate in their flock as a *means to have power over their victims.*

This shouldn't be hard to remember... How much the idea that being a victim in that manner 'made someone gay,' (Apparently not 'normal and hot-blooded?') ...was exactly what really hurt those boys, ongoingly: in an atmosphere of homophobia, any sexuality could be preyed upon and the victims' shame and both the scorn of Church and community could be used to silence victims and enable abusers.

It's not about 'homosexuality in the ranks,' actually: it's not the same thing. Queer people are ready targets for such priests.

Having a few people *in* the ranks who know more about sex and marriage and parenting and humanity than they read out of *Augustine,* ..ie married folks, would probably do wonders.

If you've got to have that system, sometimes it takes only one 'good cop' on the block.

Personally, I just think the whole Christian thing is unnatural, and people being conflicted about it and most of all trying to preserve 'authority,' well, that's almost inevitable.

Even *one* person around that could help could have made all the difference for guys that confided in *me* when we were in it. Not people more terrified of 'apostasy' or 'seeming wrong' than of actually becoming the bad guys.

These are *cultures* of abuse, maybe of *teaching* men that it's manly to beat up on girls rather than mess with boys... The Church's absentee feudalism is a problem of its own, but they don't actually have more abusers. Just more 'control.'

What scars the victims for life isn't that they had dubious experiences with a priest that made them less of 'men.'

It's that you believe that.

MHawke: "Recruitment of domestic married priests and priestesses (do I dare wish) would be enhanced by dispensing with the archaic rules."

While I mourn the lack of vocations in the modern West, I think the Faith will be better served by sticking with tradition rather than becoming the "Church of What's Happening Now"...

Once again:

On a related topic note, are imams/clerics celibate?? If not, are they allowed to beat their wives?? Ditto for the all-male members of the Baha'ist UHJ (Universal House of Justice)??

To Jameon, who said: "The policy of celibacy of priests and nuns is man-made and it is NOT a law handed down by God. You will find that no where in the Bible."

Then how exactly would you interpret the following lines from I Corinthians 7:

"1Now for the matters you wrote about: It is good for a man not to marry.[a] 2But since there is so much immorality, each man should have his own wife, and each woman her own husband. 3The husband should fulfill his marital duty to his wife, and likewise the wife to her husband. 4The wife's body does not belong to her alone but also to her husband. In the same way, the husband's body does not belong to him alone but also to his wife. 5Do not deprive each other except by mutual consent and for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer. Then come together again so that Satan will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control. 6I say this as a concession, not as a command. 7I wish that all men were as I am. But each man has his own gift from God; one has this gift, another has that.

8Now to the unmarried and the widows I say: It is good for them to stay unmarried, as I am. 9But if they cannot control themselves, they should marry, for it is better to marry than to burn with passion."

It seems rather clear to me that St. Paul believed that celibacy is morally superior to marriage. If clergy are to take Paul and the other apostles as their models, then shouldn't the celibacy of Paul be part of that?

"The only reason that celibacy seems "inhuman" to modern eyes is because modern society is overly-sexualized."

Actually, Robert, it's not even that 'modern society is overly-sexualized,' ...it's in fact that sexual obedience (and thus 'sin') are *overly-fetishized.*

The same people trying to sell us conservative religion are also trying to *use* frustrated sexuality to *sell* all manner of things and ideologies to fill the *hole* that's left from *not* having a healthy and balanced sexuality.

I mean, you couldn't sell crap by exploiting frustrated sexuality if people were in a good place sexually in the first place.

It's why I don't sleep with Christians, you turn the whole darn thing dirty and make a pressure-cooker of denial and shame out of it. It tends to make you dishonest, unpredictable, and ... whiny.

Then wonder why it all comes out sideways.

You turned it into a damn Hell-fetish.

No thanks.

You guys seem to imagine my life with another lady is all like, your Girls Gone Wild or girl-on-girl-porn made to titillate frustrated males, thus 'decadent and 'sinful,' ...funny enough, maybe you're too scared of looking at a penis to be OK with overtly het porn...

Real sexuality really doesn't have to be that conflicted: in fact, if you're *not* conflicted about it, you might be surprised how little of your *attention* it takes up.

I'm not sure why we make the general assumption that Celibacy is "...one of the more obvious..." reasons why there is a shortage of priests. Or for that matter, why we assume that the fact that we had more priests per parishioner in the recent past means we have a shortage now. Perhaps the higher number in the recent past was the aberration.

"It seems rather clear to me that St. Paul believed that celibacy is morally superior to marriage. If clergy are to take Paul and the other apostles as their models, then shouldn't the celibacy of Paul be part of that" Robert_B1

I would say 'no.' Even in translations, it's very clear Paul was a damaged and irrational individual in these regards.

Celibacy can be a worthwhile way to spend some time, have done it myself, really: but the man was not about 'celibacy,' he was about 'spanking sex itself.'

These are very different things.

Paganplace: "It's why I don't sleep with Christians, you turn the whole darn thing dirty and make a pressure-cooker of denial and shame out of it. It tends to make you dishonest, unpredictable, and ... whiny."

You may sleep with whomever you choose. I, for one, have no priestly vocation, which is why I'm married. And no, I don't believe that sex is dirty. I merely expect that those who dedicate themselves to God hold themselves to a higher standard. If you can't follow the rules, then don't sign up for the service.

My trouble is with those who believe that sexual freedom is the same as sexual license and that we must respect them both equally. From your previous posts, you seem like one who understands the difference. I just wish you could stop dropping all Christians into the same box.

I mean... St. Paul? Not a model for responsible views of sex. He was clearly *terrified.* He thought that if women spoke or showed a little *hair* ...that his own God's holy Angels would be overcome with lust and become rapacious.

Maybe you get something out of that guy, but he's not exactly a poster child for sexual maturity. I think someone hurt him. Bad.

To answer sjpatejak: that's not quite true. The catholic church uses a white mass to send those whom they deem acceptable on their way. For those whom they deem offensive such as suicides, etc., they hold a black mass. If there is anything satanic about the ritual it's sanctioned by the church as a means of sending someone to the infernal regions.

Hi, Robert: I hope you'll pardon the generalizations: quite often there's a lot of talk about specifics in the Christian world which tends to completely ignore the perceptual ...and less tangible, world these specifics are intended to feed people back into. Often the words come out to 'prove' that people should still dream the world the same way, but it often connects in no wise to anything more 'holy' than people wanting to control how and when others have sex.

I always say you're afraid to admit we're primates cause you're terrified someone will really notice the resemblance. :)

"You may sleep with whomever you choose. I, for one, have no priestly vocation, which is why I'm married. And no, I don't believe that sex is dirty. I merely expect that those who dedicate themselves to God hold themselves to a higher standard. If you can't follow the rules, then don't sign up for the service."

This is an assumption that trying to beat the sexuality out of yourself *is* a higher standard, and thus 'lay people' ought to do as well as they can at doing the same thing... And also unwilling people subject to whatever dictates you can enforce by other means...

I can appreciate, for clergy of certain kinds, observing certain tabooes and geasa: even if one of them may be celibacy: a lot of the problems come of trying to be absolutist about these things, say, 'This is more holy, thus those who do it less are less holy, and those who do completely differently must be unholy. And therefore it's 'evil,' and to blame for what we do when we try to impose our tabooes on others and it never works. Humans must be evil...'

That's not what that is.

(continued)

"My trouble is with those who believe that sexual freedom is the same as sexual license and that we must respect them both equally."

Read that back to yourself.

You use the word 'license' as though it meant other than a permit from a controlling authority: what you're saying is, 'Freedom means obeying and claiming it was your own idea: actually expressing freedom is bad and not respectable.'

What I see about you Christians is that when you do what *you* want, it's while being in denial, and it's not being 'free,' it's just 'yielding to temptation.' And someone must be punished later, and better it not be you.

Frankly, I think that's ...A long way around to make something bad that isn't.

" From your previous posts, you seem like one who understands the difference. I just wish you could stop dropping all Christians into the same box."

Your boxes are of your own construction.

The sheepfold is from people colonizing our *mind,* your *sexuality,* even.

I'm sure it's a very nice place for you in there. But part of that 'box' is built on the idea that without strict controls, punitive shames and threats, and general disrespect for anything but kneeling and following... people *must* be simply 'libertine,' ..horrible, rapacious... 'lustful.'

Actually, if you're less conflicted about *sex,* it just stops being both so scary and painful. Actually takes up *less* of your life.

Seems to me that a lot of conservative Christians spend a lot more attention, energy, and money, on queerbashing, than I do on sex.

I think you're scared (maybe a little rightly so, ever watch fratboys?) what happens if you ever uncork...

No one said sexuality had to be stoked up under pressure for absentee 'kings' to exploit.

What if it's actually something you live and breathe and *raise* where apropriate and meaningful?

Your fears of sex are about your pressurization of it... According to the words of a man, 'St. Paul' who was *desperately afraid* of it.

It's not 'sexual freedom' to get people to bottle up their sex drives for you, tell them it's a helplessly-irresistable force, then deny responsibility when they 'lose control' any time they're 'allowed' or can 'get away with it.'

That's not freedom. That's manipulation.

See what I mean? That's not about Freedom,.... that's about a leash. It's about teaching people how 'tempting' it is to behave badly, that everyone is llike this, and that only the leash 'prevents' people from giving in to 'fallen natures,' ...when it's really you. It's about authorities trying to make themselves indispensable.. about making freedom in yourself, never mind others, 'too scary' to contemplate.

I mean, don't get me wrong, when the leash gets cut, you may run, and run hard. May do things without thinking who taught you you'd react that way...

But at least eventually, you realize the world goes on, your life is your life, there are other beings in it, and... You... and humans, are not as bad as they said.

Paganplace:

Thank you for your candor. I've known only a few pagans (mostly in college) and most of them have struck me as having adopted their faith for purely counter-cultural reasons (i.e. to "freak out" the Christian majority). Your posts, however, are genuinely thoughtful. Though we cannot agree on many matters, I always appreciate your point of view.

Your comments on "strict controls" leads me to ask a question that may be off-topic: What exactly do modern pagans believe? Is there a creed or tradition that you draw on? The few pagans I've met seem remarkably inarticulate regarding their reasons for embracing the faith. As I said above, their adherence to this religion seemed to be chiefly to thumb their noses at convention while being allowed to do whatever they wished. From what I've gleaned from them, modern paganism seems to mostly be about earth-worship with some Celtic spirituality thrown in. I'm sure that there's more to it than that, but I haven't found a reliable source.

Please don't think I'm trying to be snarky by asking this. I really do want to understand where you're coming from.

Paganplace: "You use the word 'license' as though it meant other than a permit from a controlling authority: what you're saying is, 'Freedom means obeying and claiming it was your own idea: actually expressing freedom is bad and not respectable.'"

Help me out here, PP. Are you saying that self-control is actually bad?

"Help me out here, PP. Are you saying that self-control is actually bad?"

No, I'm saying that 'self control' is about something more than 'self-enforcing' authoritarian fears of punishment.

*Self* control is wholly of your own self. It therefore doesn't go away when you're unobserved or drunk or don't, for the moment, believe you'll be punished for stepping out of line.

It's not based in fear or inhibition or shame: it's based in who you are when all these mental things are taken away from you.

We're a tradition, if you will, where people took as much of our 'stuff' away as they could: our words, our sacred places, and by their own terms even what they think *memory* is, ...and to people who think words are 'God,' they think to have succeeded.

What we got isn't written in a book you can burn or a temple you could trash. Or a history you could rewrite.

Sure does come from our ancestors, but not in the way you think.

So you ask this:

"Paganplace:

"Thank you for your candor. I've known only a few pagans (mostly in college) and most of them have struck me as having adopted their faith for purely counter-cultural reasons "

Capital P Pagans, if you please, ...proper name like the rest of world religions.

But, yes, in college, especially, well, not only are you primed to interpret anything you *do* see that way, but freedom... takes time. Like with the frat boys I mentioned.

Our Gods are patient.

"(i.e. to "freak out" the Christian majority). Your posts, however, are genuinely thoughtful. Though we cannot agree on many matters, I always appreciate your point of view."

Well thank you for that.

It's not, as I have been trying to mention, a small matter to deprogram from Abrahamic shame and such. Paganism is not a religion ready to hand out a ready tract and 'convert' someone.

We accept a certain amount of 'just rebellion' because ...what else are you gonna tell college kids?

They're usually smarter and more sincere than you're taught to think they are, though. I have the advantage in this of knowing how you Christians interpret any disobedience, ...as selfish, lazy, greedy, 'weak.'

Not so.

" What exactly do modern pagans believe? Is there a creed or tradition that you draw on? The few pagans I've met seem remarkably inarticulate regarding their reasons for embracing the faith."

Many traditions. Not creedal, though. We don't in general believe the Gods are all-fired worried what you claim to *believe.* I know it hardly seems like 'religion' at *all* to you that way.

I think you Christians have a way of not understanding that 'just cause it cheeses you off doesn't mean it's *all* about cheesing you off.'

Sometimes the thoughtful thing to do *really is* to mess with them what messed with you. :)

Not all there is, though, not by a long shot. :)

I will say, though, Robert, we've got a word for it when people *do* want to treat Paganism like a 'more permissive' faith, like the Gods exist as the Christians seem to say, to 'give excuses....'

'Party Pagans.' They bought into what Christians say about us as mere hedonists, and decided they *like* it.

Those really *only* in it for some sense of permissiveness soon learn that if that's all they want, that they actually *don't* need divine permission to do what they like, and tend to drop all this boring and inconvenient stuff abut the Gods.

I actually think, more often, they discover "Satiation is possible, yes, actually OK, too, if you need that, whoda' thunk, and the Gods are still there, ....with a whole lot of more-interesting than escape."

NEW YORK -- A Roman Catholic archbishop who resigned in 2002 over a sex and financial scandal involving a man has written a memoir that describes how he struggled with being gay...

Weakland stepped down quickly after Paul Marcoux, a former Marquette University theology student, revealed in May 2002 that he was paid $450,000 to settle a sexual assault claim he made against the archbishop more than two decades earlier. The money came from the archdiocese.

In a videotaped deposition released last November, Weakland admitted returning guilty priests to active ministry without alerting parishioners or police.

Advocates for abuse victims said that Weakland's cover up of his own sexual activity was part of a pattern of secrecy that included concealing the criminal behavior of child molesters.

"During the last months, I have come to know how strained I was, tense, pensive, without much joy," Weakland wrote. "I felt like the world's worst hypocrite. So gradually I came back to the importance of celibacy in my life."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/11/AR2009051102719_2.html

Anyway: 'Creed?; I think the 'creed' is, all this, everything between us and everything we encounter, is alive, and aware in some way. Your issues about 'Sex and how to please a jealous-abusive view of a Father with turning 'sex' into 'virtuous suffering' ....as if we were *made* to suffer in that manner just because our brains find it important... ...theologically, in fact, conservative Christians are still banging rocks together.

The wa I see *my* course in this life seems to lead more into tring to understand *violence and trauma.* Always does seem to come back to 'frustrated sex in the minds of people in too much denial of their instincts to even admit they have them'

You're being the abusers, tring to conrol everything with your frustrated sex drives and saying, 'Look what you made me do' when you break your own rules.

Of course it comes to war and violence and insanity.

You may not think much of our Pagan ancestors, but we did have Gods that could teach about war. What it is, how to do it, how not to shame nations, and how to not make it about 'sex' or 'love.'

You fear most an absolute God who gets angry about not-cotrolled sex, 'wants' violence, and calls it 'love.'

Then come at me with your idea 'Some college Pagans didn't make sense to me.'

They darn well *shouldn't.*

Try and make sense to *them,* then maybe we're cooking. :)

The lipsyncing celebrity clergyman has the support of his fans.

Once again, are imams/clerics celibate?? If not, are they allowed to beat their wives?? Have multiple wives?? Ditto for the all-male members of the Baha'ist UHJ (Universal House of Justice)??

""During the last months, I have come to know how strained I was, tense, pensive, without much joy," Weakland wrote. "I felt like the world's worst hypocrite. So gradually I came back to the importance of celibacy in my life."

Oh, yeah. That's rich. Half a million dollars... Gods know how many victims, Gods know how many compromises of honor to cover it all up, and Gods know what this guy who couldn't hack it said with Church sanction about queer people in the meantime.

All this so this dude can later have a 'renewed commitment to celibacy' rather than admit gay people are people?

What a bargain.

Is celibacy really an exercise in self control if it's written into your job description?

Abstainence makes the church grow fondlers.

As per Pagan Magic:

http://pagan-magic.co.uk/shop/colors-dreams-their-meaning-a-856.html

"Every colour possesses its own symbolism for everyone of us. Colours play an important psycho-physiological role in our daytime lives. Hereunder we are giving details in regard to the different colours we see in our dreams and their significance.

Red: Lighter shades of red can be representative of excitement (especially sexually), passion, energy, and life. However, deeper or "weighed down" shades of red may be indicative of anger and vengeance. Notice how the stop sign is red; possibly a hint from your subconscious to cease and desist in a certain activity?

Orange: Orange is considered to be a color of warmth, thoughtfulness, wisdom and sociability. Muddier shades of orange may be representative of pride or vanity, while golden orange denotes self-control."

Poor Father Cutie!! Had he only known that a few dreams in golden orange would have saved him from his fornicating ways!!!

Organized religion is a joke

"Look at how many rabbis, imams, and ministers cheat on their wives."

???

Obviously, who ever wrote that can't know "how many" and is throwing out a red herring. How many nonCatholic clergy have been investigated and confirmed to have sexually abused underage parishioners, an evil that might be related to celibacy, unlike infidelity?