The
Catholic Church does not allow priests to marry. But married Anglican priests who go crazy and
convert to Roman Catholicism are allowed to be ordained provided they don’t
sleep with their wives. This clearly
suggests that sex is evil and unholy.
The
Bible argued that ministers of religion should be the husbands of one wife and
have families (1 Timothy 3). The reasoning was that the man who has
experience of family life would be more suited to governing the family of God.
Paul
said that we have the right to take a wife like Peter and the other apostles
did (1 Corinthians 9:5).
The
Catholic Church seeks to justify this defiance of scripture by saying that the
apostles permitted priestly marriage but knew the ideal was for a priest to
sacrifice himself to become a celibate.
This assumes that the apostles believed in acts over and above one’s
duty which is not only unlikely for it is a ridiculous belief but also for it
is not in the Bible. The early Church
would have been made to do things perfectly for when it was ruled by inspired
prophets that would be the only time it could be perfect. The apostles believed that Jesus wanted them
to be perfect examples for the world so they would have performed every act of
supererogation in the book or commanded perfection. If the apostles were loyal to their God and
permitted priestly marriage then it is sinful to have celibate priests in the
compulsory way.
A priest who beds one man or woman after another is preferred to one who is honourably married, under the papal regime. The Church might object that he should never have been a priest. But is it fair to say that of sexual sinners when there are plenty of other bad and worse sins? A person would only degrade themselves to take on celibacy if they perceived themselves as sexually abnormal. They fear sexuality and that must be down to something in themselves – how else could you explain the big deal they make about sex? The priest that meets a woman and gets married is one that recovers from that something. The Catholic adulation for enforced celibacy is an indication of psycho-sexual ill-health. There is something wrong with the pope for example. He wants celibacy to stay. Actions speak louder than words so don’t let his lofty observations on marriage and sexuality lead you up the garden path. It would be better to be stricter on drink. It would be better to make a bigger deal about a priest drinking and ban it than it would be to be so obsessed with keeping them out of the marital bed.
The Church says a man who doesn't want a companion in a wife who can make him happy and be with him in old age but who prefers to bed one woman after another is emotionally damaged. There is a part of him that hasn't grown up. But this man though he has sex has the mindset of the celibate. He is celibate though he is a bed-hopping celibate. Actions reflect what kind of person you are. So according to the Church this isn't true for a chaste celibate who doesn't have marital sex and has renounced it forever is considered normal while a man who also has renounced marital sex forever but who has sex anyway is considered psychologically defective. The point is, though the actions are different the actions in both men reflect their being at the same level as human beings.
A
huge number of areas are without a priest and many others just see a priest who
is spreading himself thin just briefly now and again. The pope can remedy this by ordaining married
men to the priesthood but he won’t. The
pope acts as if he sees the loss of the mass, the supreme act of worship in
Roman Catholicism, as better than the loss of celibacy. He does not respect the mass and by
implication he does not respect anybody else.
He does not have to allow married priests forever but they could do
until the vocation crisis is resolved.
The bishops would all ignore him if they were decent and their priests
would twist their arms if they didn't if they were human. These things don’t happen much. The authority of the pope comes before
helping others. Yet the Catholic faith
still says that we are only obliged to obey the pope in all that is not
sinful. Priests say that it isn’t a sin
to obey an unreasonable command of the pope though it would be if that command
were sinful. This is obviously
unintelligible. Sin is doing stupid
things.
Is
celibacy and lack of sex-drive unnatural?
Most people these days would believe they are unnatural and
perverted. For example, choosing to be
celibate for life like a priest does indicates a turning away from sexual love
and the intimacy and outstanding support it brings. Sexual love does not necessarily have to be
expressed in physical actions. It is
still there even if the partners have no sex drive. This illustrates how abnormal what priests do
is. Better to be a homosexual and have
loads of partners than to be like that.
Lack of sex-drive is abnormal only when the person has no desire for
physical closeness with a partner, when he or she does not like kissing or
being held. For some that can be enough
sexual activity and that is fine. But
sexual pleasure is healthy and an important part of life and anybody who
settles for kisses and cuddles should try and get help so that he or she is not
doing wrong by missing out. But if they
cannot be made more interested in sex then they should be happy the way they
are.
PAPAL SIN, STRUCTURES OF DECEIT, Garry Wills, Darton Longman and Todd, London, 2000