The book Animal Architects by James L. Gould and Carol Grant Gould mentions the existence of sterile workers in ant colonies whose sole purpose is to protect the colony and to look for food. I guess such an arrangement pays off: the colony is thriving and well-fed and the specialized ability to reproduce is left to those who are equipped to do just that, say, the queen ant and her harem of male drones.
In human society, a similar arrangement can be seen and, though we are far from being mindless ants, such an arrangement stands to benefit the society as a whole. Here we have the religious orders and the clergy who have chosen to abstain from "passing their genes to the next generation" by getting married to an abstract partner, the Church.
Obviously, the idea of celibate priests and nuns have received a lot of flak over the years. In the wake of the recent breakout of sexual abuse cases in the US, many have pointed out that forced celibacy among priests was the main factor that directly contributed to the issue. Some also protest the "restriction" as theologically impossible to defend since JC and St. Paul never placed any such restriction among those who had the priestly calling ( the apostles had wives too).
So why is celibacy here in the first place? Looking back at history, some pope by the name of Gregory VII declared that mandatory celibacy become part of canon law. This move was to eliminate pervasive corruption inside the church, a problem aggravated by married priests who supported their families by plundering the church's funds. The mandate also served to allow priests and nuns to work full-time for the church, since they had almost no other pressing obligations other than their commitment to their vocation.
The curious thing here is that most of the clamor for a married clergy ( like those of the other Christian denominations) are coming from either the laity or the elite club of ex-priests. Among current priests, there may be slight murmurs of disgruntlement but, over and above these, everyone is trying to uphold the standard of voluntary celibacy, a standard which appears quite insane considering the times we are living in.
Fr. Marbendear had pointed out earlier that good priests can, ergo, also be good husbands and vice versa. Why is that so? That's because the qualities of a good husband are already in a good priest. A good priest is faithful and loving. Voluntary celibacy is admittedly an "abnormal" way of living and, as such, demands a lot of fidelity from a guy ( just like monogamy, by the way. Human society is inherently oriented towards polygamy and yet we opt for monogamy as our choice of life, a choice which also demands fidelity and a little bit of courage too). A good priest must also be loving. It's hard to love another human person but I think it's also hard to love the church, a reality which is there but is not really there. For starters, there's no "having sex with the Church", a fundamental act of love which binds all marriages together. Instead, priests are left with the choice to love the church without the physical attraction necessary to sustain most human relationships. But a good priest still loves and that love comes unconditionally.
Such a reality exists because celibacy is maintained by the Catholic church. As for me, I think it's a wonderful phenomenon and I bet many priests would have it no other way. Going back to our ant analogy, such a self-imposed restriction does help priest perform their jobs better. Like those many sterile daughter ants whose sole function is to feed the colony, our priest and nuns also have a mission to nourish the flock spiritually and if celibacy allows them to do just that, why can't it not be a good thing?
In human society, a similar arrangement can be seen and, though we are far from being mindless ants, such an arrangement stands to benefit the society as a whole. Here we have the religious orders and the clergy who have chosen to abstain from "passing their genes to the next generation" by getting married to an abstract partner, the Church.
Obviously, the idea of celibate priests and nuns have received a lot of flak over the years. In the wake of the recent breakout of sexual abuse cases in the US, many have pointed out that forced celibacy among priests was the main factor that directly contributed to the issue. Some also protest the "restriction" as theologically impossible to defend since JC and St. Paul never placed any such restriction among those who had the priestly calling ( the apostles had wives too).
So why is celibacy here in the first place? Looking back at history, some pope by the name of Gregory VII declared that mandatory celibacy become part of canon law. This move was to eliminate pervasive corruption inside the church, a problem aggravated by married priests who supported their families by plundering the church's funds. The mandate also served to allow priests and nuns to work full-time for the church, since they had almost no other pressing obligations other than their commitment to their vocation.
The curious thing here is that most of the clamor for a married clergy ( like those of the other Christian denominations) are coming from either the laity or the elite club of ex-priests. Among current priests, there may be slight murmurs of disgruntlement but, over and above these, everyone is trying to uphold the standard of voluntary celibacy, a standard which appears quite insane considering the times we are living in.
Fr. Marbendear had pointed out earlier that good priests can, ergo, also be good husbands and vice versa. Why is that so? That's because the qualities of a good husband are already in a good priest. A good priest is faithful and loving. Voluntary celibacy is admittedly an "abnormal" way of living and, as such, demands a lot of fidelity from a guy ( just like monogamy, by the way. Human society is inherently oriented towards polygamy and yet we opt for monogamy as our choice of life, a choice which also demands fidelity and a little bit of courage too). A good priest must also be loving. It's hard to love another human person but I think it's also hard to love the church, a reality which is there but is not really there. For starters, there's no "having sex with the Church", a fundamental act of love which binds all marriages together. Instead, priests are left with the choice to love the church without the physical attraction necessary to sustain most human relationships. But a good priest still loves and that love comes unconditionally.
Such a reality exists because celibacy is maintained by the Catholic church. As for me, I think it's a wonderful phenomenon and I bet many priests would have it no other way. Going back to our ant analogy, such a self-imposed restriction does help priest perform their jobs better. Like those many sterile daughter ants whose sole function is to feed the colony, our priest and nuns also have a mission to nourish the flock spiritually and if celibacy allows them to do just that, why can't it not be a good thing?
No comments:
Post a Comment