SANITIZE CHRISTENDOM IN SEVEN VOLUMES '
A CRUSADE FOR THE ENTHRONEMENT OF TRUE MORALITY IN THE UNHOLY ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH PLAGUED BY SEX SCANDALS FOR CENTURIES NOW
THE INTEGRATIONAL SPIRITAN MOVEMENT
Founded
in 1990, is an interdisciplinary socio-cultural organisation
for
modern scientists who desire a self- fulfilled life
spiced
with spiritual devotion, wisdom and peace of mind.
Our
motto speaks volumes for itself;
ONE ALMIGHTY CREATOR,
ONE CREATED UNIVERSE,
ONE HUMAN FAMILY! ! !
ISBN: 987 -
……..……………………
© 2004 Rev. Prof. J. J. KENEZ
Copyrights: All rights
reserved. No part of
this work may be reproduced, or transmitted, in any form or by any means;
electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, or stored in any
retrieval system, of any nature, without the written permission of the author.
Published & Printed By:
Kihol Productions
Limited
Danis Family Villa,
Umuelechi, Umuezeawala,
P.O.Box 139
IHIALA, BIAFURU AMAMIFE
ND’IGBO n’ime R .O. B
Kenez International Humanitarian Organisations
Linkage
www.happyfamilynetwork.hpage.com
SANITISE CHRISTIAN
CHURCHES NOW
IN SEVEN VOLUMES
·
ABROGATE
CELIBACY IN THE CATHOLIC CHURCH
·
DE-EMPHASISE
THE CRAZE FOR SIGNS AND WONDERS
·
CURB NOISE
EXPLOSION ‘IN THE NAME OF JESUS’
·
SANCTION ALL
PROSPERITY GOSPEL PREACHERS
·
EXCISE
COMMERCIALISATION DURING CRUSADES
·
HALT THE
EXPLOITATION OF ALL CONGREGATIONS
·
EXCOMMUNICATE
INFILTRATORS AND OCCULTISTS
By:
Rev. Prof. J. J. Kenez
E-mail:
saintkenez@yahoo.co.uk
International
President
Kenez Interdenominational
Philosophers’ Forum
&
Animator
International
Association for the
Abrogation of Celibacy in the Catholic Church
DEDICATION
To the million
souls that
were deliberately aborted and have been sent to limbo due to the promiscuous
lifestyles of our erring brothers and sisters!
To all the
underage
who have been abused sexually by the homosexual and lesbian graduates of
Satan’s university adorning cassocks or veils of varying colours!
To the memory
of naïve girls
who were deceived, seduced, impregnated and forced to have D&C, from which
they did not survive!
To the
repentant celibates who want to renounce the inhuman vow and wed canonically with the
appropriate dispensations!
Finally, TO
THE FEW HONEST AND DEDICATED SERVANTS OF THE LORD WHO HAVE KEPT THEIR VOWS VERY
RELIGIOUSLY!
May the Blood of Jesus Christ Plead for All Of You, Amen!
Give this book
as birthday gifts to seminarians and convent girls, before or on their
ordination / profession days! You would have played the role of a wise prophet
who has
shown pious concern!
A SEVEN-PRONGED SANITATION EXERCISE
Every
good homemaker trains her children to observe sanitation rules in the home.
This normally starts with toilet training; early morning brushing of the teeth,
sweeping of the bedrooms, re-arrangement of bedspreads and regular soapy baths
to avoid body odour! This continues till Saturdays when there is usually a
general compound cleaning, washing of dresses used during the week and their
subsequent ironing in preparation for Sunday service.
Most
of us grew up that way! That was in the good old days when dedicated parents
were the first teachers, real confidants and the best friends of their
offspring. The same cannot be said of today’s litter of uncultured children who
roam the roads and ransack cybercafes and video kiosk in towns. These street
urchins are on the prowl seeking out the goriest of violent and blue films to
rent and view in hiding and re-enact in pre-arranged secret places! Their
nonchalant parents are away twenty hours of the day literally chasing money!
Househelps try to cope with their routine chores as well as re-train these
spoilt children. However, being so immature and ill equipped for such roles,
they fail woefully!
Unless
fathers and mothers wield their parental authority, the efforts of these
house-helps will never yield any desirable results. Sanitation exercises must
be totalitarian to have any lasting effects. It starts with the mind. The
cobwebs must first be cleared before the environment is swept! Nevertheless, in
most religious denominations or mass gatherings, none of these is done!
Therefore, what we have is only the “washing of the outside of the cup while
the inside is very dirty!”
Jesus,
the Christ, warned us to be wary of white painted sepulchres that had only
filth and dry bones inside.” We never imagined he was actually prophesying the
state of affairs in many congregations of our newly found brands of
Christianity! We all thought that his rich parables were directed only to the
Pharisees and Sadducees, who were the proud teachers of his time! In today’s
Christendom, we have worse preachers and teachers than those Jewish
authorities.
The
seven-pointed attack enumerated above underscores our folly. Our ugly situation
is not only psychopathological but also socio-political. The sad condition is
far worse than the minor sycophancy of his epoch! He, further, gave us at
Matthew 5 vv. 3-10 “The Eight Beatitudes” each prefixed by the phrase; “Blessed
are the …………….…, for theirs
is……………………..” His manifesto follows for the next two chapters! Do we keep any
of them?
Today,
we are experiencing what Jesus Christ, never imagined would bedevil his
followers. Prosperity preachers; who not only fleece his flock, pauperise the
gullible, seduce or rape the womenfolk, but initiate the youth into homosexual
and lesbian lifestyles and to crown it all, have carnal knowledge of the
underage! This last depravity is known as “Paedophilism
or Paedophilia” and the practitioners are termed: “Paedophiles.”
The
first port of call for any good therapist or counsellor for any meaningful
redressing of any of these anomalies is the assessment and re-evaluation of the
mental life of our members! Are we truly disciples of the God-sent Lord Jesus
or of Satan, the deceiver and destroyer graphically painted for us in the
Gospel of John, Chapter 8, vv: 31-59. Read that passage several times, meditate
and analyse its contents meticulously before you proceed further in this book!
Our sanitation exercise must necessarily begin in
out hearts, minds and thoughts. Next are our homes, workplaces, communities,
congregations, nations and finally our planet earth! There are seven days in
the week. There are seven major aberrations in Christendom today! The seven
point agenda listed in the previous pages denote the sub-headings that we
intend to follow in our genuine efforts at sanitising twentieth century
Christendom that has, for long, been under the power of Satan and his demons!
Do a little research to convince yourself of our assertions!
·
ABROGATE
CELIBACY IN THE CATHOLIC CHURCH
·
DE-EMPHASISE
THE CRAZE FOR SIGNS AND WONDERS
·
CURB NOISE
EXPLOSION ‘IN THE NAME OF JESUS’
·
SANCTION ALL
PROSPERITY GOSPEL PREACHERS
·
EXCISE
COMMERCIALISATION DURING CRUSADES
·
HALT THE
EXPLOITATION OF ALL CONGREGATIONS
·
EXCOMMUNICATE
INFILTRATORS AND OCCULTISTS
Read, digest and contribute your quota.
Join the
sanitation crusade!
Call: 0804 –
271 - 9800, E-mail: saintkenez@yahoo.co.uk
FOREWORD
A CALL FOR
RE-DIRECTION
My
dear people of God, great grandsons of Adam by obedience to natural laws, and
grandsons of Abraham by faith and my ardent followers of Jesus Christ, the time
is ripe for everyone to rethink and repudiate the aberrations in the theory and
practice of Christianity of the 21st century! It is self evident that we have
all derailed and are in dire need of an urgent internal auditing of our moral
standards and social ethics in the light of reason and social justice. Can we
honestly claim that all the preachers that today, parade as pastors and priests
are actually servants of God and the Lord Jesus? If one truly remembers the
fervent warnings of the apostles Peter and Paul in their letters, one can
easily identify “the wolves in sheep’s clothing” masquerading as ‘born-again’
Christians among us today!
Mundane
materialism is on the increase, while concupiscence ensures that sexual
immorality is the order of the day. Theatrical subterfuge has reached its
highest point, as gluttony is eulogised. Priests, pastors and bishops drive the
biggest limousines today, whereas their Master Jesus, the Christ, walked the
unpaved roads and pathways of Palestine
All
manners of publicity gimmick, subliminal advertising tricks, blatant trade and
cut-throat commerce are now employed by our psychedelic nouveau-riche crusade
preachers to ‘fleece the flock and pay the ladies’! Married pastors indulge in
adulterous relationships without any qualms of conscience. Who can redeem us
from these demonic onslaughts in the guise of modernism? It is only this timely
interdenominational forum formed by Rev. Prof. J. J. Kenez!
In support of my assertion,
I reprint here unabridged a letter that I downloaded from the Internet, which
states in concise and unequivocal terms that the Catholic Church does not, has
never and will never teach CELIBACY. It is a legislation that can be abrogated
anytime, he emphatically concludes.
“CELIBACY
AND CATHOLIC TEACHING
Father
Mateo, August 28, 1982
GZ | Blessings in The
Name of Our Lord!
GZ | For centuries The Roman Rite has been teaching the laity that celibacy is demanded of ALL Priests... Yet, since the beginning of The Catholic Church this has not been so... I.E. St. Peter had a wife perSt
Paul
GZ | For centuries The Roman Rite has been teaching the laity that celibacy is demanded of ALL Priests... Yet, since the beginning of The Catholic Church this has not been so... I.E. St. Peter had a wife per
Dear Gayle:
May I humbly suggest
that the Roman Rite doesn't teach anybody
anything!
anything!
The official teachers of
the Church are the Bishops in
union with the Pope, and they can be and are of all the rites. For
example, Pius XI belonged to the Ambrosian Rite, as did Paul VI. John Paul II recently celebrated Mass in the Mozarabic Rite, although he comes from the Roman Rite.
union with the Pope, and they can be and are of all the rites. For
example, Pius XI belonged to the Ambrosian Rite, as did Paul VI. John Paul II recently celebrated Mass in the Mozarabic Rite, although he comes from the Roman Rite.
Secondly, the Church doesn't "teach the laity".
The Church teaches
all her members. The Church is not "us" vs. "them". We are all the
Church and members of one another, in need of the gospel of God.
all her members. The Church is not "us" vs. "them". We are all the
Church and members of one another, in need of the gospel of God.
Thirdly, the Church does not "teach" anything whatever
about
Celibacy. The objects of Church teaching are (1) doctrine and (2) morals. Celibacy is neither. Celibacy is a matter of Church legislation.
Celibacy. The objects of Church teaching are (1) doctrine and (2) morals. Celibacy is neither. Celibacy is a matter of Church legislation.
The law of celibacy, which has been universal in the Latin rites since
the Middle Ages, is of ecclesiastical origin and may therefore be dispensed in
individual cases. Conceivably, it could be entirely abrogated.
An easily available
treatment of this matter (it is scarcely an
issue) is the article "Celibacy" in the New Catholic Encyclopaedia.
issue) is the article "Celibacy" in the New Catholic Encyclopaedia.
Sincerely in Christ,
Signed………………………….Father Mateo
CIN <http://www.cin.org> St. Gabriel
<http://www.stgabriel.com> Visit the above or E-Mail
<mailto:webmaster@cin.org>
Copyright
© 1996 Catholic Information Network (CIN) - October
28, 1996 ”
This is coming from an authority on the subject
under scrutiny. You have no reason not to believe what he says! If clerical
celibacy has out-lived its usefulness, what is the need of clinging tenaciously
to it! This is an absurdity on the part of the Catholic Church hierarchy. This,
in medical language, is akin to giving the wrong signals that all is well while
a very sick patient is in a comatose state! Or shall we take it that the Church
Fathers approve of the numerous sex scandals rocking the boat? Or has it become
so insensitive to the evidence that our “separated brethren” are laughing us to
scorn?
If
nothing is done, and fast too, we shall be left with no option than to assert
that celibacy is a canonical camouflage designed to shelter all those who are
incapable of living the monogamous life demanded by the sacrament of Holy
Matrimony! It shall then be obvious that it is an institutionalised and welcome
haven for those having psychopathological inadequacies! For now, that is what
it represents among the Igbos of Biafra in West Africa who love children and cherish family life
dearly!
THE RAISON D’ÊTRE
Current
sex scandals in Catholic dioceses all over the world and in many parishes of
the African Church
IT IS SCANDALS GALORE AS AT NOW!
It
is hoped that this association, as a child of necessity, will save us the
recurrent shame, stigmatisation and embarrassment serious minded members of the
clergy and our faithful laity suffer at the hands of our separated brethren,
who now deride us on the false claims we make on celibacy and so laugh us to
scorn! We have no excuses for the flagrant violations of the vows of chastity
and virginity by our sons and daughters!
The words of
Apostle Peter, in 2nd Peter 2: 17-22, Good News Bible edition (GNB)
is prophetic and says it all!
v.17: These men are like
dried-up springs, like clouds blown along by a storm; God has reserved a place
for them in the deepest darkness.
v.18: They make proud and
stupid statements, and use immoral bodily lusts to trap those who are just
beginning to escape from among people who live in error.
v.19: They promise them freedom while they
themselves are slaves of destructive habits—for a person is a slave of anything
that has conquered him.
v.20: If people have escaped from the corrupting
forces of the world through their knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus
Christ, and then are again caught and conquered by them, such people are in a
worse state at the end than they were at the beginning.
v.21: It would have been much better for them never
to have known the way of righteousness than to know it and then turn away from
the sacred command that was given them.
v.22: What happened to them shows that the proverbs
are true:
“A dog goes back to what it
has vomited” and “A pig that has been washed goes back to roll in the mud.”
What
else can be more appropriate in describing our erring religious hypocrites than
the last two verses? One takes a vow of chastity or that of virginity after
fifteen years of training at the seminary or a minimum of seven years after a
novitiate/postulancy at a convent respectively. And then such a candidate
flaunts the vow and unrepentantly indulges in promiscuous sexual exploits
shortly after a mission-sponsored tutelage and the diocesan ceremonies of
ordinations or solemn professions usually well orchestrated and extensively
financed by the laity!
This
is sheer “abomination of desolation standing in a holy place”!
Has
Satan taken over our seminaries and convents or are the spiritual directors and
formators to be held responsible for this turn of events? Deceit and pretence must have been so
eulogised and indulged in at some of these training grounds, otherwise how can
anyone explain how these wolves in sheep’s clothing survive the scrutiny of
their trainers for so long. The sorrows of parents of these wayward
candidates are better imagined than experienced!
The
situation has so got out of hand that the warnings of Jesus Christ himself now
apply to our clergy. The whole of chapter twenty-three of the gospel according
to Matthew is an apt description of the depravity of most of our present day
priests! Currently, about fifty-five cases of reported HIV/AIDS patients in
our teaching hospitals are those of our young men and women in religious
cassocks, gowns and veils of all descriptions. However only one appellation
truly fits them all, and that is- HYPOCRITES!
THE STATUS QUO OF CLERICAL
CELIBACY TODAY
At
UNTH some years back, a convent girl was used at the medical students’
practical session to demonstrate the early signs of pregnancy in a virgin. The
naïve postulant was made to stand in front of students of her age and narrate
what happens to her early in the morning. ‘Of
course her descriptions are nothing peculiar’, the mischievous
Consultant explained to the class, ‘Congrats
my dear, you are a very good sample of a healthy mother-to-be, you are
pregnant!” he thundered.
You
can only conceptualise the loud ovation or the sarcastic uproar that greeted
the Consultant’s verdict! Then imagine the scorn and shame the Catholic medical
students had to bear on account of a parish priest’s secret love affair with
the adolescent girl who honestly desired the vocation and seriously hoped to
become an exemplary Reverend Sister!
At
a wedding in my hometown back in 1992, a handsome light complexioned
Rev. Fr. travelled all the way from Umuahia to officiate at St Martin ’s Parish, Odoata-Ihiala.
The grandmother of the bridegroom was at hand to witness the ceremony despite
her aging frame and figure! She insisted on being present at her first
grandson’s wedding feast, but for a different reason altogether as the events
of the wedding celebration unfolded.
At
the end of the cutting of the wedding cake, she requested to speak. Sitting in
front of the audience with the microphone secure in her trembling hands, she
feebly implored the visiting Rev. Fr. not to forget to take along with him the
beautiful daughter the bride bore for him prior to being engaged to her
grandson. “We have taken care of her for you for three years now!” she
concluded. You can imagine the livid consternation her confession caused in the
reception hall!
This
is only the tip of the iceberg, as many such violations of the vow of celibacy
and worse stories from the convents litter all our parishes. One cannot recount
even ninety percent of them were such a one to narrate for ten hours the sex
scandals perpetrated under the unnatural guise of a celibate life that no
African is qualified for, let alone programmed to keep! We have been deceiving
ourselves all these years. Prior to the civil war, this author could vouch for
33% of the Rev. Gentlemen who took their sacred vows seriously. Now, he cannot
even swear an affidavit for as little as 0.05%. The current vocation explosion
is thanks to this nonchalant attitude to the vows of obedience, poverty and
chastity. Most of the candidates for the religious life nowadays, are
frustrated applicants who now see easy life and sensual pleasure as the
exclusive preserve of clandestine Rev.Frs. and
impious Rev. Srs. They are the only ones permitted by the Church to
dissect the sexual enjoyment in Holy Matrimony from the difficult roles and
duties of parenthood as demanded by the Canon Laws of the Holy Roman Catholic
Church. They enjoy sex without the corresponding responsibility of pregnancy,
gestation period, labour pains, delivery and child rearing involved in it!
The
seven or more items listed on the title page will be treated on separate well
research volumes. For now, only the first has been examined. The treatise is
neither comprehensive nor exhaustive! Every concerned parent or Christian is
invited to make his or her inputs on any of the listed aberrations in the
theory and practice of Christianity today and mail same to the headquarters of
the KENEZ INTERDENOMINATIONAL PHILOSOPHERS’ FORUM for publication. Feel
free to communicate with us by dialing
042-551199 or E-mail:
saintkenez@yahoo.co.uk.
We
are equal partners in this business of sanitizing all Christian Churches
Now, read 1st
Maccabees, Chapters 1-3.
 |
Rev. Prof. J.
J. Kenez, an exemplary ex-seminarian since the 1970s, is a stoic of the first
class genre, a moral crusader of no mean order, a retired bloody and war
battered Biafran Commando Officer as well as a veteran Nigerian Air Force
Officer! So he owes no one any apologies for his strong views in this crusade
to sanitise the Catholic Church in particular, and others in general!
CHAPTER ONE
THE ORIGIN OF CELIBACY
1.1 WHAT IS CELIBACY?
Celibacy, is the state of being unmarried, with
abstinence from sexual activity. Considered a form of asceticism, it has been practised in many religious
traditions: in ancient Judaism, by the Essenes; and in Buddhism, Jainism, and
Hinduism, by the members of monastic groups. In
Christianity, celibacy has been practised by monks and nuns in both the Western
and Eastern churches. In the Eastern Church, parish clergy are permitted to
marry before ordination, but bishops are selected from among the unmarried
clergy. In the Roman Catholic Church, celibacy is required of all clergy in the
Latin Rite. The church holds that this practice is sanctioned, although not
required, by the New Testament, basing this claim upon what it avers to have
been the constant tradition of the church and upon several biblical texts
(notably, 1 Corinthians 7:6-7, 25; Matthew 19:12). The principles upon which
the law of celibacy is founded are that the clergy may serve God with more
freedom and with undivided heart; and that, being called to serve Jesus Christ,
they may embrace the holier life of self-restraint. This statement does not imply, it is said, that matrimony is not a
holy state, but simply that celibacy is a state of greater perfection.
There would be no
argument against this myopic position if those who take the vow of celibacy
actually kept it. However, that is not the case, at least, in the past century.
What we now have in Nigeria and other sister African countries are FRAUDSTERS
who pretend to be celibates but are truly Casanovas, Nymphomaniacs and a
generation of promiscuous heterosexuals, homosexuals and/or lesbians. As a
result, our youth have been so corrupted by these demons in cassocks and veils
that the SIXTH Commandment of God means nothing to the younger generation of
Catholic children! Shall we fold our hands and allow such desecration of moral
ethics to continue unabated. That’s the challenge before this association!
Having no doctrinal bearing in the Roman Catholic Church, celibacy is
regarded as a purely disciplinary law. A dispensation from the obligation of
celibacy has occasionally been granted to ecclesiastics under exceptional
circumstances, for instance, to provide an heir for a noble family in danger of
extinction.
The same
argument can be applied to the African situation, more so when it is remembered
that our peculiar culture frowns on someone dying without leaving any children
to continue the family tree or even an individual’s name. In some communities,
one is not even mourned nor given a decent funeral if such a person has never
given birth to any offspring at all, whether legally married or not. You only
get a befitting funeral when you have had a child in or outside wedlock! And
these so-called celibates know that, believe in it, since they’re not islands
in our cultural setting or gene-load. Do you blame them?“Blood no dey lie for
joh ooh!” We have a saying, which states “ if a prick
does not die young, it will surely eat bearded meat.” Ask Professor Chinua Achebe or
rather read his famous novels; ‘Things Fall Apart’, ‘No Longer at Ease’ or ‘The
Arrow of God’; they will give you a background to understanding what I am
talking about.
Dr Kenez®.
The Protestant reformers rejected the
celibacy of the clergy, Martin Luther setting the example to his followers by
marrying a former nun. Both the marriage of ministers and the abolition of
monastic vows became common features of those bodies that withdrew their
allegiance from the Roman Catholic Church.
According to
the articles of religion of the Church of England, “bishops, priests, and
deacons are not commanded by God's law, either to vow the estate of single
life, or to abstain from marriage; therefore it is lawful for them, as for all
other Christian men, to marry at their own discretion, as they shall judge the
same to serve better to godliness.”
The history of priestly celibacy has
been a stormy one since it became law for the clergy of the Latin Rite in the
6th century. Although Pope Paul VI, in his encyclical of June 24, 1967 , reaffirmed the traditional position, the requirement of priestly
celibacy remains a much-disputed ecclesiastical question.[1]
No
one can cheat nature, at least not when one is half-baked, semi-trained and ill
prepared to take a vow that needs an ascetic life or demands a monastic genre.
The only way an African can practise celibacy that is transparent and
convincing to the average Church member is when those who take the vows are
also ‘MADE EUNUCHS FOR THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN’; as St Paul the proponent, the
initiator and the instigator of the celibacy tradition suggested. Moreover, I
am fully aware of the true contents of Matthew, 19:11 -12 and 1st Corinthians, 7: 7-35!
None of them demands or makes celibacy compulsory! Both are suggestions based
on God’s grace, not on false vows taken by sex perverts!
So let all Africans that would embrace celibacy in our local
congregations in Africa be ready for surgery that will permanently curb sexual
arousal and extinguish that fire that definitely could lead them into
indulgence in heterosexual activities. We shall whole-heartedly welcome,
respect and accord such ones full recognition and unwavering loyalty in every
religious function and willingly take care of and sponsor such candidates to
the priesthood or any other religious profession! Anything short of this is
unacceptable! ®
Insert a diagram of a fish
This big fish is swimming backwards,
that is, anti-clockwise. It has lost its bearing. In short, it is swimming in
the murky waters of deception, subterfuge, promiscuity and sex scandals! Who
can rescue it and/or redirect its course to true salvation? S. O. S. It’s A 2 C 3!
CHAPTER TWO
THE SCIENCE OF ETHICS
Ethics (Greek ethika,
from ethos, “character,” “custom”), are principles or standards of human
conduct, sometimes called morals (Latin mores, “customs”), and, by extension,
the study of such principles, sometimes called moral philosophy.
This article is concerned with ethics
chiefly in the latter sense and is confined to that of Western civilization,
although every culture has developed an ethic of its own.
Ethics, as a branch of philosophy, is
considered a normative science, because it is concerned with norms of human
conduct, as distinguished from the formal sciences, such as mathematics and
logic, and the empirical sciences, such as chemistry and physics.
The empirical social sciences,
however, including psychology, impinge to some extent on the concerns of ethics
in that they study social behaviour. For example, the social sciences
frequently attempt to determine the relation of particular ethical principles
to social behaviour and to investigate the cultural conditions that contribute
to the formation of such principles.
2.2 ETHICAL PRINCIPLES
Philosophers have attempted to
determine goodness in conduct according to two chief principles, and have
considered certain types of conduct either good in themselves or good because
they conform to a particular moral standard. The former implies a final value,
or summum bonum, which is desirable
in itself and not merely as a means to an end. In the history of ethics there
are three principal standards of conduct, each of which has been proposed as
the highest good:
1. happiness or
pleasure;
2. duty, virtue, or
obligation; and
3. perfection, the fullest harmonious development of human
potential.
Depending on the social setting, the
authority invoked for good conduct is the will of a deity, the pattern of
nature, or the rule of reason.
·
When is the will
of a deity the authority and obedience to the divine commandments in scriptural
texts the accepted standard of conduct?
·
If the pattern of
nature is the authority, conformity to the normal qualities attributed to human
nature is the standard.
·
When reason rules,
behaviour is expected to result from rational thought and experiential
practices of humankind.
This is the case in this malady
termed ‘CELIBACY’. Saul of Tarsus
Timothy was of the rank of a bishop
at the time! So, for the Church authorities in Rome Early Church
2.3 PRUDENCE, PLEASURE, OR POWER
Sometimes principles are chosen whose
ultimate value is not determined, in the belief that such a determination is
impossible. Such ethical philosophy usually equates satisfaction in life with
prudence, pleasure or power, but it is basically derived from belief in the
ethical doctrine of natural human fulfilment as the ultimate good.
A person lacking
motivation to exercise preference may be resigned to accepting all customs and
therefore may develop a philosophy of prudence.
He or she then lives in conformity with the moral conduct of the period and
society. Some others only pretend to do so! The natural urge to mate is so
powerful that only stoics can control it!
Hedonism is that philosophy in which the highest good is pleasure. The hedonist decides between the most enduring pleasures
or the most intense pleasures, whether present pleasures should be denied for
the sake of overall comfort, and whether mental pleasures are preferable to
physical pleasures.
A philosophy in which the highest
attainment is power may result from
competition. Because each victory tends to raise the level of the competition,
the logical end of such a philosophy is unlimited or absolute power.
Power seekers may
not accept customary ethical rules but may conform to other rules that can help
them become successful. They will seek to persuade others that they are moral
in the accepted sense of the term in order to mask their power motives and to
gain the ordinary rewards of morality.
2.4 HISTORY
For as long as people have been
living together in groups, the moral regulation of behavior has been necessary
to the group's well being. Although the morals were formalized and made into
arbitrary standards of conduct, they developed, sometimes irrationally, after
religious taboos were violated, or out of chance behavior that became habit and
then custom, or from laws imposed by chiefs to prevent disharmony in their
tribes.
Even the great ancient Egyptian and
Sumerian civilizations developed no systematized ethics; maxims and precepts
set down by secular leaders, such as Ptahhotep, mingled with a strict religion
that affected the behavior of every Egyptian. In ancient China
2.5 EARLY GREEK ETHICS
In the 6th century BC the Greek philosopher Pythagoras developed one of the earliest moral
philosophies from the Greek mystery religion Orphism. Believing that the intellectual nature is superior to the sensual
nature and that the best life is one devoted to mental discipline, he founded a
semi-religious order with rules emphasising simplicity in speech, dress,
and food. The members observed rituals that were designed to demonstrate the
decreed ethical beliefs.
In the 5th century BC the Greek philosophers known as Sophists, who taught rhetoric, logic, and civil
affairs, were skeptical of moral absolutes. The Sophist Protagoras taught that human judgment is subjective,
and that one's perception is valid only for oneself. The Sophist Gorgias went to the extreme of arguing that nothing
exists; that if anything does exist, human beings could not know it; and that
if they did know it, they could not communicate that knowledge.
Other Sophists, such as Thrasymachus,
believed that might makes right. Socrates opposed the Sophists. His philosophical position, as represented in the
dialogues of his pupil Plato, may be
summarized as follows: virtue is knowledge; people will be virtuous if they
know what virtue is; and vice, or evil, is the result of ignorance. Thus,
according to Socrates, education can make people moral.
2.6 GREEK SCHOOLS OF ETHICS
Later, most of the Greek schools of
moral philosophy were derived from the teachings of Socrates. Four such schools
originated among his immediate disciples:
1. the Cynics,
2. the Cyrenaics,
3. the Megarians (a school founded by Euclid of Megara), and
4. the Platonists.
The Cynics, notably the philosopher Antisthenes, maintained that the essence of virtue, the
only good, is self-control and that it is capable of being taught. The Cynics
disdained pleasure as an evil, if accepted as a guide to conduct. They
considered all pride a vice, including pride in appearance or cleanliness.
Socrates is reputed to have said to Antisthenes, “I can see your pride through
the holes in your cloak.”
The Cyrenaics, notably Aristippus of
Cyrene, were hedonists, postulating pleasure as the chief good (as long as it
does not dominate one's life), that no one kind of pleasure is superior to
another, and that it is measurable only in degree and duration.
The Megarians, Euclid
According to Platonists, good is an
essential element of reality. Evil does not exist in itself but is, rather, an
imperfect reflection of the real, which is good.
In his Dialogues (first half of the 4th century BC) he maintains that human virtue lies in the fitness of a
person to perform that person's proper function in the world. The human soul
has three elements: intellect, will, and emotion.
Each of which possesses a specific virtue in the good
person and performs a specific role.
·
The virtue of intellect is wisdom, or knowledge of the
ends of life;
·
that of the will is courage, the capacity to act; and
·
that of the emotions is temperance, or self-control.
The ultimate virtue, JUSTICE,
is the harmonious relation of all the others, each part of the soul doing its
appropriate task and keeping its proper place.
Plato maintained that the intellect should be sovereign, the
will second, and the emotions subject to intellect and will.
The just person, whose life is ordered in this
way, is therefore the good person. Aristotle, Plato's pupil, regarded happiness
as the aim of life. In his principal work on ethics,
the Nicomachean Ethics (late 4th
century BC), he defined happiness as activity that accords with the specific nature
of humanity; pleasure accompanies such activity but is not its chief aim.
Happiness results from the unique human attribute of reason, functioning
harmoniously with human faculties.
Aristotle held that virtues are essentially
good habits, and that to attain happiness a person must develop two kinds of
habits:
·
those of mental
activity, such as knowledge, which lead to the highest human activity,
contemplation; and
·
those of practical
action and emotion, such as courage.
Moral virtues are habits of action that conform to the
golden mean, the principle of moderation, and they must be flexible because of
differences among people and conditioning factors. For example, the amount one should eat
depends on one's size, age, and occupation. In general, Aristotle
defines the mean as being between the two extremes of excess and insufficiency;
thus, generosity is the mean between prodigality and stinginess.
Modesty
then should be the mean between pride and shame, while decency is the mean
between extreme fashion consciousness and dirty or clumsy dressing. And so, the
virtue of Chastity, should be the mean between virginity and promiscuity! ®
For Aristotle, the intellectual and the moral virtues
are merely means toward the attainment of happiness, which should result from
the full realization of human potential. It
is left for the concerned individual to work hard at cultivating any one virtue
at any given time! ®
2.7 STOICISM
According to the Stoics, nature is
orderly and rational, and only a life led in harmony with nature can be good.
The Stoic philosophers, however, agreed also that because life is influenced by
material circumstances one should try to be as independent of such
circumstances as possible. The practice of certain cardinal virtues, such as
practical wisdom, courage, discretion, and justice, enables one to achieve
independence in the spirit of the Stoic motto “Endure and renounce.” Hence, the
word stoic has come to mean fortitude
in the face of hardship.
2.8 EPICUREANISM
In the 4th and 3rd centuries BC, the Greek philosopher Epicurus developed a system of thought, later called
Epicureanism, which identified the
highest good with pleasure, particularly intellectual pleasure, and, like
Stoicism, advocated a temperate and even an ascetic life devoted to
contemplative pursuits. The Epicureans sought to achieve pleasure by
maintaining a state of serenity—which is, by eliminating all emotional
disturbances. They considered religious beliefs and practices harmful because
they preoccupy one with disturbing thoughts of death and the uncertainty of
life after death. The Epicureans also held that it is better to postpone
immediate pleasure in order to attain more secure and lasting satisfaction in
the future; they therefore insisted that the good life must be regulated by
self-discipline.
2.9 CHRISTIAN ETHICS
The ethical systems of the classical
age were applied to the aristocracy, particularly in Greece
Partly for these reasons, as the
pagan religions decayed, the contemporary philosophies did not gain any popular
following, and much of the appeal of Christianity was its extension of moral
citizenship to all, even to slaves.
The coming of Christianity marked a
revolution in ethics, for it introduced a religious conception of good into
Western thought. In the Christian view a person is totally dependent upon God
and cannot achieve goodness by means of will or intelligence but only with the
help of God's grace.
The primary Christian ethical belief is
stated in the golden rule,
·
“So whatever you
wish that men would do to you, do so to them” (Matthew 7:12 );
·
in the injunctions
to love one's neighbor as oneself (see Leviticus 19:18 ) and to love one's enemies (see Matthew 5:44 ); and in
·
Jesus' saying,
“Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things
that are God's” (Matthew 22:21 ).
·
Jesus believed
that the essential meaning of Jewish law is in the commandment “you shall love
the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all
your strength, and with all your mind; and your neighbor as yourself” (Luke 10:27 ).
Early Christianity emphasized as
virtues asceticism, martyrdom, faith, mercy, forgiveness, and non-erotic love,
few of which had been considered important by the philosophers of classical Greece Rome
This is exactly what our new generation
celibates do not recognise even when they are taught so in their formative
years in the seminaries and convents! Most of them are pretentious and lazy and
so do not see the need to cultivate and practise these virtues! ®
2.10 ETHICS OF THE CHURCH FATHERS
One of the major shaping forces in
Christian ethics was the competition with Manichaeism, a rival religion of Persian origin which held that good and evil, light
and darkness, virtue and vice were opposite forces struggling for mastery.
Manichaeism had an enormous following in the 3rd and 4th centuries AD.
Saint Augustine
After his conversion to Christianity
in 387, he sought to integrate the Platonic view with the Christian concept of
goodness as an attribute of God and sin as Adam's fall, from the guilt of which
a person is redeemed by God's mercy.
The Manichaean belief in evil persisted,
however, as may be seen in Augustine's conviction of the sinfulness of human
nature. This attitude may have reflected
his own strong guilt over his youthful indiscretions and may account in part
for the emphasis in early Christian moral doctrine on chastity and celibacy.
During the late Middle Ages
Aristotle's works, made available through texts and commentaries prepared by
Arab scholars, exerted a strong influence on European thinking. Because it
emphasized empirical knowledge as opposed to revelation, Aristotelianism
threatened the intellectual authority of the church.
The Christian theologian Saint Thomas Aquinas succeeded in reconciling
Aristotelianism with the authority of the church by acknowledging the truth of
sense experience but holding it to be complementary to the truth of faith.
The great intellectual authority of
Aristotle was thus made to serve the authority of the church, and the
Aristotelian logic was used to support the Augustinian concepts of original sin
and redemption through divine grace. This synthesis is the substance of
Aquinas's major work, Summa Theologica
(1265-1273).
2.11 ETHICS AND PENANCE
As the medieval church grew more
powerful, a juridical system of ethics evolved, apportioning punishment for sin
and reward for virtue in life after death. The most important virtues were
humility, continence, benevolence, and obedience; inwardness, or goodness of spirit, was indispensable to morality.
All actions, both good and bad, were graded by the church, and a system of
temporal penance was instituted as atonement for sins.
The ethical beliefs of the medieval
church received literary expression in The
Divine Comedy by Dante, who was
influenced by the philosophies of Plato, Aristotle, and Aquinas. In the section
of The Divine Comedy called
“Inferno,” Dante classifies sins under three main headings, each with a number
of subdivisions. In increasing order of evil he places
·
sins of
incontinence (sensual or emotional sins);
·
of violence or
brutishness (sins of will); and
·
of fraud or malice
(sins of intellect).
Plato's three faculties of the soul are repeated in
their original order of importance, and the sins are regarded as corruption in
one or another of the three faculties.
2.12 ETHICS AFTER THE REFORMATION
The influence of Christian ethical
beliefs and practices diminished during the Renaissance. The Protestant Reformation effected a widespread return to basic principles within the Christian
tradition, changing the emphasis on certain ideas and introducing new ones.
According to Martin Luther, goodness of spirit is the essence of Christian piety. Moral conduct, or
good works, is required of the Christian, but justification, or salvation,
comes by faith alone. Luther himself married, and celibacy ceased to be
required of the Protestant clergy.
The French Protestant theologian and
religious reformer John Calvin accepted the theological doctrine that justification is by faith alone,
and also upheld the Augustinian doctrine of original sin. The Puritans were Calvinists
and adhered to Calvin's advocacy of sobriety, diligence, thrift, and lack of
ostentation; they regarded contemplation as mere laziness, and poverty either
as punishment for sin or evidence that one did not have God's grace.
The Puritans
believed that only the elect could
expect salvation. They considered themselves elect but could not be sure unless
they were given a sign. They believed
their way of life was ethically correct and that it led to worldly prosperity.
Prosperity was accepted as the sign. Goodness came to be associated with
wealth, and poverty with evil; not to succeed in one's calling seemed to be
clear indication that the approval of God was being withheld. The behavior that
once was believed to lead to sanctity led the descendants of the Puritans to
worldly wealth.
Unfortunately, this is the classification that best mirrors where our
worldly priests and nuns fall. They are fashion conscious and will do anything,
including pilfering mission funds to become wealthy and display their
ostentatious lifestyles with impunity! ®
In general, during
the Reformation, individual responsibility was considered more important than
obedience to authority or tradition. This change of
emphasis, which indirectly led to the development of modern secular ethics, is
to be seen in the De Jure Belli et Pacis
(The Law of War and Peace, 1625) by the Dutch jurist, theologian, and statesman
Hugo Grotius. Although the
work adheres to some of the doctrines of Saint Thomas Aquinas, it deals with
people's political and civil duties in the spirit of ancient Roman law. Grotius
argued that natural law is a part of divine law and is based on human nature,
which exhibits a desire for peaceful association with others and a tendency to
follow general principles in conduct. Therefore, society itself is properly
based on natural law.
2.13 PSYCHOANALYSIS AND BEHAVIORISM
Modern ethics is profoundly affected
by the psychoanalysis of Sigmund Freud and his followers and the behaviorist doctrines based on the
conditioned-reflex discoveries of the Russian physiologist Ivan Pavlov. Freud attributed the problem of good and
evil in each individual to the struggle between the drive of the instinctual
self to satisfy all its desires and the necessity of the social self to control
or repress most of these impulses in order for the individual to function in
society. Although Freud's influence has not been assimilated completely into
ethical thinking, Freudian depth psychology has shown that guilt, often sexual,
underlies much thinking about good and evil.
Behaviorism, through observation of
animal behavior, strengthened beliefs in the power to change human nature by arranging
conditions favorable to the desired changes. In the 1920s, behaviorism was
broadly accepted in the United States
The greatest influence, however, was
on thinking in the former Union of Soviet Socialist Republics
In his late 19th-century and early
20th-century writings, the American philosopher and psychologist William James anticipated Freud and Pavlov to some
extent. James is best known as the founder of pragmatism, which maintains that the value of ideas is determined
by their consequences. His greatest contribution to ethical theory, however,
lies in his insistence on the importance of interrelationships, in ideas as in
other phenomena.
2.14 RECENT TRENDS
The British philosopher Bertrand Russell has influenced ethical thinking in
recent decades. A vigorous critic of conventional morality, he held the view
that moral judgments express individual desires or accepted habits. In his
thinking, both the ascetic saint and the detached sage are poor human models
because they are incomplete human beings. Complete human beings participate
fully in the life of society and express all of their nature.
Some impulses must
be checked in the interests of society and others in the interest of individual
development, but it is a person's relatively unimpeded natural growth and
self-realization that makes for the good life and harmonious society.
A number of 20th-century
philosophers, some of whom have espoused the theories of existentialism, have been concerned with the problems of individual ethical choice
raised by Kierkegaard and Nietzsche. The orientation of some of these thinkers
is religious, as was that of the Russian philosopher Nikolay Aleksandrovich Berdyayev, who
emphasized freedom of the individual spirit; of the Austrian-Jewish philosopher
Martin Buber, who was concerned with the morality of relations between individuals; of
the German-American Protestant theologian, Paul Tillich, who stressed the courage to be oneself; and
of the French Catholic philosopher and dramatist, Gabriel Marcel and the German Protestant philosopher and psychiatrist, Karl Jaspers, both of whom were concerned with the uniqueness of the individual and
the importance of communication between individuals. A different tendency in
modern ethical thought characterises the writings of the French philosophers, Jacques Maritain and Étienne Gilson, who followed the tradition of Thomas
Aquinas. According to Maritain, “true existentialism” belongs only to this
tradition.
Certain other modern philosophers do
not accept any of the traditional religions. The German philosopher Martin Heidegger maintains that no God exists,
although one may come into being in the future. Human beings are, therefore,
alone in the universe and must make their ethical decisions with the constant
awareness of death. The French philosopher and novelist Jean-Paul Sartre was an atheist who also emphasised
the awareness of death. Sartre also maintained that people have an ethical
responsibility to involve themselves in the social and political activities of
their time.
Several other modern philosophers,
such as the American John Dewey, have been concerned with ethical thought from the viewpoint of instrumentalism. According to Dewey, the good is
that which is chosen after reflecting upon both the means and the probable
consequences of realising the good.
It remains to be seen where these recalcitrant
fake celibates got their own codes of ethics. Are they Christians, Stoics or
Epicureans? It is very difficult to classify one who has read the entire moral
and social ethics in literature only to settle down to double life styles,
deceptive sycophancy and indiscriminate sexual promiscuity! This calls for
resourcefulness hence the need for an
INTERDISCIPLINARY THERAPEUTIC METHODOLOGY
This novel malady requires an interdisciplinary
diagnosis and a pragmatic therapeutic regimen before it causes the downfall of
the Catholic Church in particular and the entire Christendom! This remains the
noble objective of these sanitation efforts embarked upon by various groups of
Christians who are now the founding members of THE ASSOCIATION FOR THE
ABROGATION OF CELIBACY IN THE CATHOLIC CHURCH.
 |
This is our mission statement. ®
What
is the rationale behind a vow that contradicts social ethics?
CHAPTER
THREE
HUMAN SEXUALITY
Human Sexuality is a general term referring to
various reproductive aspects of human life; including the physical changes of
and the psychological development of human anatomy, physiology, behaviours,
attitudes, emotions, motivations, and the social customs associated with the
individual's sense of gender, relationship, love, attraction, mate selection,
sexual activity and reproduction.
Sexuality permeates many areas of
human life and culture, thereby setting humans apart from other members of the
animal kingdom, in which the objective of sexuality is more often confined, to
reproduction. This article discusses the sexual anatomy, development,
physiology, and behaviour of human beings. For a more general discussion of
animal reproduction, see Sex and Reproduction.
3.2 Human Sexual Characteristics
Sexual characteristics are divided
into two types. Primary sexual
characteristics are directly related to reproduction and include the sex
organs (genitalia). Secondary sexual
characteristics are attributes other than the sex organs that generally
distinguish one sex from the other but are not essential to reproduction, such
as the larger breasts characteristic of women and the facial hair and deeper
voices characteristic of men.
3.2.1 Female Sexual Organs
Primary sexual characteristics of
women include the external genitalia (vulva) and the internal organs that make
it possible for a woman to produce ova (eggs) and become pregnant. The vulva
includes
·
the mons pubis, the most visible part of the
woman's external genitalia, which is the pad of fatty tissue that covers the
pubic bone and is commonly covered by pubic hair;
·
the labia majora, the large outer lips; and
·
the labia minora, the smaller, hairless
inner lips that run along the edge of the vaginal opening and often fold over
to cover it,
·
the labia minora
come together in front to form the clitoral hood, which covers the clitoris, a sensitive organ that is very
important to the woman's sexual response,
·
the opening of the
urethra, the tubular vessel through
which urine passes, is located midway between the clitoris and the vaginal
opening,
·
the area where the
labia majora join behind the vagina is called the fourchette,
·
the area of skin
between the vaginal opening and the anus is the perineum,
·
the hymen is a thin membrane that partially
covers the vaginal opening.
If the hymen is extensive and is
still present at first intercourse, it may be broken or stretched as the penis
enters the vagina and some bleeding and pain may occur, although more typically
its presence is unnoticed. The presence or absence of a hymen is not a reliable
indicator of virginity, although historically it was viewed as such.
The internal sex organs of the female
consist of the vagina, uterus, Fallopian tubes (or oviducts), and ovaries.
The vagina is a flexible tube-shaped organ that is the passageway
between the uterus and the opening in the vulva. Because during birth the baby
travels from the uterus through the vagina, the vagina is also known as the
birth canal. The woman's menstrual flow comes out of the uterus and through the
vagina. When a man and a woman engage in vaginal intercourse, the penis is
inserted into the vagina.
The cervix is located at the bottom of the uterus and includes the
opening between the vagina and the uterus. The uterus is a muscular organ that has an inner lining (endometrium)
richly supplied with blood vessels and glands. During pregnancy, the uterus
holds and nourishes the developing fetus. Although the uterus is normally about
the size of a fist, during pregnancy it is capable of stretching to accommodate
a fully developed fetus, which is typically about 50 cm (about 20 in ) long and weighs
about 3.5 kg (about 7.5 lbs .). The uterine
muscles also produce the strong contractions of labor. At the top of the uterus are the pair of Fallopian tubes that lead to the
ovaries. The two ovaries produce
eggs, or ova (the female sex cells that can become fertilized), and female sex hormones, primarily estrogens and progesterone. The
Fallopian tubes have fingerlike projections at the ends near the ovaries that
sweep the egg into the Fallopian tube after it is released from the ovaries. If
sperms are present in the Fallopian tube, fertilization (conception) may occur
and the fertilized egg will be swept into the uterus by cilia (hair-like projections inside the Fallopian tube).
3.2.2 Male Sexual Organs
The external sex organs of men are
the penis and the scrotum. The penis
is a sensitive organ important to reproduction and urination and to sexual
pleasure. At its tip is the glans,
which contains the urethral opening,
through which urine passes. The ridge that separates the glans from the body of
the penis is called the corona (Latin
for “crown”), or coronal ridge. The
glans and the corona are the most sensitive parts of the penis. The glans is
covered with a prepuce (foreskin)
unless the man has been circumcised, in which case the foreskin has been
surgically removed.
The penis contains three cylinders of
tissue that run parallel to the urethra. During sexual arousal, these tissues
become engorged with blood and expand, causing the penis to enlarge and become
erect (erection or tumescence). Men do not have a penis bone or a muscle that
causes erection, as do some other animals. The scrotum is a pouch that hangs below the penis and contains the two testes, which produce sperm (the male sex cell responsible for
fertilization) and are considered part of the internal genitalia. The testes
also are the primary producers of testosterone (male sex hormone) in men. Inside
the testes are about 1000 semi-niferous
tubules that manufacture and store the sperm.
The scrotum can pull up closer to the body when the surrounding
temperature is low and can drop farther away when the temperature is hot in
order to keep the testes at an optimal, constant temperature somewhat lower
than body temperature.After sperms are produced, they move out of the testes
and into the epididymes, a long tube
coiled against the testes, where the sperm are stored and mature. The vas deferens transports the sperm from
the epididymes through the prostate, after which the vas deferens becomes the
ejaculatory duct. Here, fluids from the prostate and seminal vesicles (small sacs that
hold semen) combine with the sperm to form semen,
a thick, yellowish-white fluid. The average discharge of semen, called
ejaculate, contains approximately 300 million sperm.
3.3 Sexual Development
There are two periods of marked
sexual differentiation in human life. The first occurs pre-natally and the
second occurs at puberty. Although adult women and men may differ greatly in
genital appearance and secondary sexual characteristics, they are almost
identical during prenatal development. When an egg and a sperm unite during
fertilization, they each bring to the new cell half the number of chromosomes (threadlike structures that contain genetic
material) present in other cells.
From fertilization through about the
first six weeks of development, male and female embryos differ only in the pair
of sex chromosomes they have in each cell—two X chromosomes (XX) in females and
one X and one Y chromosome (XY) in males. At this stage, both male and female
embryos have undifferentiated gonads
(ovaries or testes), two sets of ducts
(one set capable of developing into male internal organs and the other into
female organs), and undifferentiated external genital folds and swellings. See Embryology.
3.3.1 Prenatal Sexual
Development
About six weeks after conception, if
a Y chromosome is present in the embryo's cells (as it is in normal males), a
gene on the chromosome directs the undifferentiated gonads to become testes. If
the Y chromosome is not present (as in normal females), the undifferentiated
gonads will become ovaries.
If the gonads become testes, they
begin to produce androgens (male hormones, primarily
testosterone) by about eight weeks after conception. These androgens stimulate
development of the one set of the genital ducts into the epididymes, vas
deferens, and ejaculatory duct. The presence of androgens also stimulates
development of the penis and the scrotum. The testes later descend into the
scrotum. Males also produce a substance that inhibits the development of the
second set of ducts into female organs. In the absence of such hormonal
stimulation, female structures develop.
Prenatal hormones also play a role in
the sexual differentiation of the brain. For example, prenatal hormones direct
the development of sex differences in some cells and the neural pathways in the
hypothalamus (the part of the brain that controls the endocrine system). Beginning at puberty, based on
prenatal sexual differentiation, the hypothalamus directs either the cyclic
secretion of sex hormones that controls the female menstrual cycle or the
relatively continuous production of male sex hormones. Other brain differences
may be related to differences in sexual and aggressive behavior or in cognitive
and perceptual characteristics. Most of the research on sexual differentiation
of the brain has been performed with animals or with biased human samples, and
there are many debates about the nature and behavioral relevance of these
differences in humans.
3.3.2 Childhood
After birth, the process of sex-role
socialization begins immediately. There may be small, physiologically based
differences present at birth that lead girls and boys to perceive the world or
behave in slightly different ways. There are also marked and well-documented
differences in the ways that boys and girls are treated from birth onward. The
behavioral differences between the sexes, such as differences in toy and play
preference and in the degree of aggressive behavior, are most likely the
product of complex interactions between the way that the child perceives the world
and the ways that parents, siblings, and others react to the child. The
messages about appropriate behavior for girls and boys intensify differences
between the sexes, as the child grows older.
It is not uncommon for children to
touch or play with their genitals or to play games, such as “doctor” or
“house,” that include sexual exploration. Such experiences are usually not
labeled sexual by the children. Adults will often discourage such behavior and
respond negatively to it. Generally by the age of six or seven, children
develop a sense of privacy and are aware of social restrictions on sexual
expression.
As the first bodily changes of
puberty begin, sometime from the age of 8 to the age of 12, the child may
become self-conscious and more private. During this period, more children gain
experience with masturbation (self-stimulation of genitals). Surveys indicate
that about one-third of all girls and about half of all boys have masturbated
to orgasm by the time they reach the age of 13, boys generally starting earlier
than girls. Because preadolescents tend to play with others of their own sex,
it is not at all uncommon that early sexual exploration and experience may
happen with other members of the same sex.
3.3.3 Puberty
Puberty marks the second stage of
physical sexual differentiation—the time when both primary and secondary sexual
characteristics as well as adult reproductive capacity develop, and when sexual
interest surges. Puberty typically begins in girls from 8 to 12
years of age, whereas boys start about two years later. The hypothalamus
initiates pubertal changes by directing pituitary growth hormones and gonadotropins (hormones that
control the ovaries and testes).
A girl's breasts grow, her pubic hair
develops, and her body grows and takes on the rounded contours of an adult
woman. This is followed by the first menstrual period (menarche) at about age
12 or 13 (although ages of onset range from 10 to 16.5), underarm-hair growth,
and increased secretions from oil- and sweat-producing glands. It may take a
year or two before menstruation and ovulation occur regularly. The hormones
primarily responsible for these changes in young girls are the adrenal
androgens, estrogens, progesterone, and growth hormone.
During puberty, a boy's testes and
scrotal sac grow, his pubic hair develops, his body grows and develops, his
penis grows, his voice deepens, facial and underarm hair appear, and secretions
from his oil- and sweat-producing glands increase. Penile erections increase in
frequency, and first ejaculation (thorarche) typically occurs sometime from the
age of 11 to the age of 15. For a boy who has not masturbated, a nocturnal
emission, or so-called wet dream, may be his first ejaculation. The ability to
produce sperm may take another year or two and typically begins at about age
14. Growth hormone and androgens, particularly testosterone, are responsible
for these pubertal changes in boys.
The fact that boys tend to develop
more slowly than girls can cause some social awkwardness. Girls who have grown
earlier may find themselves much taller than their dates, for example, and they
may be more physically and psychologically mature than their male peers.
The first menstruation and first
ejaculation are often considered the most important events of puberty, particularly
for the individual. However, it is the development of the secondary sexual
characteristics that serve as more apparent signals to others that the person
is becoming a man or a woman. These signals lead to increasingly differential
treatment of adolescent girls and boys by parents or other adults. The changes
in hormone levels that occur during puberty may cause boys and girls to
perceive the world in different ways, leading them to react differently to
situations. Thus, puberty augments behavioral sex differences between young men
and women. In some cultures and religions, puberty is recognized with rituals
that mark the transition into adulthood.
3.3.4 Adolescence
Whereas the term puberty refers to the period of physical maturation, the term adolescence typically refers to the
socially defined period during which a person adjusts to the physical,
emotional, and social changes associated with the transition from childhood to
adulthood. Adolescence, which occurs from about the age of 12 to the age of 17
or older, is a period marked by increased sexual behavior.
By the end of adolescence, two-thirds
of young women and almost all young men have masturbated to orgasm. In recent
decades, surveys indicate that more adolescents have begun engaging in intercourse
at a younger age. However, studies of college students often find that 20 to 30
percent of these students have not had sexual intercourse. Adolescence can be
particularly difficult for teens who feel different from their peers. Sexually
active adolescents may wonder if their peers are abstinent, while sexually
inactive adolescents may believe that their peers are sexually active. Others
may struggle with same-sex attractions.
Sexual orientation may become a
question during puberty or adolescence. The term sexual orientation refers to a person's erotic, romantic, or
affectional attraction to the other sex, the same sex, or both. A person who is
attracted to the other sex is labeled heterosexual,
or sometimes straight. A person
attracted to the same sex is labeled homosexual.
The word gay may be used to describe homosexuals and is most often applied
to men, whereas the term lesbian is
applied to homosexual women. A person who is attracted to both men and women is
labeled bisexual. A transsexual is a person whose sense of
self is not consistent with his or her anatomical sex—for example, a person
whose sense of self is female but who has male genitals. Homosexuality is not
synonymous with transsexuality.
Homosexual men's sense of self is male and lesbian women's sense of self is
female.
3.3.5 Adulthood
In adulthood, more permanent
relationships, in the form of marriage or cohabitation, become prevalent. The
frequency of sexual activity is different for different individuals. People in
monogamous relationships often engage in sexual activity more frequently than
those who have several partners. It is not unusual for some new couples to have
sexual intercourse almost every day, but in general, among married or
cohabiting couples, the frequency of sexual intercourse tends to decline the
longer the two people are together.
Many individuals remain sexually
active throughout their older years. According to Love, Sex, and Aging (1984), by American social historian Edward
Brecher, a book about sex among older people in the United States, 33 percent
of women 70 years of age and older and 43 percent of men in the same age range
report that they still masturbate, and 65 percent of married women and 59
percent of married men in that age range report that they still have sexual
intercourse with their spouses.
As people age, they may experience
physical changes, illnesses, or emotional upheavals, such as the loss of a
partner, that can lead to a decline in sexual interest and behavior. In women,
there is a gradual decline in the function of the ovaries and in the production
of estrogen. The average age at which menopause
(the end of the menstrual cycle) occurs is about 50. Decreased estrogen leads
to thinning of the vaginal walls, shrinking of the vagina and labia majora, and
decreased vaginal lubrication. These conditions can be severe enough to cause
the woman pain during intercourse. Women who were sexually active either
through intercourse or through masturbation before menopause and who continue
sexual activity after menopause are less likely to experience vaginal problems.
Women can use hormone-replacement therapy or hormone-containing creams to help
maintain vaginal health.
In men, testosterone production
declines over the years, and the testes become smaller. The volume and force of
ejaculation decrease and sperm count is reduced, but viable sperm may still be
produced in elderly men. Erection takes longer to attain, and the time after
orgasm during which erection cannot occur (the refractory period) increases. Medications
and vascular disease, diabetes, and other medical conditions can cause erectile
dysfunction.
3.4 Physiology of Sex
Understanding the processes and
underlying mechanisms of sexual arousal and orgasm is important to help people
become more familiar with their bodies and their sexual responses and to assist
in the diagnosis and treatment of sexual dysfunction. Nevertheless, it was not
until the work of American gynecologist William H.
Masters and American psychologist Virginia Johnson that detailed laboratory studies
were conducted on the physiological aspects of sexual arousal and orgasm in a
large number of men and women. Based on data from 312 men and 382 women and
observations from more than 10,000 cycles of sexual arousal and orgasm, Masters
and Johnson described the human sexual response cycle in four stages:
excitement, plateau, orgasm, and resolution. In
men who are un-aroused, the penis is relaxed, or flaccid. In un-aroused women,
the labia majora lie close to each other, the labia minora are usually folded
over the vaginal opening, and the walls of the vagina lie against each other
like an un-inflated balloon.
3.4.1 Excitement
The excitement stage of sexual
arousal is characterized by increased blood flow to blood vessels
(vasocongestion), which causes tissues to swell. In men, the tissues in the
penis become engorged with blood, causing the penis to become larger and erect.
The skin of the scrotum thickens, tension increases in the scrotal sac, and the
scrotum is pulled up closer to the body. Men may also experience nipple
erection. In women, vasocongestion
occurs in the tissue surrounding the vagina, causing fluids to seep through the
vaginal walls to produce vaginal lubrication. In a process similar to male
erection, the glans of the clitoris becomes larger and harder than usual.
Muscular contraction around the nipples causes them to become erect. However,
as the excitement phase continues, vasocongestion causes the breasts to enlarge
slightly so that sometimes the nipples may not appear erect. Vasocongestion
also causes the labia majora to flatten and spread apart somewhat and the labia
minora to swell and open. The upper two-thirds of the vagina expands in a
“ballooning” response in which the cervix and the uterus pull up, helping to
accommodate the penis during sexual intercourse. Both women and men may develop “sex flush” during this or later stages
of the sexual response cycle, although this reaction appears to be more common
among women. Sex flush usually starts on the upper abdomen and spreads to the
chest, resembling measles. In addition, pulse rate and blood pressure increase
during the excitement phase.
3.4.2 Plateau
During the plateau stage,
vasocongestion peaks and the processes begun in the excitement stage continue
until sufficient tension is built up for orgasm to occur. Breathing rate, pulse
rate, and blood pressure increase. The man's penis becomes completely erect and
the glans swells. Fluid secreted from the Cowper's gland (located near the
urethra, below the prostate) may appear at the tip of the penis. This fluid,
which nourishes the sperm, may contain active sperm capable of impregnating a
woman. In women, the breasts continue to swell, the lower third of the vagina
swells, creating what is called the orgasmic platform, the clitoris retracts
into the body, and the uterus enlarges. As the woman approaches orgasm, the
labia majora darken.
3.4.3 Orgasm
Orgasm, or climax, is an intense and
usually pleasurable sensation that occurs at the peak of sexual arousal and is
followed by a drop in sexual tension. Not all sexual arousal leads to orgasm,
and individuals require different conditions and different types and amounts of
stimulation in order to have an orgasm. Orgasm consists of a series of rhythmic
contractions in the genital region and pelvic organs. Breathing rate, pulse
rate, and blood pressure increase dramatically during orgasm. General muscle
contraction may lead to facial contortions and contractions of muscles in the
extremities, back, and buttocks.
In men, orgasm occurs in two stages. First, the vas deferens, seminal
vesicles, and prostate contract, sending seminal fluid to the bulb at the base
of the urethra, and the man feels a sensation of ejaculatory inevitability—a
feeling that ejaculation is just about to happen and cannot be stopped. Second, the urethral bulb and penis
contract rhythmically, expelling the semen—a process called ejaculation. For
most adult men, orgasm and ejaculation are closely linked, but some men
experience orgasm separately from ejaculation. In women, orgasm is characterized by a series of rhythmic
muscular contractions of the orgasmic platform and uterus. These contractions
can range in number and intensity. The sensation is very intense—more intense
than the tingling or pleasure that accompany strong sexual arousal.
3.4.4 Resolution
During resolution, the processes of
the excitement and plateau stages reverse, and the bodies of both women and men
return to the unaroused state. The muscle contractions that occurred during
orgasm lead to a reduction in muscular tension and release of blood from the
engorged tissues. The woman’s breasts return to
normal size during resolution. As they do, the nipples may appear erect as they
stand out more than the surrounding breast tissue. Sex flush may disappear soon
after orgasm. The clitoris quickly returns to its normal position and more
gradually begins to shrink to its normal size, and the orgasmic platform
relaxes and starts to shrink. The ballooning of the vagina subsides and the
uterus returns to its normal size. Resolution generally takes from 15 to 30
minutes, but it may take longer, especially if orgasm has not occurred.
In men, erection subsides rapidly and
the penis returns to its normal size. The scrotum and testes shrink and return
to their unaroused position. Men typically enter a refractory period, during
which they are incapable of erection and orgasm. The length of the refractory
period depends on the individual. It may last for only a few minutes or for as
long as 24 hours, and the length generally increases with age. Women do not
appear to have a refractory period and, because of this, women can have
multiple orgasms within a short period of time. Some men also experience
multiple orgasms. This is sometimes related to the ability to have some orgasms
without ejaculation.
3.5 Sexual Risks
There are a number of pressing
sexually related public health and social policy issues facing countries around
the world today. According to the United States Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention, in the United States United States
Individuals can reduce their exposure
to such sexual risks by practicing abstinence, using appropriate methods of
contraception to avoid unwanted pregnancies, and using of safer sex practices.
Such practices include using condoms to avoid exchanging bodily fluids,
limiting the number of sexual partners, and restricting sexual behaviors to
those with less risk, such as manual stimulation and massage.
3.6 Sexual Dysfunctions
Sexual dysfunctions are problems with
sexual response that cause distress. Erectile
dysfunction (impotence) refers to the inability of a man to have or
maintain an erection. Premature
ejaculation occurs when a man is not able to postpone or control his
ejaculation. Inhibited male orgasm,
or retarded ejaculation, occurs when
a man cannot have an orgasm despite being highly aroused. Female orgasmic
dysfunction (anorgasmia, or inhibited
female orgasm) refers to the inability of a woman to have an orgasm. Orgasmic
dysfunction may be primary, meaning that the woman has never experienced an
orgasm; secondary, meaning that the woman has had orgasms in the past but
cannot have them now; or situational, meaning that she has orgasms in some
situations but not in others. Vaginismus
refers to a spastic contraction of the outer third of the vagina, a condition
that can close the entrance of the vagina, preventing intercourse.
Dyspareunia refers to painful intercourse in
either women or men. Low sexual desire
is a lack of interest in sexual activity. Discrepant
sexual desire refers to a condition in which partners have considerably
different levels of sexual interest. These dysfunctions may be caused by
physical problems such as fatigue or illness; the use of prescription
medications, other drugs, or alcohol; or psychological factors, including
learned inhibition of sexual response, anxiety, interfering thoughts, spectatoring (observing and judging
one’s own sexual performance), lack of communication between partners,
insufficient or ineffective sexual stimulation, and relationship conflicts. In
such cases, a qualified sex therapist can work with a physician, if necessary,
to determine the cause and best treatment options.
3.7 Studies of Human Sexuality
Sexuality and lovemaking techniques
have been studied in various cultures since ancient times. The Kama Sutra, written in India
In Europe and the United States Germany
In the early 1930s, American anthropologist Margaret Mead and British anthropologist Bronislaw
Malinowski began collecting data on sexual behavior in other cultures. The most
noted scientific studies of sexuality in the 20th century are those
of American biologist Alfred Charles Kinsey and his colleagues and those of William H. Masters and Virginia Johnson.
Kinsey began interviewing people about their sexual histories in 1938, and with
his colleagues he published Sexual
Behavior in the Human Male (1948) and Sexual
Behavior in the Human Female (1953), based mostly on interviews with 5300
white men and 5940 white women. Masters and Johnson began their clinical
studies of the physiology of sexual response and sexual dysfunctions in the
1950s. These observations were published in Human
Sexual Response (1966) and Human
Sexual Inadequacy (1970), among others. Smaller studies have confirmed many
of the findings of these pioneering sex researchers and have challenged certain
others. The AIDS crisis has prompted a number of contemporary surveys of sex,
including the National Health and Social Life Survey, the results of which were
published in the book Sex In America
(1994). As in any area of science, particularly relatively new and sensitive
areas such as sex research, these studies have been criticized, on the basis of
their findings and methodologies, but each study brings us closer to a fuller
understanding of human sexuality. [2]
The
power of libido cannot be under-estimated. Psychologists warn that it is a very
vital survival instinct in all animals though humans pride themselves by
labelling it sexual urge or drive to differentiate their ability to control it
by their will power. Just like breathing fresh air, drinking water and eating
food to live, sleep and sex are the silent survival kits that are neglected to
one’s detriment! Think of the thrones that have been destabilised by the bottom
power of women or the fierce wars that were fought because of rivalry over the
love of a woman. History is replete with so many examples that it is
unnecessary recapitulating some here. Did Adam and Eve not suffer the same fate
as their great grandchildren; Samson and Delilah or King Solomon and the Queen
of Sheba. No one should be forced to take a vow that so many disciplined
soldiers could not control.
Fifteen
years of pretence by young seminarians and aspirants is not enough to school
anyone in the resolute determination required to remain a virgin or a chaste
moralist! The power of sex is so much that only the Holy Spirit can guarantee
its observance by mere mortals who are truly dedicated. Refresh your mind with
Genesis 6: vv. 1- 8 and see that even
angels failed the test despite their spiritual bodies and powers of control.
Let’s stop the hoax and
call a spade by its name! Celibacy must be optional and a vow consciously and
voluntarily entered into by every ordinand!
Contributed By:
Stephanie Ann Sanders, Kenez
J. Danmbaezue,
Christopher A. Ezike & Nkechi N. Mbaezue
CHAPTER FOUR
VIRGINITY AND CHASTITY
4.1 What is Virginity?
A simple dictionary definition states that
·
A virgin as n [C] someone who has never had sex, e.g. She remained a virgin
till she was over thirty, She was a virgin bride.
·
Virginity as n [U] the state of being a virgin, of
innocence, of purity and of modesty, e.g. She lost her virginity at the age of
sixteen.
Other practical examples are “Here in the West, virginity is no longer
as highly valued as it once was, but in African culture it will forever be
valued beyond gold and silver.” “The white gown and veil of the bride at a
wedding is meant to symbolize virginity”
p. 1625 Cambridge
4.2 What is Chastity?
From the same dictionary;
Chastity as n
[U] is the state of not having sexual relationships or never having had
sex: e.g. as a monk, he had taken vows of chastity, poverty and obedience.
·
The education programme was designed to promote chastity
among young people in an as attempt to curb the spread of AIDS.
·
In the past, a chastity belt was a device that some
women were forced to wear to prevent them from having sex. It had a part that
went between the woman’s legs and a lock so that it could not be removed. p.220 of Cambridge
Thus far, we are not in doubt what
both terms mean. And so if we follow these concepts religiously, definitely
less than 5% of our priests and nuns qualify for either state! So, who is
fooling whom in this orchestrated notion of celibacy, when they have lost it
even at age fifteen, ever before applying for admissions to the seminaries and
convents? We must stop deceiving ourselves. I repudiated my candidacy for the
same very reason I’m now crusading. It may be seem uncalled for and difficult
to believe, but I stand up to declare boldly that I kept mine for another three
years after resigning my position as a seminarian. That was back in the 1970s
as an undergraduate of the University of Lagos
So, how did the Roman Church
come about this nefarious injunction? Was it edifying or satanic? Who introduced
it? The claim that it was a tradition in the Early Church Jerusalem
If the Church intended imitating the examples of the Blessed Virgin Mary
and her fiancé, the saintly Joseph the Carpenter, they must carry out a
thorough medical investigation at the selection of candidates for the religious
professions. It is necessary to ensure that at the commencement of their
training they are at least chaste if not completely ‘virginia
4.3 WHAT IS HOMOSEXUALITY [sodomy and lesbianism]:
by Naseer Ahmad Faruqui
Taken from: The Light (August 24, 1981); pp. 7-9.
by Naseer Ahmad Faruqui
Taken from: The Light (August 24, 1981); pp. 7-9.
|
THIS ARTICLE WAS DOWNLOADED FOR YOUR CONVENIENCE/PLEASURE
|
Had I not been asked by an esteemed and learned
friend from England
Firstly, because it is, to me at least, such a
shameful subject to discuss. Secondly, it is such an obvious perversion that it
has been described in legal books and other literature as an "unnatural
offence". However, I feel that the subject should now be discussed openly
because:
(a) It has now been legalised
in certain prominent countries, some of them known for their conservatism in
the past.
(b) Even before this
legalisation, it had recently come to be practised openly and shamelessly.
(c) I confess that sitting
here in Pakistan
In fact when this unnatural offence was being legalised in a certain
hitherto conservative country, I was surprised to read that the Church had lent
support to the legalisation. Is the Church's attitude consistent with the
teachings of the Bible which calls it a "very grievous sin" (Genesis,
18:20 ) and describes it as being the cause of the
Divine wrath and destruction of the cities of Sodom Gomorrah
(d) The Holy Quran requires us to raise our voice against
all evils. It condemns the Israelites of the pre-Islamic period thus:
"They forbade not one another the hateful things they did. Evil indeed was
what they did" (5:79).
And it was one of the reasons why the then Israelites were cursed
"on the tongue of David and Jesus" (5:78).
(e) Very few people have the
fear of God. But most people are afraid of the public opinion. So that when public opinion goes corrupt
and does not forbid glaring evils like homosexuality, in fact legalises it,
then the conscience of such people is really sick, if not dead.
Causes of Homosexuality:
The answer, of course, is polygamy, which Islam prescribes for a society where women preponderate in numbers over men. Polygamy is pooh-poohed by those in the West, but the same people do not mind illegal polygamy (extramarital sex-indulgence) which is being practised freely. What is better for the society, even women, than a proper home life, security and legitimate children! And for those who still care for morals and spiritual welfare, legal polygamy is the only choice, rather than the illegal polygamy with all its evil consequences, including the slow decline of the institution of marriage. In any case, the Mormons in
The British judge Lindsay's book "A Case for
Polygamy" is one, which those who care for the moral, spiritual and social
health of their society should read.
General Remarks:
Generally speaking, whether it is the promiscuity in sex-indulgence or perversity (Homosexuality and Lesbianism), some of the remedies suggest themselves in the above discussion. Other than those, the following general remedies are a must:
(a) Public condemnation rather
than tolerance and legalisation of these evils.
(b) But public opinion can
itself become perverse as in countries where these evils are not only tolerated
but also legalised and publicly practised without any repercussions.
(c) So, the only answer is religion. If Christianity has failed in
its appeal to the people of the West let them study Islam. Let them also take
note of the fact that these evils do not prevail in the Islamic countries.
(d)
In the last resort, it is not the public opinion, nor the legal consequences,
which can put an end to these evils, but a living faith in a Living God that
can restrain people from all evils. And such a living faith and a Living God
can be found in Islam, if mankind is to save itself from annihilation.
For more visit:
<homosexualitylesbianismsodomy_pf.shtml>
4.4 MARY (Virgin Mary), also called the
Virgin Mary, is accepted as the earthly mother of Jesus Christ, and has been
venerated by Christians since apostolic times (1st century).
The Gospels give only a fragmentary
account of Mary's life, mentioning her chiefly in connection with the beginning
and the end of Jesus' life. Matthew speaks of Mary as Joseph's wife, who was
“with child of the Holy Spirit” before they “came together” as husband and wife
(Matthew 1:18 ).
After the birth of Jesus, she was
present at the visit of the Magi (Matthew 2:11 ), fled with Joseph to Egypt 2:14 ), and returned to Nazareth 2:23 ). Mark simply refers to Jesus as the son of Mary (Mark 6:3).
Luke's narrative of the nativity
includes the angel Gabriel's announcement to Mary foretelling the birth of
Jesus (Luke 1:27-38); her visit to her kinswoman Elizabeth, mother of John the
Baptist, and Mary's hymn, the ‘Magnificat’ (Luke 1:39-56); and the shepherds' visit to the manger (Luke 2:1-20).
Luke also tells of Mary's perplexity at finding Jesus in the Temple
The Gospel of John contains no
infancy narrative, nor does it mention Mary's name; she is referred to as “the
mother of Jesus” (John 2:1-5; 19:25 -27). According to John, she was
present at the first of Jesus' miracles at the wedding feast of Cana and at his death. Mary is also
mentioned as being present in the upper room at Olivet with the apostles and
with Jesus' brothers before Pentecost (Acts 1:14 ).
4.5 THE EARLY CHURCH
As early as the 2nd century,
Christians venerated Mary by calling her Mother of God, a title that primarily
stresses the divinity of Jesus. During the controversies of the 4th century
concerning the divine and human natures of Jesus, the Greek title theotókos (Mother of God) came to be
used for Mary in devotional and theological writing.
Nestorius, patriarch of Constantinople (present-day Istanbul
Closely related to the title Mother
of God is the title Virgin Mary, affirming the virginal conception of Jesus
(Luke 1:35 ). Initially, this title stressed the belief that God, not Joseph, was
the true father of Jesus.
In the Marian devotion that developed
in the East in the 4th century, Mary was venerated not only in the conception
but also in the birth of Jesus. This conviction was expressed clearly in the
4th century, baptismal creeds of Cyprus Syria Palestine Armenia
·
The title used was
aieiparthenos (ever-virgin), and by
the middle of the 7th century the understanding of the title came to include
the conviction that Mary remained a virgin for the whole of her life.
The passages in the New Testament referring to the
brothers of Jesus (for instance, Mark 6:3, which also mentions sisters; see 1
Corinthians 9:5; Galatians 1:19 )
have been accordingly explained as references to relatives of Jesus or to
children of Joseph by a previous marriage, although there is no historical
evidence for this interpretation.
This
is debatable and diversionary if it is remembered that he was a young carpenter
and was grieved that his wife-to-be was pregnant before wedding. That wouldn’t
be the case if he was already married once! Why did he contemplate breaking the
engagement secretly? Deception in the name of religion! ®007
In the 2nd and 3rd centuries, various
Christian writers began to express the belief that, because of her intimate
union with God through the Holy Spirit in the conception of Jesus (Luke 1:35 ), Mary was completely free from any taint of sin. In 680 a Roman Council spoke of her as the “blessed, immaculate ever-virgin.”
In both the Eastern and Western
churches, feast days in honour of the events of Mary's life came into existence
between the 4th and 7th centuries. They celebrate her miraculous conception and
her birth, narrated in the apocryphal “Infancy Gospel” of James (September 8);
the Annunciation (March 25); her
purification in the Temple
4.6 THE MIDDLE AGES
During the late Middle Ages (13th
century to 15th century), devotion to Mary grew dramatically. One of the
principal reasons was the image of Christ that developed in the missionary
efforts of the early Middle Ages.
To the extent that the Goths and other tribes of central and northern Europe were Christian, they remained
strongly influenced by Arianism, a teaching that denied the divinity of Christ. In response, preaching
and the arts of this period particularly stressed Christ's divinity, as in the
Byzantine depictions of Christ as Pantokrator
(universal and all-powerful ruler) and in the western images of Christ as the
supreme and universal judge.
As Christ became an awe-inspiring,
judgmental figure, Mary came to be depicted as the one who interceded for
sinners. As the fear of death and the Last Judgment intensified following the
Black Plague in the 14th century, Mary was increasingly venerated in popular
piety as mediator of the mercy of Christ. Her prayers and pleas were seen as
the agency that tempered the stern justice of Christ.
Among the popular devotions that came
into being at this time were the rosary (a chaplet originally consisting of 150 Hail Marys in imitation of the
150 Psalms in the psalter, later augmented by 15 interspersed Our Fathers as
penance for daily sins); the angelus recited at sunrise, noon, and sunset; and litanies (invocations of Mary using such biblical titles as Mystical Rose, Tower
of David, and Refuge of Sinners). Hymns, psalms, and prayers were incorporated
into the Little Office of the Blessed Virgin, in imitation of the longer divine office recited or chanted by monks and
priests.
4.7 DOCTRINE OF IMMACULATE CONCEPTION
The principal theological development
concerning Mary in the Middle Ages was the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception. This doctrine, defended and
preached by the Franciscan friars under the inspiration of the 13th-century
Scottish theologian John Duns Scotus, maintains that Mary was conceived without original sin. Dominican teachers and preachers
vigorously opposed the doctrine, maintaining that it detracted from Christ's
role as universal saviour. Pope Sixtus IV, a Franciscan, defended it, establishing in 1477 a feast of the Immaculate Conception with a proper mass and office to be
celebrated on December 8. Pope Clement XI extended this feast to the whole Western
church in 1708. In 1854 Pope Pius IX
issued a solemn decree defining the Immaculate Conception for all Roman
Catholics, but the doctrine has not been accepted by Protestants or by the
Orthodox churches. In 1950 Pope Pius XII solemnly defined as an article of
faith for all Roman Catholics the doctrine of the bodily assumption of Mary
into heaven.
4.8 SHRINES
Marian shrines and places of
pilgrimage are found throughout the world. At Montserrat in Spain Poland Mexico 1531. In the 19th century a number of apparitions of Mary were reported that
inspired the development of shrines, devotions, and pilgrimages—for instance,
in Paris (1830, Our Lady of the Miraculous Medal); Lourdes (1858, Our Lady of
Lourdes); Knock, in Ireland (1879, Our Lady of Knock); and Fatima, in Portugal
(1917, Our Lady of Fatima).[3]
This is idolatry in its simplest form, and outright disobedience to the
Almighty Creator, for the second commandment of God says that we should “not
worship anything or bow to any image in heaven or earth or below the earth.”
Check the undiluted Mosaic Laws received from Mount Sinai , (Exodus 20) and you will be
convinced that all adoration to Jesus, the Christ is idolatry, not to mention
the BVM or the lesser saints that some Christians kneel before their statues
and pray to like our forefathers poured libations at the shrines of their juju.
What is the difference between a shrine of Mary and that of the ‘goddess of the
land’ in Igbo mythology? There has been a lot of imperialism attached to
foreign religions. They are colonial masters just like other slave traders.
They impose their own philosophies on us as if we were incapable of developing
our own religious belief systems. It is time for cultural independence and
democratic principles in the mode of worshipping the Almighty Creator. No one
culture can claim the monopoly of neither theological constructs nor liturgical
rites for adoration of this One Benevolent Father that all humans share. Anyone who violates natural laws regarding marital sexual intercourse and
responsible procreative activity is neither a child of God nor a descendant of
Adam or Abraham! Celibacy is a farce and should be abrogated.
It is high time we stopped deceiving ourselves and the congregation that
our sexually active young men and women were virgins either before or after
their canonical / orchestrated ordinations or religious professions. I
challenge the church hierarchy to do a small random sampling of the candidates
and discover that not up to 0.05 % are qualified for genuine celibacy!
I have been there! I know it all! It is all demonic pretence! Let’s stop the
scandal now!
CHAPTER FIVE
CELIBACY OF THE CLERGY
Celibacy is the renunciation of marriage
implicitly or explicitly made, for the more perfect observance of chastity, by
all those who receive the Sacrament of Orders in any of the higher grades. The
character of this renunciation, as we shall see, is differently understood in
the Eastern and in the Western Church
Speaking, for the moment, only of Western Christendom the
candidates for orders are solemnly warned by the bishop at the beginning of the
ceremony regarding the gravity of the obligation, which they are incurring. He
tells them:
“You ought anxiously to
consider again and again what sort of a burden this is which you are taking
upon you of your own accord. Up to this you are free. You may still, if you
choose, turn to the aims and desires of the world (licet vobis pro artitrio ad caecularia vota transire). But if you
receive this order (of the sub-diaconate) it will no longer be lawful to turn
back from your purpose. You will be required to continue in the service of God and with His assistance to observe chastity and
to be bound for ever in the ministrations of the Altar, to serve who is to
reign.”
By stepping forward despite this warning, when
invited to do so, and by co-operating in the rest of the ordination service,
the candidate is understood to bind himself equivalently by a vow of chastity.
He is henceforth unable to contract a valid marriage, and any serious
transgression in the matter of this vow is not only a grievous sin in itself
but incurs the additional guilt of sacrilege.
Before turning to the history of this observance
it will be convenient to deal in the first place with certain general
principles involved. The law of celibacy has repeatedly been made the object of
attack, especially of recent years, and it is important at the outset to
correct certain prejudices thus created. Although we do not find in the New
Testament any indication of celibacy being made compulsory either upon the
Apostles or those whom they ordained, we have ample warrant in the language of Our Saviour,
and of St. Paul for looking upon virginity as the higher call, and by
inference, as the condition befitting those who are set apart for the work of
the ministry. In Matthew, Chapter 19 verse 12, Christ clearly commends those
who, "for the sake of the Kingdom of God have held aloof from the married state, though
He adds: "he who can accept it, let him accept it". St.
Paul
“I would that all men were
even as myself; but every one has his proper gift from God. But I say
to the unmarried and to the widows, it is good for them if they so continue,
even as I. But I would have you to be without solicitude. He that is without a
wife is solicitous for the things that belong to the Lord, how he may please God. But he that is with a wife, is
solicitous for the things of the world, how he may please his wife: and he is
divided. And the unmarried woman and the virgin think on the things of the
Lord, that she may be holy both in body and spirit. But she that is married
thinks on the things of this world how she may please her husband. And this I
speak for your profit, not to cast a snare upon you, but for that which is decent
and which may give you power to attend upon the Lord without impediment. ”
(I Cor., Chapter 7 vv. 7-8 and 32-35.)
Further, although we grant that the motive here
appealed to, is in some measure utilitarian, we shall probably be justified in
saying that the principle, which underlies the Church’s action in enforcing
celibacy, is not limited to this utilitarian aspect but goes even deeper. From
the earliest period the Church was personified and conceived of by her
disciples as the Virgin Bride and as the pure Body of Christ, or again as the
Virgin Mother (parthenos meter), and
it was plainly fitting that this virgin Church should be served by a virgin
priesthood. Among Jews and pagans the priesthood was hereditary. Its functions
and powers were transmitted by natural generation. But in the Church of Christ
Virginity is consequently the special prerogative
of the Christian Priesthood. Virginity and marriage
are both holy, but in different ways. The conviction that virginity possesses a
higher sanctity and clearer spiritual intuitions seems to be an instinct
planted deep in the heart of man. Even in the Jewish Dispensation where the
priest begot children to whom his functions descended, it was nevertheless
enjoined that he should observe continence during the period in which he served
in the Temple
THE GREATEST ARGUMENT IN FAVOUR OF CELIBACY:
On the other hand, such motives as are dwelt upon
in the passage just quoted from the Epistle to the Corinthians are of a kind,
which must appeal to the intelligence of all. The more holy and exalted we
represent the state of marriage to be, the more we justify the married priest
in giving the first place in his thoughts to his wife and family and only the
second to his work. It would be hard to find more unexceptionable testimony to
this point of view than that of Dr. Döllinger.
No scholar of this generation was more intimately
acquainted with the by-ways of medieval history. No one could have supplied so much
material for a ‘chronique scandaleuse’
like that, which Dr. Lea has compiled in his history of celibacy. Moreover,
when Dr. Döllinger severed his connection with the Church after the Vatican
Council, he had absolutely no motive to influence his judgement in favour of Rome
“You in England
(A. Plummer in "The Expositor", December, 1890, p. 470.)
A testimony given under such circumstances
carries more weight than long explanations would do. Neither was it the only
occasion on which the historian so expressed himself. "When a priest",
Döllinger wrote in a letter to one of his Old Catholic friends in 1876, "can
no longer point to personal sacrifice which he makes for the good of his
people, then it is all over with him and the cause which he represents. He
sinks to the level of men who make a trade of their work [Er rangiert dann mit den Gewerbetreibenden]."
(See Michael, Ignaz von Döllinger, ed. 1894, p.
249.)
Supposing always that the vow of celibacy is
faithfully kept, the power which this practical lesson in disinterestedness
must lend to the priest's exhortations when addressing his people is too
obvious to need insisting upon. Numberless observers, Protestant and Agnostic as well as Catholic have borne the
obstacles to really confidential relations and more especially to confession in
the case of the married clergy. Even if this difficulty is often quite unfairly
exaggerated in the many current stories of Anglican clergymen sharing the secrets of the
confessional with their wives -- are certainly real enough.
When the once famous Père Hyacinth (M. Loyson)
left the Church and married, this was the first point, which once struck a
freethinker like George Sand. "Will Père Hyacinthe still hear
confessions?" she wrote. "That is the question. Is the secrecy of the
confessional compatible with the mutual confidences of conjugal love? If I were
a Catholic, I would say to my children: 'Have no secrets, which cost too much,
in the telling and then you will have no cause to fear the gossip of the
vicar's wife'."
Again, with regard to missionary work in
barbarous countries, the advantages which lies with a celibate clergy can
hardly need insisting upon and are freely admitted both by indifferent
observers and by the non-Catholic missionaries themselves. The testimonies that
have been gathered in such a work, as Marshall Marshall
Over and over again the admission is made by
well-qualified observers, who are themselves either indifferent or opposed to
the Catholic Faith, that whatever genuine work of conversion is done, is
effected by the Catholic missionaries whose celibate condition permits them to
live among the natives as one of themselves. See, for example, to speak only of
China, Stoddard, "Life of Isabella Bird", (1906), pp. 319-320; Arnot
Reid, "Peking to Petersburgh" (1897), p. 73; Professor E.H. Parker,
"China Past and Present" (1903), pp. 95-96.
The comparatively slight cost of the Catholic missions
with their unmarried clergy need not be dwelt upon. To take a single example,
the late Anglican Bishop Bickersteth, the
much-respected Bishop of South Tokyo, Japan, describes in one of his
published letters how he had " a good deal of talk" with a Catholic
vicar Apostolic, who was on his way to China. Whereupon Bickersteth remarks
that
"Roman Catholics certainly can teach us much by their
readiness to bear hardships. This man and his priests are at times
subject to the most serious privations I should fear. In Japan
With regard again to the effect upon a priest's
work the following candid testimony from a distinguished married clergyman and
professor of Trinity College Dublin London
To these general considerations various replies
are urged. In the first place, it is asserted that celibacy is a mere specious
device invented to ensure the subjection of the clergy to the central authority
of the Roman See. Such writers as Heigl (Das Cölibat, Berlin, 1902) contend
that the deprivation of home and family ties tends to rob the priest of all
national feeling and of standing in the country, and consequently to render him
a willing tool in the hands of the spiritual autocracy of the popes.
The historical summary that follows will help to do
justice to this objection. But for the moment, we may note that St. Dunstan,
who more than any other character in early English history is identified with
the cause of a celibate clergy, was the Archbishop of Canterbury from 960 to 988 AD. That was a period during which the papacy was
subjected to oppression and disorder of the worst kind. In fact the practice of
celibacy was almost universally enjoined long before the resolute energy of Gregory VII (Hildebrand) built up
what it has of late years been the fashion to call the papal monarchy.
Again, the consistently nationalist tone of such
a chronicler as Matthew Pris, not to speak of countless others, lets us see how
mistaken it would be to suppose that celibates are devoid of patriotism or
inclined to lay aside their racial sympathies in deference to the commands of
the pope. And a similar lesson might be drawn from the Gallicanism of the
French clergy in the seventeenth century, which seemingly was not inconsistent
with at least ordinary fidelity to their vows of continence.
Another objection, which has been urged against
sacerdotal celibacy, is that the reproduction of the species is a primary
function and law of man's nature, and therefore constitutes an inalienable
right of which no man can deprive himself by any vow. In view of the fact that
social conditions of every sort, as well as the moral law, necessitate celibacy
on the part of millions of the race, no one takes this objection seriously. So
far as any justification of this position has been attempted, it has been found
in the analogy of the animal or vegetable kingdom, in which the reproduction of
its own kind has been represented as the main object of created existence. But
such a comparison applied to an intellectual being like man is hardly more than
puerile. And if the argument is pressed further, we might answer that, as
horticulturists are well aware, some of the most beautiful and highly-developed
of the natural products of our flower-gardens are only to be obtained at the
sacrifice of their fertility.
The argument if anything, tells the other way.
The one serious objection against the law of clerical celibacy is the
difficulty, which its observance presents for all but men of exceptionally
strong character and high principle.
Such writers as Dr. H.C. Lea and M. Chavard have
set themselves to gather up all the scandalous excesses, which have been charged against a
celibate priesthood since the beginning of the Middle
Ages.
It has been their aim to show that the observance
of continence in a much-exposed life is beyond the strength of the average man.
And that consequently to bind the rank and file of the clergy by such a law is
only to open the door to irregularities and abuses far more derogatory to the
priestly character than the toleration of honourable marriage could possible
be. They urge that, in point of fact, the law during long periods of time has
become a dead letter throughout the greater part of Christendom
and that its only result has been to force
deceptive compliance which in turn has
robbed her of all power to influence men for good. As to the historical
evidence upon which such charges are based, there will probably always be much
difference of opinion. The anti-clerical animus, which prompts a certain type
of mind to rake these scandals together,
and to revel in and exaggerate their prurient details, is at least as marked as
the tendency on the part of the Church's apologists to ignore these
uncomfortable pages of history altogether.
In any case, it may be said in reply, that the
observance of continence with substantial fidelity by a numerous clergy, even
for centuries together, is assuredly not beyond the strength of human nature
when elevated by prayer and strengthened by Divine grace. Not to speak of such
countries as Ireland Germany France Belgium
No candid student of history who reviews this
period will hesitate to admit that the immense majority of many thousands of
secular priests in these two countries have led lives, which are clean and
upright, in accordance with their professions. We prove it not only by the good
report which they have enjoyed with all moderate men, by the tone of
respectable novelists who have portrayed them in fiction, by the testimony of
foreign residents, and by the comparatively rare occurrence of scandals, but,
what is most striking of all, we argue from the tributes paid to their
integrity by former associates who have themselves severed their connection
with the Catholic Church, men, for example, like M. Loyson (Père Hyacinthe) or
M. Ernest Renan.
Speaking of the wholesale charges of incontinence
often levelled against a celibate priesthood, M. Renan remarks:
"The
fact is that what is commonly said about the morality of the clergy is, so far
as my experience goes, absolutely devoid of foundation. I spent thirteen years
of my life under the charge of priests, and I never saw the shadow of a scandal [je
n'ai pas vu l'ombre d'un scandale]; I have known no priests but good priests.
The confessional may possibly be productive of evil in some countries, but I
saw no trace of it in my life as an ecclesiastic" (Renan,
Souvenirs 'Enfance et de Jeunesse, p. 139).
Similarly M. Loyson, when seeking to justify his
own marriage, does not attempt to suggest that the obligation of celibacy was
beyond the strength of the average man, or that the Catholic clergy lived otherwise
than chastely. On the contrary, he writes:
"I am well aware of the true state of our
clergy. I know of the self-sacrifice and virtues within its ranks."
His line of argument is that the priest needs to
be reconciled with the interests, the affections, and the duties of human
nature; which seems to mean that he ought to be made less spiritual and more
earthly.
"It
is only", he says,
"by tearing himself away from the traditions of a blind asceticism, and of
a theocracy still more political than religious, that the priest will become
once more a man and a citizen. He will find himself at the same time more truly
a priest."
We are not contending that the high moral
standard conspicuous in the clergy of France Belgium
·
Our argument is that the
observance of celibacy is not only possible for the few called to be monks and
enjoying the safeguards of the monastic life, but that it is not beyond the
strength of a great body of men numbered by tens of thousands, and recruited,
as the French and Belgian clergy mostly are, from the ranks of the industrious
peasantry.
·
We have no wish to deny or to
palliate the very low level of morality to which at different periods of the
world's history, and in different countries calling themselves Christian but Catholic
priesthood has occasionally sunk, but such scandals are no more the
effect of compulsory celibacy than the prostitution, which is everywhere
rampant in our great cities, is the effect of our marriage laws.
·
We do not abolish Christian
marriage because so large a proportion of mankind is not faithful to the
restraints, which it imposes on human concupiscence. No one in his heart
believes that civilised nations would be cleaner or purer if polygamy were
substituted for monogamy. Neither is there any reason to suppose that scandals
would be fewer and the clergy more respected if Catholic priests were
permitted to marry.
All this balderdash, in the name of
arguing in favour of clerical celibacy. Perjury is a criminal offence even in
civil courts! It a different kettle of fish, when one perjures a sacred vow one
voluntary takes publicly and in front of the Blessed Sacrament. This is not
only sacrilegious, but also profanity demonstrated on the part of the candidate
who opts for celibacy without the slightest intention of abiding by its pious
demands.ã Dr Kenez.
CHAPTER SIX
HISTORY OF CLERICAL CELIBACY
The
First Period
Turning now to the historical development of the
present law of celibacy, we must necessarily begin with St.
Paul
These passages seem fatal to any contention that
celibacy was made obligatory upon the clergy from the beginning, but on the
other hand, the Apostle's desire that other men might be as himself, ref. 1st Cor. 7, vv. 7- 8, precludes the inference that he wished all
ministers of the Gospel to be married.
The words
beyond doubt mean that the fitting candidate was a man, who, amongst other
qualities, which St. Paul
A strenuous attempt has indeed been made by some
writers, of whom the late Professor Bickell was the most distinguished, to
prove that even at this early date the Church exacted celibacy of all her ministers
of the higher grades. But the contrary view, represented by such scholars as
Funk and Kraus, seems much better founded and has won general acceptance of
recent years.
It is not,
of course, disputed that at all times virginity was held in honour, and that in
particular large numbers of the clergy practised it or separated from their
wives if they were already married. Tertullian comments with admiration upon the number of
those in sacred orders who have embraced continence (De exhortatione
castitatis, cap. xiii), while Origen seems to contrast the spiritual offspring
of the priests of the New Law with the natural offspring begotten in wedlock by
the priests of the Old (In Levit. Hom. vi, no. 6).
Clearly, however, there is nothing in this or
similar language which could be considered decisive, and Bickell, in support of
his thesis, found it needful to appeal mainly to the testimony of writers of
the fourth and fifth century. Thus Eusebius declares that it is befitting that priests and
those occupied in the ministry should observe continence (Demonst. Evangel., I,
C. ix), and St. Cyril of Jerusalem St. Jerome
But the passage most confidently appealed to is
one of St. Epiphanius where the holy doctor first of all speaks of the accepted
ecclesiastical rule of the priesthood (kanona
tes ierosynes) as something established by the Apostles (Haer., xlviii, 9),
and then in a later passage seems to describe this rule or canon in some
detail.
"Holy Church
Epiphanius goes on, however, to explain that
there are localities in which priests and deacons continue to have children, but he argues against
the practice as most unbecoming and urges that the Church under the guidance of
the Holy Ghost has always in the past shown her disapproval of such procedure.
But we need hardly insist that all this is very inadequate evidence (even when
supplemented by some few citations from St. Ephraem and other Orientals) to
support the contention that a general rule of celibacy existed from Apostolic
times. Writers in the fourth century were prone to describe many practices, for
example, the Lenten fast of forty days; as of apostolic institution,
which certainly had no claim to be so regarded.
On the other hand, there are facts that tell the
other way. The statement of Clement of Alexandria at an earlier date is open to
no ambiguity. After commenting on the texts of St.
Paul
"All the same, the Church fully receives the
husband of one wife whether he be priest or deacon
or layman, supposing always that he uses his marriage blamelessly,
and such a one shall be saved in the begetting of children" (Stromateiae,
III, xiii).
Not less explicit is the testimony given by the
church historian, Socrates. He declares that in the Eastern Churches neither
priests nor even bishops were bound to separate from their wives, though he
recognized that a different custom obtained in Thessaly and
in Greece
Socrates
tells the story of Paphnutius rising in the assembly and objecting to an
enactment that he considered too rigorous on behalf of celibacy. It would be
sufficient, he thought, that such as had previously entered on their sacred
calling should abjure matrimony according to the ancient tradition of the
Church, but that none should be separated from her to whom, while yet
un-ordained, he had been united. And these sentiments he expressed although
himself without experience of marriage.
Some attempt has been made to discredit this
story, but nearly all modern scholars (notably Bishop von Hefele, with his most
recent editor, Dom H. Leclercq) accept it without reserve. The fact that the
attitude of Bishop Paphnutius differs but little from the existing practice of
the Eastern Churches is alone a strong point in its favour. These testimonies,
it will be observed, are from Eastern sources and indicate, no doubt, the
prevailing Oriental discipline. Wernz expressed the opinion that from the
earliest days of the Church the custom, if not the law, was for bishops,
priests, and all in major orders, to observe celibacy.
The
Second Period
In the history of clerical celibacy “conciliar
legislation” marks the second period during which the law took definite
shape both in the Eastern and in the Western churches. The earliest enactment
on the subject is that of the Spanish Council of Elvira (between 295 and 302) in
canon xxxiii. It imposes celibacy upon the three higher orders of the clergy, bishops, priests, and deacons. If they
continue to live with their wives and beget children after their ordination
they are to be deposed. This would seem to have been the beginning of the
divergence in this matter between East and West.
If we may trust the account of Socrates, just
quoted, an attempt was made at the Council of Nicaea, perhaps by Bishop Osius
who had also sat at Elvira, to impose a law similar to that passed in the
Spanish council. But Paphnutius, as we have seen, argued against it, and the
Fathers of Nicaea were content with the prohibition expressed in the third
canon which forbade mulieres
subintroductas.
No bishop, priest,
or deacon was to have any woman living
in the house with him, unless it were his mother, sister, or aunt, or at any
rate persons against whom no suspicion could lodge.
But the account of Socrates at the same time
shows that marriage on the part of those who were already bishops or priests
was not contemplated; in fact, that it was assumed to be contrary to the
tradition of the Church. This is again what we learn from the Council of Ancyra
in Galatia Cappadocia , in
315 (canon i).
The latter canon absolutely
forbids a priest to contract a new marriage under the pain of deposition; the
former forbids even a deacon to contract marriage, if at the moment of his
ordination he made no reservation as to celibacy. Supposing, however, that he
protested at the time that a celibate life was above his strength, the decrees
of Ancyra allow
him to marry subsequently, as having tacitly received the permission of the
ordaining bishop. There is nothing here which of itself forbids even a bishop
to retain his wife, if he were married before ordination.
In this
respect, the law, as observed in the Eastern Churches, was drawn gradually
tighter. Justinian's Code of Civil Law would not allow anyone who had children
or even nephews to be consecrated bishop, for fear that natural affection
should warp his judgement. The Apostolic Constitutions (c. 400), which formed
the principal factor of the church law of the East, are not particularly rigid
on the point of celibacy, but whether through imperial influence or not the Council
of Trullo, in 692 AD., finally adopted a somewhat stricter view.
Celibacy in a bishop became a matter of precept.
If he were previously married, he had at once to separate from his wife upon
his consecration. On the other hand, this council, while forbidding priests and
sub-deacons to take a wife after
ordination, asserts in emphatic terms their right and duty to continue in
conjugal relations with the wife to whom they had been wedded previously.
This canon (xiii of Trullo) still makes the law
for the great majority of the Churches of the East, though some of the Eastern
Catholic communions have adopted the Western discipline.
In Latin Christendom however, everything was ripe for a stricter law.
We have already spoken of the Council of Elvira, and this does not seem to have
been an isolated expression of opinion. "As a rule", remarks Bishop
Wordsworth from his anti-celibate standpoint, "the great writers of the
fourth and fifth century pressed celibacy as the more excellent way with an
unfair and misleading emphasis which led to the gravest and moral mischief and
loss of power in the Church." (The
Ministry of Grace, 1902, p. 223).
This, one would think, must be held to relieve
the papacy of some of the onus which modern critics would thrust upon it in
this matter. Such writers as St.
Augustine St.
Jerome
At a Roman council held by Pope Siricius in 386
AD, an edict was passed forbidding priests and deacons
to have conjugal intercourse with
their wives (Jaffe-Löwenfeld, Regesta, I, 41), and the pope took steps to have
the decree enforced in Spain and in other parts of Christendom
(Migne, P.L., LVI,
558 and 728).
Africa and Gaul, as we learn from the canons of
various synods, seem to have been earnest in the same movement, and though we
hear of some mitigation of the severity of the ordinance of Elvira, was
enforced against transgressors than that if they took back their wives they
were declared incapable of promotion to any higher grade, it may fairly be said
that by the time of St. Leo the Great the law of celibacy was generally recognized in
the West.
With
regard to sub-deacons, indeed, the case was not clear. Pope Ciricius, 385-398
AD, seems to rank them with acolytes and not to require separation from their
wives until after the age of thirty when they might be ordained deacons if they
had previously, during some short period of trial, given proof of their ability
to lead a life of stricter continence. Writers like and Wernz regard them as
bound to celibacy in the time of Pope Leo the
Great, (446).
The Council of Agde in Gaul , in
506, forbade sub-deacons to marry, and such synods as those of Orléans in 538
and Tours
During this Merovingian period the actual
separation of the clergy from the wives which they had previously married was
not insisted on. A law of the Emperor Honorius, in 420, forbids that these
wives should be left unprovided for, and it even lays stress upon the fact that
by their upright behaviour they had helped their husbands to earn that good
repute which had made them worthy of ordination.
However, this living together in the relation of
brother and sister cannot have proved entirely satisfactory, even though it had
in its favour such illustrious examples as those of St. Paulinus of Noa, and of
Salvinianus of Marseilles.
At any rate
the synods of the sixth and seventh centuries, while fully recognising the
position of these former wives and according them even the formal designation
of bishopess, priestess, deaconess and subdeaconess (episcopissa, presbytera, diaconissa, subdiaconissa), laid down some
very strict rules to guide their relations with their former husbands. The
bishopess, as a rule, did not live in the same house with the bishop (see the
Council of Tours in 567, can. xiv). For the lower grades actual separation does
not seem to have been required, although the Council of Orléans in 541, can.
xvii, ordained: "ut sacerdotes sive diacom cum conjugibus suis non habeant
commune lectum et cellulam"; while curious regulations were enforced
requiring the presence of subordinate clergy in the sleeping apartment of the
bishop, arch-priest, etc., to prevent all suspicion of scandal (see,
e.g., the Council of Tours, in 567), canons xiii and xx).
A good deal seems to have been done at the
beginning of the Carolingian epoch to set things upon a more satisfactory
footing. To this St. Chrodegang (q.v., formerly the chancellor of Charles
Martel, and after 742 Bishop of Metz
The influence both of these canons that devoted
themselves principally to the public recitation of the Office, as also of those
who lived with the bishop in the episcopium
and were busied with parochial work, seems to have had an excellent effect upon
the general standard of clerical duty. Unfortunately, "the Iron Age",
that terrible period of war, barbarism, and corruption in high places which
marked the break-up of the Carolingian Empire, followed almost immediately upon
this revival.
"Impurity, adultery, sacrilege and murder
have overwhelmed the world", cried the Council of Trosly in 909. The
Episcopal Sees, as we learn from such an authority as Bishop Egbert of Trier
The style, no doubt, is rhetorical and
exaggerated, and his authority as an eyewitness does not extend beyond that
district of Northern Italy, in which he lived. However, we have evidence from
other sources that the corruption was widespread and that few parts of the
world failed to feel the effect of the licence and venality of the times. How
could it be otherwise, when there were intruded into bishoprics on every side
men of brutal nature and unbridled passions, who gave the very worst example to
the clergy over whom they ruled? Undoubtedly, during this period the traditions
of sacerdotal celibacy in Western Christendom suffered
severely. But even though a large number of the clergy, not only priests but
bishops, openly took wives and begot children to whom they transmitted their benefices,
the principle of celibacy was never completely surrendered in the official
enactment of the Church.
With Pope St. Leo IX
, St. Gregory VII (Hildebrand) and their successors, a determined and
successful stand was made against the further spread of corruption. For a while
in certain districts where effective interference appeared hopeless, it would
seem that various synodal enactments allowed the rural clergy to retain the
wives to whom they had previously been married. See, for example, the Councils
of Lisieux of 1064, Rouen Winchester
In all these we may possibly trace the personal
influence of William the Conqueror. But despite these concessions, the attitude
of Gregory VII remained
firm, and the reform which he consolidated has never subsequently been set
aside. His determined attitude brought forth a whole literature of protests,
amongst others the letter "De Continentiâ" which is widely attributed
to St. Ulric of Augsburg
The point
is of importance because the evidence seems to show that in this long struggle
the whole of the more high-principled and more learned section of the clergy
was enlisted in the cause of celibacy. The incidents of the long final
campaign, which began indeed even before the time of Pope
St. Leo IX and lasted down to
the First Council of Lateran in 1123, are too complicated to be detailed here.
We may note, however that the attack was conducted along two distinct lines of
action.
In the first place, disabilities of all kinds
were enacted and as far as possible enforced against the wives and children of
ecclesiastics. Their offspring were declared to be of servile condition,
debarred from sacred orders, and, in particular, incapable of succeeding to
their fathers' benefices. The earliest decree in which the children were
declared to be slaves, the property of the Church, and never to be enfranchised
seems to have been a canon of the Synod of Pavia in 1018.
Similar penalties were promulgated later on against the
wives and concubines (see the Synod of Melfi, 1189, can. xii), who by the
very fact of their unlawful connection with a sub-deacon or clerk of higher
rank became liable to be seized as slaves by their over-lord. Hefele
(Concilienge-schichte, V, 195) sees in this, the first trace of the principle
that marriages of clerics are ipso facto
invalid.
As regards to the offenders themselves, the
strongest step seems to have been that taken by Nicholas
II in 1059, and more vigorously by Gregory VII in 1075, who interdicted
such priests from saying Mass and from all ecclesiastical functions. In
addition, people were forbidden to hear the Mass which they celebrated
or to admit their ministrations so long as they remained contumacious. In the
controversies of this time the Masses said by these incontinent priests were
sometimes described as "idolatrous"; but this word must not be
pressed, as if it meant to insinuate that such priests were incapable of
consecrating validly. The term was only loosely used, just as if it was
also sometimes applied at the same period to any sort of homage rendered to an anti-pope.
Moreover
the wording of a letter of Urban II (Ep.
cclxxiii) enforcing the decree takes an exception for cases of urgent
necessity, as, for example, when Communion has to be given to the dying.
Clearly, therefore, the validity of the sacraments when consecrated or
administered by a married priest was not in question.
Finally, in 1123, at the First Lateran Council,
an enactment was passed (confirmed more explicitly in the Second Lateran
Council, can. vii) which, while not in itself very plainly worded, was held to
pronounce the marriages contracted by sub-deacons or ecclesiastics of any of
the higher orders to be invalid. (Contracta
quoque matrimonia ab hujusmodi personis disjungi ... judicamus -- can. xxi).
This
may be said to mark the victory of the cause of celibacy.
Henceforth all conjugal relations on the part of the clergy in sacred orders
were reduced in the eyes of canon law to mere concubinage. Neither can it be
pretended that this legislation, backed, as it were, by the firm and clear
pronouncements of the Fourth Council of Lateran in 1215, and later by
those of the Council of Trent remained any longer a dead letter. Laxity among
the clergy at certain periods and in certain localities must undoubtedly be
admitted, but the principles of the canon law remained unshaken. And despite all
assertions to the contrary made by unscrupulous assailants of the Roman system,
the call to a life of self-denying continence has, as a rule, been respected by
the clergy of Western Christendom.
For more visit
<http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09022a.htm>.
Clerical
Celibacy In England
A few words may here be added, in particular,
about the history of clerical celibacy upon English soil. Very extreme views
have been put forward by various Anglican writers. Passing over Dr. Lea as quite
untrustworthy, the following statement of a more sober writer, the Bishop of
Salisbury (John Wordsworth) may be taken as a specimen. After declaring that
during the Anglo-Saxon period the English clergy were undisguisedly married, he
adds:
"It would be easy to multiply evidence for
the continuance of a practically married clergy in this country up to the time
of the Reformation. Sometimes I believe that they were privately but still
legally married so that their wives and children might have the benefit of
their property after their death. For all marriages properly performed in
England were valid according to the civil law, unless they were voided by
action in the Bishop's Court, down to the passing of Lord Lynhurst's Act in
1835, however much they might be contrary to law" (Ministry of
Grace, p. 236).
It can only be said that this is a quite
gratuitous assertion, unsupported by any evidence. If any, it is yet to be
produced. For now it is founded, in the main, upon that strange misconception,
so well exposed in Professor Maitland's "Roman Canon Law in the Church of
England", that ecclesiastical law in England differed from, and was
independent of, the jus commune (i.e.
the canon law) of the Catholic Church. Objectors may safely be challenged to produce
a single case during the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries in which a clerk in
sacred orders went through the marriage ceremony with any woman. Or again, in
which the wife or the children born after his ordination claimed to inherit his
property upon his death.
On the other hand, the denunciations of all such
unions as mere concubinage are innumerable, and the evidence for any great
prevalence of these irregular connections, despite the rhetorical exaggerations
of such writers as Gower or Gangland, is relatively slight. Unfortunately,
nearly all the best-known popular histories (Trevelyan's "Age of
Wicliffe" might be cited as a specimen) are written with a strong
anti-Roman or anti-sacerdotal bias, particularly disastrous in matters in which
there can be no question of comparative statistics, but only of general
impressions.
For details visit :
<http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01498a.htm>
With regard to the Saxon and Angevin period
again, careful study of the evidence has convinced the present writer that a
very exaggerated estimate has been formed of the prevalence of marriage or
concubinage among the secular clergy.
Two points deserve special remembrance here.
·
First, that the Anglo-Saxon
word ‘preost’ does not necessarily mean a priest but simply a
cleric. The ordinary word for priest in the sense of sacerdos, was maesse-preost.
This is continually ignored, but the evidence for
it is quite unmistakable and is fully admitted in Bosworth-Toller's
"Dictionary" and in the important monograph, "The Influence of
Christianity upon the Vocabulary of Old English" (1902) by the American
scholar Dr. H. MacGillivray. To take one illustration, Abbot Xlfric writes:
"Gemaenes hades preostum is alyfed ... thaet hi syferlice sincipes
brucon" -- i.e. "To clerics [preostum]
of the common order [i.e. to clerks in minor orders] it is permitted that they
enjoy marriage soberly"; and then he continues: "but in sooth to the
others that minister at God's altar, that is to say mass-priests and deacons (maessepreostum and diaconum), all conjugal relations are
forbidden" (Aelfric, Homilies). Similarly, where Bede speaks of St.
Wilfrid receiving the tonsure, the Anglo-Saxon translation, as in many
similar cases, renders it, "he waes to preost gesceoren", i.e. he was
shorn into a cleric (preost).
Wilfrid's ordination as priest did not take place until several years later.
Now the importance of this will be appreciated
when we find a well-known historian writing thus: "Celibacy was avowedly
not practised by the northern clergy [in Anglo-Saxon England]. The law of the
Northumbrian Priests declares 'if a priest forsake a woman and take. A priest
might therefore take a wife and cleave to her without rebuke". (Ref. Hunt,
The English Church to the Norman Conquest, 1899, p 383).
Now this piece of evidence is quite inconclusive;
the word preost, which is here, used,
may or may not assume that it refers to any other class of preost, i.e. cleric, than those in minor orders who were always
entirely free to marry.
·
The second point which it is
equally important to remember is that clerics in minor orders were a very
numerous class in Saxon, Norman and Angevin times.
With us there are, practically preparing for
ordination to the priesthood, while such candidates now from their earliest
years lead a life apart from the world in the seclusion of colleges and
seminaries. In the Medieval Church
All this, which up to a
certain point was not inconsistent with good faith, unfortunately prepared the
way for easy relapses into incontinence, and generated a public opinion in
which it was not accounted a reproach to be known as the son of a priest.
Undoubtedly the sons of priests formed a large class. There was a natural
tendency to bring them up also as clerics, and there was no doubt an immense
amount of scheming, not unfrequently successful, to secure their promotion to the benefices held by their fathers.
But it would be a great mistake to regard these
sons of priests as all necessarily born in flagrant violation of the canons.
The situation was a very complicated one, and it is impossible to pronounce any
sober opinion upon its moral aspects without a careful study. On the other
hand, the conditions of social, and particularly of student, life, which an
appreciation of the ambiguities of the marriage law, as regards which the
difficulties raised by the sponsalia de
praesenti have long been the despair of canonists.
One of the Constitutions of the Legate Otho,
issued in 1237, is particularly instructive in this connection. “He has
learnt,” he declares, on good authority that "many clerics [not yet
priests, be it noted] forgetful of the salvation of their souls, after
contracting a clandestine marriage, do not fear to retain the churches (to
which they may previously have been appointed) without putting away their
wives, and to acquire fresh ecclesiastical
benefices and to be promoted to
sacred orders contrary to the provisions of the sacred canons, and finally in
due course of time after children have been reared from this union, to prove at
the proper moment, by means of witnesses and documents, whether they themselves
be still living or have passed away, that a marriage had really be contracted
between the parties". (Wilkins, I, 653.)
To meet this, Otho decrees
that any married clerk in possession of a benefice, loses all title to it ipso jure, and secondly, that all property in possession of such
clerks or priests who have been clandestinely married before their promotion to
Holy orders, is to go to the Church and none of it to their children.
But the whole legal aspect of the celibacy
question in England English Church
The
Present Position
With regard to the law of celibacy and its
canonical effects in the Western Church
Clerk in minor orders, as already stated, as free
to marry, and by such marriages they forfeit the privilegia canonis and the privilegia
fori only in part, provided they observe the required conditions (cf.
Decreta Conc. Trid., Sess XIII, cap. vi); though in our day such observance is
practically impossible; but they are incapable of being promoted to sacred
orders unless they separate from their wives, and make a vow of perpetual
continence.
Further, if as clerks they held any benefice or
ecclesiastical pension, these are at once forfeited by marriage, and they
become incapable of acquiring any new benefice. Historically
there has been some little variation of practice with regard to married clerks,
and Boniface VIII and the Council of Trent subsequently mitigated the severe.
For details see:
<http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15030c.htm>.
As regards ecclesiastics in sacred orders (i.e.
the subdiaconate and those that follow), the teaching of both theologians and
canonists alike, for many centuries past, has been unanimous as regards the
facts, though some little divergence has existed regarding the manner of
explaining them. All are agreed that the sub-deacon in presenting himself of
his own free will for ordination binds himself by a tacit vow of chastity
(Wernz, IV, n. 393), and that this even constitutes a diriment impediment in
view of any subsequent marriage.
The idea of this votum annexum
seems to be traceable in one form or another as far back as the time of Pope Gregory the Great. Although the opposition to
the law of celibacy frequently took the form of open agitation, both in the
earlier Middle Ages
and again at the Reformation period, only one such movement
calls for notice in modern times. This was an association formed principally in
Würtemberg and Baden in the early part of
the nineteenth century to advocate the mitigation or repeal of the law of celibacy.
The agitation was condemned by an Encyclical of Pope Gregory XVI on
15 August, 1832, and no more permanent harm seems to have resulted than the publication of a certain
amount of disaffected literature, such as the pretentious but extremely biased
and inaccurate work on compulsory celibacy by the brothers Theiner, a book
which at once was prohibited by the authority of and repudiated by Aug. Theiner
before he was reconciled to the Church.
Law of
Celibacy in Oriental Churches
Something has already been said above about this
subheading, and the general principle has been stated that in the Oriental
Churches deacons and priests are free
to retain the wives to whom they have been wedded before ordination. But they
are not allowed to contract any new marriage when once they are ordained. A few
details may be added here about the practice of the different Churches, taking
first the Schismatical Communions and then those united to the Holy See.
In the Greek Churches, acknowledging the
jurisdiction of the schismatic Patriarchs of Constantinople, Alexandria
Priests and
deacons are bidden to practise
continence during the time of their service of the altar. In 1897 there seemed
to have been 4025 parish churches in Greece
This is all we are asking for; namely that
celibacy be optional and not compulsory!
In the Russian Church
Any marriage attempted after the reception of the
subdiaconate is invalid and the ecclesiastic so offending renders himself
liable to severe penalties. Further, to have been already married, or to have
married a widow, or to have contracted any other marriage which offends against
the canons -- e.g. with a near relative, an unbeliever, or person of
notoriously loose character, e.g. an actress -- constitutes a disqualification
for ordination.
Formerly the priest who lost his wife was
required to retire into a monastery. He is still free to do so and in this way
may qualify for higher functions, e.g. for the episcopate, etc., the bishops in
the Greek and Russian Church
In the Armenian Church, again, clerics in minor
orders are still free to contract marriage, and such marriage is required as a
condition for ordination to the simple secular priesthood. Besides monks and
the ordinary clergy, the Armenian Church recognises a class of Vartapeds, or preachers, who are
celibate priests of higher education. From their ranks the bishops and higher
clergy are as a rule selected. It is only by exception that a monk is chosen to
the episcopate.
Amongst the Nestorians,
celibacy is not so much honoured as amongst most of the Oriental Churches. Priests and deacons may marry even after ordination, and if their
wife should die they marry a second or even a third time. Still, bishops are
required to live as celibates, though formerly this does not seem to have been
the case.
The Copts and also the Abyssinian Monophysites
resemble the Greek Church in their laws regarding clerical marriage. A marriage
contracted after the reception of Holy orders, or any second marriage, involves
deposition. All the Coptic bishops are chosen from the monastic clergy.
Among the Syrian Jacobites similar rules prevail.
Bishops, as a rule, are chosen from the monks and a second marriage is
forbidden to a priest who is left a widower. If, however, he marries, the
marriage is regarded as valid although he is deprived of his clerical
functions.
Turning now to the Oriental Churches in communion
with the Holy See
<http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07424b.htm>, we may note that as a general principle married
clerics are not ineligible for the subdiaconate, diaconate, and priesthood. As
in the Russian Church 26 May, 1742 .
There has, however, been a strong
movement of recent years among the Eastern Catholic Churches favouring
conformity with Western Christendom
<http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09022a.htm> in
this matter of celibacy. For example, the Armenian Church dependent upon the
Patriarch of Cilicia even as far back as July, 1869, passed a resolution that
celibacy should be required of all the higher orders of the clergy. Again the
Synod of Scharfa in Syria, in 1888, decreed that "the celibate life which
is already observed by the great majority of the priests of our Church should
henceforth be common to all", http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04647c.htm and priests who were
already married were allowed to continue as before, and though a certain power
of dispensation in cases of necessity was left with the patriarch. Similarly in
1898 a synod of the Catholic Copts at Alexandria Church of Alexandria
Downloaded from the
Internet and improved on by Rev. Prof. J. J. Kenez
CHAPTER SEVEN
THE NEED
TO ABROGATE CELIBACY
Raymond
A. Grosswirth
rgrosswirth@hotmail.com <mailto:rgrosswirth@hotmail.com>
rgrosswirth@hotmail.com <mailto:rgrosswirth@hotmail.com>
As the Catholic Church continues to face a major
crisis in terms of a priest shortage, the issue of celibacy will be at the
forefront of theological and ecclesial debates. In fact, so much has been
taking place concerning the celibacy issue that I have updated this page on April 30, 2002 , in
order to bring forth stronger arguments than those previously presented. While
my remarks will primarily concern married men, I am on record for supporting
the ordination of women as well, which are articulated on other web pages.
As I present this updated thesis on celibacy, we
are in the midst of a paedophilia crisis in the Catholic Church. For the
record, I try to distance the two issues. While I don't label celibacy as the
cause of paedophilia, an all-male, celibate clergy does provide an attractive
secretive environment in which potential paedophiles can easily hide.
Nevertheless, the primary purpose of this web page is the issue of celibacy,
whereby I draw upon historical, theological and ecclesiological dimensions of
the priesthood.
What follows is the content of my original web
page on the celibacy issue. However, I hope you will also visit the following
two pages: www.angelfire.com/ga2/religious/web1.htm, (This is a critical
look at the issue of clerical dispensation.) www.angelfire.com/ga2/religious/web2.htm
(This is an expansion of the issues presented on this page.)
I am sure I am in the company of multitudes of
men who feel called to the priesthood. Yet, one obstacle stands in our way: we
are married. A primary question for married men who have gone through the
equivalent of a seminary education is simply this: Is it possible to be called
to both ordinations as a priest and the married state? I say it is entirely
possible.
When one looks at the history of celibacy in the
Catholic Church, it soon becomes apparent that this state of life became
mandatory due to financial considerations, not because priests were supposed to
emulate Christ by remaining single.
When one focuses more specifically upon the
medieval period, we can clearly see that church property was donated by kings and princes in exchange for
faithful service. A controversy arose when married priests in turn left this
property to their heirs. To make a long story short, celibacy soon followed as
a requirement for ordination, so as to prevent such property transactions
between heirs.
As a side note to this history, it is interesting
to note that the imposition of celibacy in 1139 AD, was not the end of married
priests. We now know that secret marriages took place after 1139, whereby married
priests continued to serve. Unfortunately, the Council of Trent and the
infamous Inquisition sought out such marriages, whereupon Trent
This
meant and still does to date, that ‘ab initio’ there was nothing theological in
the celibacy directive. It meant that priests complied only because they were
afraid of death, and not for any pious intents! This deceit has continued to
date as many who see the vow as a stumbling block or a necessary hurdle they
must jump over in their selfish ambition to the attainment of an easy life pay
only lip service to the vow on their ordination days!
Since the diaconate is an ordained ministry open
to married men, I spent several years in discernment over this possibility.
However, I ultimately reached the conclusion that I am being called to the
priesthood as a married person.
I would urge other men going
through similar discernment to consider the differences between the diaconate
and priesthood. While the diaconate is primarily an ordained ministry of
service, the priesthood is highly sacramental and pastoral in
character. My suspicion is that many who apply to the diaconate are in
reality being called to the priesthood and should therefore consider joining
the crusade to end the requirement of mandatory celibacy.
There has been much discussion about
the need for Vatican III. A primary agenda of which would be the need to
include an extensive debate on the current crisis of inordinate clerical
celibacy and scandals rocking so many parishes and dioceses, as it affects
result-oriented pastoral ministry within the Catholic Church. There
are many talented persons with advanced theological degrees who are being
constantly reminded of what they "can't do" in the Church, as opposed
to being affirmed for the gifts they bring. The honest ones who detest taking a
false vow are thereby excluded, whereas the fraudulent ones are ordained!
·
For example, I completed a
field study as a hospice chaplain last year, whereby I visited the dying on a
regular basis. Since I am married, and therefore not eligible for ordination, I
am not allowed to use the title 'chaplain' within the Catholic Church, but I
nevertheless carried the title with the ecumenical organisation for which I did
my field work.
·
Furthermore, I am not
officially allowed to preach within the Catholic Church, especially as
evidenced by the 2000 Revision of the Institutio Generalis Missalis Romani,
which states that "the homily may be given by the priest celebrant, by a
concelebrating priest, or even by a deacon, but never by a lay person."
·
Perhaps one of the ironies
here lies in the fact that while I have more theological education than the
average deacon, I am not allowed to preach in a Catholic Church, yet I can do
so in an ecumenical capacity. However, there are ways around these roadblocks,
just as deceitful as taking the vow of celibacy inordinately. And that’s what
my colleagues are doing.
·
Nevertheless, like many of my
counterparts, I am facing the sad reality that as I am ending several years of
hard work on my theological studies, there will be very little I can do in the
way of ministry as a lay person in the Catholic Church.
My goal is to work 'within' the
Catholic Church for a change in the celibacy requirement for the priesthood. In my
earlier version of this web page, I referred to C.I.T.I. as working 'outside'
the mainstream. However, as public polls have indicated, the work of C.I.T.I.
is very much 'in' the mainstream.
Their
web site is worth viewing for the statistics on clergy who have left for the
married state. Their site is as follows: www.rentapriest.com.
I have
concurred with most of the statistics provided by C.I.T.I. (Celibacy is the
Issue). Most relevant to the arguments I am presenting on this web page is as
follows:
1.)
Prior to the year 1139 when celibacy was made mandatory, popes, bishops
and priests were allowed to marry;
2.)
In the past 25 years, over 20,000 priests have left the priesthood to
marry--an average of 400 per state--and 110,000 throughout the world;
3.)
We can assume, based on the tradition during Jesus' time, that his
disciples were mostly married men.
For
further historical facts and reflections as well as insights from married
priests, I highly recommend spending some time at www.rentapriest.com.
One of the statistics not mentioned by C.I.T.I.,
yet vital to my arguments,
·
Is the fact that there is only
one priest per 2,000 Catholics in most dioceses in the U.S.
·
In conjunction with this,
there is a correspondingly high death rate amongst priests. This can be
attributed to the pressures on our celibate clergy, many of whom are dying at
relatively young ages.
To highlight this point, we are facing a major
crisis in Rochester , New
York
The ordination of married men will be an
important step toward alleviating the pressure corresponding to premature
deaths. We can not expect our celibate priests to carry the burdens of their
ministries alone.
At the very least, part-time married priests need
to be affirmed by the Universal Church
Perhaps more dramatically, how many terminally
ill patients are facing deaths without the prospect of anointing, simply
because there are not enough priests to administer the sacrament? LET MARRIED
MEN FILL THE VOID!
My projection is that unless Vatican
III rescinds the mandatory celibacy directive, we will see sporadic ordinations
of married men by maverick bishops with a broader vision than cardinals behind
the Vatican walls will. Such bold initiatives would obviously cause Vatican officials to excommunicate the
maverick bishops and thus declare the ordinations to be invalid. The
excommunications in turn would cause uproars amongst the faithful, whereby the Vatican
(Wouldn't
such a scenario make a wonderful Hollywood
movie? Any enterprising screenwriters need not pay me a royalty for the script
idea.)
Since my initial publication of this web page in
August of 1999, I have received inquiries about a theory that has been
circulating concerning the possibility that Jesus was married. Until recently,
I would have dismissed such a theory as being either heretical or outlandish.
However, a recent documentary has given me cause to discern this issue more
carefully. To briefly elaborate, a documentary was aired on the Arts and
Entertainment cable network
on December 19, 1999 . As part of its
"Biography" series, a two-hour programme was presented on Jesus. Some
notable scholars presented their argument for Jesus being married. While
current materials, Biblical or otherwise don't allow for a concrete answer one
way or the other, the argument presented is nevertheless interesting.
If one carefully considers the rabbinical laws of
antiquity, marriage was expected of males by the age of twenty. For those
carrying the title of 'rabbi', or 'teacher', marriage was an absolute
requirement. At least in Orthodox Judaism, this requirement is still valid
today. If one considers that Jesus is severally referred to as 'rabbi'
throughout the Gospel narratives, and that Jewish tradition was not waived for
him, the possibility of his marriage cannot be discounted as peurile.
Another possibility presented in the documentary
is the theory that Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene, since she appears at
pivotal points in the Gospels, and we now know through scholarly research that
Mary was not the sinner she was portrayed to be for many centuries. (However, I
found the arguments concerning Jesus being married to Mary Magdalene to be
weak.) Nevertheless, if scholars promoting these arguments can further
substantiate their research, the celibacy issue will certainly be given more
credibility.
If you are convinced by the arguments I have
presented, I would urge you to write to your respective bishops in support of
an end to mandatory celibacy. My comments are in no way designed to negate the
wonderful work being done by our celibate priests. I do believe that celibacy
is a charism; correspondingly, I believe that 'some' are called to this way of
life.
However, I recall disagreeing with those
overseeing my discernment when I was considering the priesthood prior to my
years as a married person. When I made a decision to enter into marriage, I was
repeatedly told that if I was not called to a life of celibacy, I was not being
called to the priesthood. Well, after many years of careful discernment, I can
tell you that I am indeed called to ordained priesthood, just as I was called
to the married state.
I am sure that skeptics wonder why I spend so
much time on the celibacy issue. Those who know me well are aware that I have
been working vigorously toward the implementation of a married priesthood for
approximately ten years. I believe that my passions are being appropriately
placed.
If I articulate a certain degree of frustration
in the context of my remarks, it is due to the fact that as a lay minister, I
believe I am trying to be a disciple of Christ, while at the same time, the
Vatican has placed handcuffs on me. By this, I simply mean that I am often in
an awkward position of performing a 'charade' as a priest.
While I certainly don't misrepresent myself as
being an ordained person, there have been countless occasions when persons I
have ministered to have referred to me as 'father.' This has been especially
apparent when I conduct communion services in a nursing home. While I feel I am
performing a useful function as a lay minister, I would certainly be more
effective as an ordained priest would.
On several occasions, some of my wonderful
Evangelical Lutheran, Methodist and Episcopalian friends have tried to entice
me toward pursuing the ordination tract in their respective churches. While I
have been flattered that they have recognised my speaking and pastoral skills,
I believe my true calling is in the context of the Roman Catholic Church.
Ironically, there have been isolated cases
throughout the world where ordained married clergy from the Episcopalian Church Vatican
There is now the need for more opinions and
voices to be added to his clarion call by well-meaning catholic faithfuls who
are desirous of purging the church of cheats, fraudsters and sex maniacs who
hibernate under the cloak of the Catholic Priesthood to unleash their demonic
attacks on our naïve womenfolk who are the victims of their promiscuous
escapades!
The Church hierarchy will soon be accused of
deliberately ordaining candidates they know fully well are least qualified for
clerical celibacy all in mad rush to have enough priests to go round! This is a
disservice to the high moral standards the lay faithful attribute to the
Catholic Church. Next, there will be a crisis of confidence and then religious
disobedience and civil strife will set in our parishes and dioceses. A word is
enough for the wise! Let’s hope that the intelligent ones are listening!
Our
children are exposed to blue films, pornographic literature and seductive
pictures on the Internet, but all these are at the theoretical level. We must
rescue them from the practice of sexual perversions that these depraved priest
and nuns initiate them into. This is the objective of allowing celibacy to be
optional, so that the sexy ones can still serve God and the Church without
having to be deceits. The neurotic depression that their double life entails
falls on the blind spot of the Catholic hierarchy because they are all
involved! Surgical castration might be demanded as a sign that candidates who
choose celibacy are genuine!
Updated
April 30, 2002 .
Raymond
Grosswirth has an M.A. in Theology and an M.Div (Master of Divinity) from St. Bernard's Institute in Rochester New York Vatican III, be sure to visit:
http://freepages.religions.rootsweb.com/~grosswirth/vatican.htm
To view "The 95 Theses of Raymond Grosswirth", visit:
www.angelfire.com/ga2/religious/theses.html
CHAPTER EIGHT
COMPULSORY CELIBACY IS
WRONG
The real issue about celibacy is respecting a
person’s free choice. However, that choice should also be based on a
transparent and factual understanding of the options. For so many, ‘Celibacy’ is misunderstood and solely
based on guilt feelings founded on false religious teachings that were
developed to control naïve people such as untutored Catholics. Clearly there is
no biblical basis for any form of celibacy whether married or single. And too
often someone who embraces celibacy is only hiding his/her inferiority feelings
of inadequacy and the corresponding deeper fears of intimacy.
Celibacy is physically unnatural and can result in a variety of psychoneurotic problems, especially in men unless they masturbate to release tension so that the sensual body is temporarily satiated as it was intended by natural laws in creation.
Prostate blockage and
painful wet dreams are experienced so that such people remain sane. These are
often the bodies’ delayed reactions to the unnatural state of compulsory
celibacy. This is what I experienced as a teen and young adult, believing the
lies of the conceited fundamentalists that totally twisted Bible verses to make
me feel that sex was sinful and somehow wrong before marriage.Celibacy is physically unnatural and can result in a variety of psychoneurotic problems, especially in men unless they masturbate to release tension so that the sensual body is temporarily satiated as it was intended by natural laws in creation.
Likewise in women, there are unhealthy psychosomatic illnesses when the body is denied periodic emotional releases as is readily demonstrated by the benefits accruing from occasional sexual relationships that are legitimised and therefore are healthy.
However, if someone for whatever reason, whether logical or not to others, freely chooses celibacy genuinely, that choice should be truly recognised and respected by all concerned. But that person should not be a fraudulent impostor and therefore should know what it entails beforehand and realise the disadvantages of his/her choice.
[1]"Celibacy,"
Microsoft® Encarta® 98 Encyclopedia. ©
1993-1997 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
[2]"Human
Sexuality," Microsoft® Encarta® 98
Encyclopedia. © 1993-1997 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
[3]"Mary (Virgin Mary)," Microsoft®
Encarta® 98 Encyclopedia. © 1993-1997 Microsoft Corporation. All rights
reserved.
#
HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT OF
CELIBACY
The idea of Catholic celibacy is foolish when you study its origin and
realise the primordial reason behind it:
As has been chronicled by Raymond
A. Grosswirth above:
When one focuses more specifically upon the medieval period, we can
clearly see that kings and princes in exchange for faithful service donated
church property. A controversy arose when married priests in turn left this
property to their heirs. To make a long story short, celibacy soon followed as
a requirement for ordination, so as to prevent such property transactions
between heirs.
Before the Middle Ages it was permissible for
Catholic priests to have multiple wives and mistresses a.k.a. concubines. But
with concerns for protecting Church property from inheritance Pope Pelagius I
made new priests agree that their offspring could not inherit Church property.
Pope Gregory then declared the sons of all priests illegitimate.
In 1022 Pope Benedict VIII banned marriages and
concubines for priests, then in 1139 Pope Innocent II voided all marriages of
old priests and all new priests had to divorce their wives. This had nothing to
do with morality, as this had long been the norm since before biblical times.
Multiple wives or concubines ensured the procreation of numerous males.
So, we can conclude that the introduction of the
concept and practice of clerical celibacy had neither religious intent nor any
pious motive. It was all about MONEY,
CHURCH PROPERTY AND INHERITANCE!
For
many resources confirming this see: The History of
Catholic Celibacy or visit this website:
<catholiccelibacy.html>
In New Testament times many wives, concubines and
breeders were common traditional practices and no one ever spoken against it
other than Paul, the eunuch by birth, who recommended monogamy to the elders of
the early Christian church, such as Timothy and Titus. In the Tanakh, Jewish
priests not only suggested that four wives was probably about the right number
but some actually married as many as ten wives before then!
The whole nonsense about clerical celibacy was also the result of middle age Gnostic influences that falsely taught the masses that the body was dirty and not spiritual and to be more spiritual you had to avoid natural sexuality. Talk about getting people really screwed up!
This is it!
The whole nonsense about clerical celibacy was also the result of middle age Gnostic influences that falsely taught the masses that the body was dirty and not spiritual and to be more spiritual you had to avoid natural sexuality. Talk about getting people really screwed up!
This is it!
CELIBACY
– DISEASE or BLESSING?
In medical terms, celibacy may be
more a disease than a blessing!
Someone who opts to be celibate may be dramatising the ego defence mechanism of denial rather than showing a deeper emotional issue that needs to be dealt with. Celibacy is an aberration in anthropological terms since we are not created to be celibate.
Someone who opts to be celibate may be dramatising the ego defence mechanism of denial rather than showing a deeper emotional issue that needs to be dealt with. Celibacy is an aberration in anthropological terms since we are not created to be celibate.
Only someone quite immature would want to exclude
one of the most powerful ways of sharing love, emotion and intimacy. If someone
chooses celibacy it may be due to performance anxiety, lack of self-esteem,
inferiority feelings of inadequacy or false religious teachings based on
misinformed doctrines that sex is dirty and sinful.
Or again,
pathological morality based on such other negative traditions rather than the
genuine biblical injunctions found in the Book of Genesis, which endorsed true
scriptural sexuality. Many women say the biggest mistake they made was not
having much more sexual experience and variety before marriage. Can you blame
them? The urge is natural. You can’t hold back libidinal energy for too long
with psychopathological consequences! Ask for the expert opinion of any
qualified Clinical Psychologist or a Psychiatrist!
STUDENT PRIESTS’ VIEWS OF CELIBACY
We present here the personal views of some students in theological schools who were interviewed on the issue:
We present here the personal views of some students in theological schools who were interviewed on the issue:
Caroline House:
"Personally, celibacy is not a choice I
would have chosen in my youth but after talking to numerous members of every
flavour from fundamentalists to Buddhists who have chosen it, I accept with
wonder and appreciation the choice they have made.
Dave of Libchrist:
Dave of Libchrist:
"Celibacy may be more a disease than a
blessing. Someone who wants to be celibate may be showing a deeper emotional
issue that needs to be dealt with.
Dave Harman to Caroline House:
Dave Harman to Caroline House:
"I agree with what you have written. But I
also agree with Dave of Libchrist. That the monks...embraced celibacy 'for
better or worse' does not obviate the fact that it is, in fact, unnatural, and
move often than not betrays underlying problems and insecurities. As one who
studied for the priesthood, and who - while pursuing those studies followed the
celibate life, I can attest that to follow it requires an almost superhuman
feat of self-denial and extreme sacrifice of natural emotions. And, looking
back to those priests who taught and guided us, I can remember that some - but
not all - exhibited patterns and traits that would have made it difficult for
them to live in secular society. Years later, when other classmates and I
gather together, we talk of the issue of celibacy - remembering those who left the
Order to find…. hopefully.... some inner peace in the expression of that part
of their nature they had suppressed. And we remember those who died silent and
bitter. For myself, eventually not only the issue of celibacy but the whole
fabric of dogma, sin and sacrifice seemed so unnecessary and untrue, that I
left those studies." Excerpts from
a discussion on the Internet.
Then Dave adds;
I wonder
why priests are four times more likely to have AIDS, than the general
population and almost all based on homosexual sex. Perhaps many gays go into
the priesthood, hoping it will "cure" their natural sexual
orientation. But of course that is foolish and never works.
Another person's view on celibacy:
I agree with the unhealthy results of celibacy. I have several male friends that are Catholic and not married. A few of them have revealed how they are affected by long term abstinence after having a few drinks. One guy goes instantly into fondle and grope mode when he has had about three bottles of beer. It looks as if “He's been slapped and run out of places.” Funny thing is, when he is sober, he preaches against casual sex out of wedlock. Another friend, a 53-year-old man, has broken down into tears after too many beers over not getting married or having any children. He too, has been forced to cower to the will of what he has been taught.
I once tried to show these two men how they were innocently misled from accurate nature study and so they had not truly evaluated nor understood their religious injunctions and how man has evolved from the many different forms of behaviour to where we are today.
I agree with the unhealthy results of celibacy. I have several male friends that are Catholic and not married. A few of them have revealed how they are affected by long term abstinence after having a few drinks. One guy goes instantly into fondle and grope mode when he has had about three bottles of beer. It looks as if “He's been slapped and run out of places.” Funny thing is, when he is sober, he preaches against casual sex out of wedlock. Another friend, a 53-year-old man, has broken down into tears after too many beers over not getting married or having any children. He too, has been forced to cower to the will of what he has been taught.
I once tried to show these two men how they were innocently misled from accurate nature study and so they had not truly evaluated nor understood their religious injunctions and how man has evolved from the many different forms of behaviour to where we are today.
My
parents never dragged me into a church and now I can view the human condition
without prejudice. These two people will argue points they know are
not supportable. The church and their parents taught them the ways and they are
dearly afraid (programmed if you will) of what would come to them in the
afterlife if they reneged, blasphemed or abandoned their faith.
It is a sad commentary that children are born
into the religious practices of their parents with unquestioning zeal until
later in life! Were they ever allowed to express their fundamental human rights
when they are baptised and confirmed before they are mature for these
sacraments? Some church traditions need to be repealed!
THE WIDOW OF A LATE IRISH PRIEST STIRS A STORM OVER CLERICAL CELIBACY
From the Associated Press,Dublin , Ireland
From the Associated Press,
“The
late Rev. Fr. Michael Cleary was an ebullient priest and a firm supporter of
the church's teachings on birth control, divorce, abortion and priestly
celibacy.”
However,
to Ms Phyllis Hamilton, his secret wife for many years, “Rev. Cleary was a lover, a husband, and the father of their two sons.”
In Ireland
All over Africa, especially the West Coast,
students for priesthood are now adept at going through the motions during their
seminary training, only to show their true colours barely six months after
ordinations. Hear them:
Fr.
Bartholomew from Mbaise, a two-year-old newly appointed parish priest in
Enugu
Today, he is being interrogated by his superiors
and investigated for sexual assaults on his parishioners. He embezzled more
than ten million ‘naira’ of church funds and bought three cellular phones for
his girlfriends. A beautiful middle aged mother and her two pretty daughters
are at each other’s throat over who really is “in control of the priest’s
penis.” As a matter of fact, it was this in-fighting that exposed the sex
scandals that had bedevilled the young parish located in the housing estate
quarters where the family resides.
Similar cases dot the horizon of the entire Onitsha Ecclesiastical Province Enugu
In Lagos Ibadan Kaduna Calabar Provinces America
Where is morality gone? To the winds! What
homilies will the youth in these God-forsaken parishes listen to and what moral
lessons will they learn at catechism classes as they are prepared for the
reception of the sacraments to be administered by the same erring priest? A
word is enough for the wise, but not for these demon-possessed clerics and
convent ladies who use their cassocks and veils to cover up their depraved
lifestyles. They even flaunt their conquests when they sit down to gossip after
dinner. They feel no guilt.
One young priest, Fr. Charles, was reported by
members of the Mary League and Altar Girls Association as convincing them to
indulge in frequent sexual relationships with these deceptive words: “My dear…. Whenever you go to bed with me,
you get blessings and plenary indulgences from above. After all it is a service to God and the church. If you do not, then I
will turn to your mothers or better still to Protestants and Pentecostal girls.
Is that you want me to do? Man no be wood ooh!”
You can now better appreciate what the Lord Jesus
said about scandalising the little ones and a milestone being tied around the
necks of such people and thrown onto a deep sea! It has got to that critical
stage in the African Church
The young priest was however very correct; “Man,
no be wood ooh!” But he ought to have realised that before ordination, not
after! Deceit is so rampant these days that both spiritual directors and their
seminarians are all involved in the camaraderie of subterfuge. The same story
is true when you visit the convents and nunneries. For now, this author has no
data about the status quo in the monasteries. However, it is hoped that such
scandals are have not infiltrated such holy grounds. There are more sordid
stories about what these so-called celibates do behind closed doors.
Before Nigeria
When confronted later, “How could I resist an erect penis,” was her curt reply! Then she
asked; “ Have you ever seen a white
penis before?” Do you want me to describe what I saw? The smart lady queried.
When some friends tried to counsel her; “If you want a piece of the action, the
white Rev. Gentleman is available. He has been starving all along and would
appreciate it if you made yourself approachable. Now that I have broken the
ice, go along and help him out! Is that what you are angling for?
That was the beginning of a
club of female sympathisers and clergy comforters, which is still on to date!
Ask mass servers about it!
CHAPTER NINE
CATHOLIC
SCANDALS:
A CRISIS FOR CELIBACY?
The Real Story behind
Clerical "Paedophilia" & what It Really Means
Leon J. Podles
The Catholic Church has been the object of much unwanted attention, some
of which it has brought upon it-self. Dozens of cases involving clerical
"paedophilia" have been tried in the courts, several priests have
gone to jail, and various dioceses have had to pay out tens or perhaps even
hundreds of millions of dollars (the exact sums are often in sealed
settlements) to the victims.
There have been some high-profile cases:
·
Bishop Symons of Palm Beach
·
The archbishop of Vienna
·
The diocese of Dallas
·
The bishop of Bayeaux is being prosecuted for not
reporting to the police child molestation by one of his priests.
·
And most recently a media storm has raged around the
archdiocese of Boston
In the African Church
In view of these aberrations, a long-suffering public
often wonders whether the Church would not be better off with a married clergy.
The authors throw their weight behind such realistic suggestions.
Of course, the Latin tradition of clerical celibacy has
been under attack for a long time for various reasons (celibacy is never
exactly what one would call popular), and the latest scandals have only served
to make the question more pressing in the minds of many Catholics.
“True
paedophilia is rare”, states Philip Jenkins, who in his book Paedophiles and Priests: Anatomy of a
Contemporary Crisis (Oxford University Press, 1996) tries to look at the
problem objectively and dispassionately. According to Jenkins (who is not a
Catholic), true paedophilia is extremely rare, is perhaps more common among
Protestant clergy than among Catholic priests, and is even more common among
married laymen. There is certainly a problem in the Catholic Church (and other
churches), but it is not exactly what the media make it out to be.
WHAT IS THE NATURE OF CLERICAL MISBEHAVIOUR:
Paedophilia refers to sexual desire for pre-pubescent children. This is extremely rare, and only a handful
of cases in several decades have involved priests who are true paedophiles.
Almost all the cases reported in the media as paedophilia actually involve an
attraction (which a priest has acted on) to adolescent boys who are sexually
mature but under the ages of consent, which are 18 in civil
law and 16 in canon
law. This behaviour is a variety of homosexuality.
Homosexuals are often
attracted to very young men because they combine the charm of boyishness with
sexual maturity. Such sexual attraction is called EPHEBOPHILIA, which the ancient Greeks cultivated, to some extent
but which rapidly fell out of favour as Christianity transformed classical
culture.
In the 1960s and 1970s the
Catholic Church followed secular psychological advice that sexual involvement
with minors should be dealt with quietly and privately. This view was informed
by the realisation that the youth involved were more likely to be more hurt by
a public fuss than by the sexual involvement itself and that sexual interest in
minors could also be cured with intensive psychotherapy.
This opinion changed in the mid-1980s, when many of
the cases that had occurred from the mid-1960s onward came to light. In a
period of about 20 years, about 150,000 men had served as Catholic priests and
religious in the United States
The Archdiocese of Chicago did
a survey of its entire clergy files from the years 1951–1991, and found
allegations against 2.6 percent of priests, allegations that may have been
justified against 1.7 percent of them. Moreover, it found only one true case of paedophilia, which involved a priest and his
small niece.
True paedophilia occurs most
often within families; celibacy removes most Catholic priests from temptations
of that sort. When it comes to paedophilia (not EPHEBOPHILIA), clergy in
churches that do not require celibacy have the same problems.
The Catholic Church has been a
target because it keeps good records, but the Episcopal Church has a comparable
problem, and some of the worst cases have been in fundamentalist and
Pentecostal churches—but these cases rarely receive public attention. Jenkins
also shows how the "paedophilia" cases in the Catholic Church and the
bungling way church authorities sometimes handled them, have been used by
would-be church reformers as a tool to further their agenda.
Thus the Association For The Abrogation Celibacy In The Catholic
Church led by Rev. Prof. J. J. Kenez has used this and others sex scandals
currently rocking the African Church
Ultimately, the chief beneficiaries of this misinformation and the
disorder in the Catholic Church are the REFORM-ORIENTED SECULARIZERS, who want
to undermine the moral authority of religion in society. The Nazis also were
great EXPOSERS of clerical scandals, however it was not because neither from
pious motives nor of the greater National Socialist purity of heart.
(Both Philip Jenkins in his book and Victor Klemperer
in I Will Bear Witness refer to this anti-clerical campaign).
HOMOSEXUALITY IS THE SECOND PROBLEM
Jenkins’s analysis indicates most importantly, that the true nature
of the problem in the Catholic Church is not paedophilia, but HOMOSEXUALITY, which can lead to sexual relations with
sexually mature but underage boys.
Neither the media nor the
Church have made it clear to the public that most of the abuse cases involve
teenage boys, for this would focus the issue on the problems of homosexuality,
a topic that is not politically correct. By not making this clear, the media
has given the impression that the Catholic Church attracts psychologically sick
priests who like little children. This is, in contradistinction with those who
are opposed to unrepentant homosexuals who habitually seduce teenage boys. This,
too, is not a good thing, but not as disgusting as paedophilia!
No one knows what percentage
of clerics is pathologically homosexual, partially because it is not easy to
define a homosexual, a modern
category that contains many hidden, dubious assumptions.
·
Is a homosexual a man who has
ever felt the slightest sexual attraction to another male,
·
Or a man whose desires are
largely directed to other men,
·
Or a man whose desires are
exclusively directed to other men,
·
Or a man who acts on these
desires,
·
Or a man who structures his
personality around these desires?
Certainly an occasional homosexual desire does not make a man homosexual
any more than an attraction to his secretary makes a heterosexual married man
an adulterer. Temptations are often given to test the soul.
What most people
mean by a homosexual is a man who acts on a sexual desire for a man or whose
personality is structured around that desire.
What percentage of clerics are, in fact, homosexuals
in any of these senses? Donald Cozzens, the Rector of the Cleveland Roman
Catholic Seminary, in “The Changing Face
of the Priesthood”, quotes figures from 23 percent to 80 percent. He suspects that the priesthood has become
or is rapidly becoming a gay profession,
one in which heterosexuals are increasingly uncomfortable.
From my own experiences with
clerical homosexuals, I suspect that the figure is well fewer than 20 percent,
although this is still 7 to 8 times the occurrence in the general population.
The Vatican Vatican American College
In the 1960s, I thought I
might have a vocation, and I applied to a seminary program. Other applicants
and I went through a psychological evaluation that may have been aimed at
weeding out general nut cases and homosexuals. It failed on both accounts.
In retrospect I would guess
that a quarter of the people in the programme were homosexuals or effeminate.
My roommate was a homosexual, and when he approached me, I left the seminary
within hours. I reported this incident to the authorities. The first words of
the Rector were symptomatic: "Why me? Why me?" He didn’t like the
problem (who would?), but his focus was on avoiding problems for himself.
I was astonished when the offender was allowed to continue. He was only
asked to leave years later when he spent all his free time in gay bars.
Perhaps the Rector did not report the offender to other authorities (like
Evelyn Waugh’s schoolmaster, who was handed on from one school to another to
get rid of him). The offender continued to offend, and eventually he died of
AIDS.
Friends I know who had been in other seminaries reported similar
behaviour—and a similar lack of response by the authorities.
One Seminary, known
internationally as the Pink Palace
The priest who taught Celtic
Spirituality had been sleeping with the seminary students and flaunting it. The
flaunting was the offence, and the offender was sent to rural Pennsylvania
In the same diocese, a
diocesan priest and chancery official was a columnist for the Washington
WHAT EFFECT DOES THE PRESENCE OF HOMOSEXUAL
CLERGY HAVE ON THE CHURCH?
Cozzens claims that the presence of
homosexuals in the seminary and priesthood tends to discourage heterosexual
candidates. Celibacy is hard enough, but to be put in a situation in which
being celibate is (with some reason) equated with being homosexual makes it
even harder. Homosexual priests also have an interest in distorting church
teaching.
The year
before, Bishop Symons of Palm Beach Vatican Midwest ).
LACK OF MASCULINITY
At this point, it is necessary
to have a psychological evaluation of what is the endemic problem with these
abnormal clerics.
·
What is the source of the
probably disproportionate number of homosexuals among the Catholic clergy?
·
Does the Latin tradition of ordaining
only unmarried men who promise to remain unmarried contribute to this problem?
·
Why are there so many
homosexuals among the clergy?
·
Why would homosexuals be
especially attracted to the priesthood?
Obviously, the
percentage of homosexuals is larger among the unmarried than among the married,
but most single men are not homosexuals. An underlying problem, is that for
centuries the churches of Western Christianity have been seen by both men and
women as belonging to the feminine sphere of life, just like nursing, cooking,
and the care of small children.
Consequently,
men who are attracted to careers in the Church often have a weak sense of
masculinity, have difficulty dealing with men and therefore prefer to deal
mostly with women, and have personalities that tend to pick up a feminine
savour; they are, in short, more or less effeminate.
This I have treated at length in my book,
The Church
Impotent: The Feminisation of Christianity.
Now an effeminate man certainly may be heterosexual, but homosexuals are
much more likely than heterosexuals to be effeminate. Not only does this
effeminacy increase the likelihood of a cleric’s being a homosexual, but also
it can often lead to apathy in the face of clerical sexual misbehaviour. A
homosexual advance to a youth not only outrages most men because it is wrong,
but also because it encourages the youth to deviate from heterosexuality, a
crucial constituent of masculinity. The
absence of this normal male outrage among bishops and other religious leaders
has been seen as astonishing and disquieting, and is a symptom of another and
deeper problem, a lack of masculinity.
NO SECOND CHANCES
Homosexuality, is a major
problem that is both the consequences of the feminisation of religion and a
cause of further feminisation.
HOW COULD THE CHURCH AVOID HAVING SUCH A LARGE
NUMBER OF HOMOSEXUALS AMONG THE CLERGY?
If church leaders wished to
address the problem, they could do many things:
·
It should be obvious that any
cleric who has sexual contact with a minor should be immediately defrocked. No
second chances. Such conduct indicates a weakness of character that makes him
unfit to be a leader in the Christian community.
·
Clerics who insist on
identifying with the gay lifestyle should also be removed, even if they claim
to be continent. Such a distortion of the male personality makes them unfit for
church leadership, which is based on male headship.
Men who are privately struggling with homosexual temptation can be
counselled; such cases demand individual counselling and perhaps treatment. A
more heterosexual celibate clergy would certainly be desirable but, all by
itself, it would not end sexual scandals.
One scandal, right
out of the infamous book Maria Monk, recently surfaced in Africa: A priest
impregnated a nun, arranged for an abortion in which she died, and then said
her funeral mass.
Heterosexuals are quite as capable of sexual
misbehaviour as homosexuals are, and Archbishop Marino, Jim Bakker, and Jimmy
Swaggart are disgraces to their world-wide ministries in this regard. So, it is
not only the Catholic Church that is having problems of sex scandals!
Heterosexual scandals are a big problem in
Protestantism, according to Jenkins, but because they do not fit into a story
line that can be used to attack celibacy and the authority of the Catholic
Church, they do not get nearly as much press.
A MARRIED CLERGY
Now, we may honestly ask; WOULD A MARRIED
CLERGY HELP THE CATHOLIC CHURCH
The honest answer is, “It has not been a
panacea for Protestant churches. It has not prevented them from having problems
with homosexual clergy.” The Episcopal Church has a married clergy and has long
had a substantial contingent of homosexual clergy (the Anglo-Catholic spike is
a stereotype in British fiction). Episcopalians tell me that laymen assume that
an unmarried priest (with rare exceptions) is a homosexual.
The Rector of the Ecumenical Institute at St. Mary’s in Baltimore
A good Presbyterian minister
replaced him with a large family. However, clerical marriage brings its own
problems, rarely acknowledged in the discussion of celibacy.
·
First, there is the problem of
clerical infidelity and divorce. The opportunity to marry does not seem to have
reduced the occurrence of clerical sexual sins, even among the conservative
churches.
·
These often have a
particularly destructive effect on a local church because of the violation of
the cleric’s marital vows and those of the woman (or women) with whom he was
having an affair.
Furthermore, what can be done with a
divorced pastor? Even if he is blameless (and generally the fault is shared),
he is no longer
·
A good model to his flock of
Christian marriage.
·
And finally, there is the
problem of clerical romances for those clergy looking to be married. This
includes not only the temptations of dating but also the inevitable gossip and
other disruptions of the church’s life.
·
Second, there are problems
raised even by good clerical marriages. Many clerical marriages are exemplary
and edifying, but the lot of a married cleric is not easy. The wife and
children are under the strictest scrutiny. The wife finds that she is not
mistress in the rectory, because the vestry wants to run every detail of her
life, down to counting the towels.
·
When the children misbehave
(whose children don’t?), they are a double burden to their father. If the
pastor has a small family, he is not an example of faithful generosity to
Christian congregations that aren’t even reproducing themselves.
·
If he has a large family, he
is condemned to live in poverty or become the object of resentment by
parishioners, who feel that they can’t afford a large family, so why should the
pastor?
WOULD ENDING CELIBACY PERHAPS
AT LEAST PROVIDE MORE CANDIDATES FOR A SHRINKING CATHOLIC CLERGY?
But the mainline denominations
have also all been hit with a clergy shortage, even though half of their
seminary students are now women. Without the women, large numbers of pulpits
would be vacant.
·
In Scotland
The Greek Orthodox Church in the United States
·
In modern Western cultures,
the ministry is not a popular profession: high educational requirements, low
pay, and little respect.
FURTHER, ISN’T CELIBACY UNNATURAL?
It must lead to problems if
not scandals. Couldn’t the energy that is needed to maintain celibacy be
directed elsewhere with more effect? The work that the hierarchy put into the
chronic struggle of the medieval church against concubinage might have been
better used in evangelising the laity or in missionary work. The Reformers gave
up the fight, deciding it was better to have a clergy in Christian marriage
than an unmarried clergy in concubinage, and put their efforts into much needed
instruction of the laity.
The Reformers argued that
celibacy is almost impossible for men, that it opens the Church to abuses and
scandals. They were certainly correct about the state of discipline in the late
medieval Church, but their arguments prove too much. As historians have noted,
the Reformers who released monks and nuns from their vows because continence
was impossible then had to convince unmarried young men and women that
continence was possible.
WHY THE TRADITION OF CELIBACY IS RETAINED
Many devout
Catholics have argued in favour of scrapping the unproductive and mandatory vow
of clerical celibacy. So we can now ask:
·
Why is the Catholic Church so stubborn about maintaining
celibacy?
·
Wouldn’t it be an ecumenical gesture to the Eastern
Orthodox and Protestants to allow a married clergy in some form?
To understand the reluctance of the Church to change its discipline in
the West, we must look at the history of clerical celibacy. The tradition,
despite allegations that it is of medieval origin and was motivated by a desire
to stop the alienation of church property, in fact dates back to apostolic
times.
In Christian Cochini’s book, The Apostolic Origins of Clerical Celibacy, he
surveys and analyses the practice of celibacy in the early Church. From the
fourth century we find widespread (although not unanimous) evidence that the
Church indeed ordained married men, but expected them to refrain from relations
after marriage. Early Christians felt great (although perhaps not totally
warranted) confidence in the ability of Christians to remain continent within
and outside marriage.
The Eastern Church in the
Council of Trullo (691) cited previous councils (Cochini claims they
misunderstood the earlier decrees) and confirmed what must have been an
existing practice (how ancient, we do not know) of allowing married priests to
have sexual relations with their wives. This became the law in all Orthodox
churches.
Despite this legislation, both
East and West felt a strong affinity between celibacy and the priesthood, but
expressed it in different ways. In the East a priest, if widowed could not
remarry; the bishop was chosen from the monks and was therefore always a
celibate; a married priest was expected to refrain from intercourse before
celebrating the Eucharist, which was therefore increasingly restricted to
Sunday.
In the West the problems that
a married but celibate clergy created led the Church to ordain only unmarried
men. Some Catholics (like Cochini and Stanley Jaki) allege that the East
changed the universal apostolic practice of clerical celibacy, and Rome’s
acceptance of married clergy in the Eastern Churches in communion with Rome has
always been somewhat grudging.
CHANGES IN DISCIPLINE
However, there may have been more than one Apostolic tradition, and in
any case the change in the East would have been within the authority of the
Church to adapt without rejecting any of the Apostolic traditions. Similarly,
the disciplines surrounding baptism changed radically in the early Church, as
baptism became not the beginning but the end of a process of conversion.
Penance was at first public, and a sinner after baptism had only one
opportunity in his lifetime to confess and do penance. Now Catholics are
encouraged to confess monthly.
·
The Catholic Church itself has
made changes in the law of celibacy. Even the Western Latin rite has received
married Protestant clergymen, ordained them, and allowed them the use of
marriage.
·
It has also ordained married
deacons and allowed them the normal use of marriage (contrary to the ancient
canons of the West), and it may decide to permit widowed deacons to remarry
(contrary to the canons of both East and West).
The Roman Catholic Church
therefore could, if it followed Orthodox practice, still maintain some
tradition of celibacy. But, it must be said, those traditions that still
connect the clerical state with celibacy (such as choosing bishops only from
monks) are also under attack in Orthodoxy, and most Orthodox churches will
ordain only married men as parish priests.
It would be difficult to
maintain any meaningful tradition of celibacy in the West if any large-scale
changes were made. Further, and worse, the mere fact of change would encourage
those in the Catholic Church who also want women priests and homosexual
marriages.
THE GOOD OF CELIBACY
Apart from an admirable conservatism and general
reluctance to change ancient traditions, what is the Christian value of
celibacy?
WHY DID THE TRADITION GROW UP IN THE FIRST PLACE?
Paul counselled even the
married laity to refrain from relations for a time so as to make space for
prayer (1 Cor. 7:5). Sexual relations, like eating food, is good, but
abstention from food and sex in preparation for prayer, especially the greatest
prayer, the Eucharist, is a sign that entry into the New Creation to some
extent precludes full participation in the old creation, even the good parts of
it.
In the Old Testament, despite
the importance of reproduction for the Jewish people, priests separated from
their wives during their time of service in the temple, and soldiers separated
from their wives while engaging in war, which for Israel
The early Church felt that
what was true for the Levites was a
fortiori true for the priests of the New Covenant. The priest’s identity
finds its centre in his offering of the Eucharist. All his other duties and
powers flow from this. He must be ever ready to offer the Eucharist, and indeed
the custom began early in the West of the daily Eucharist ("give us this
day our daily bread" was thought first of all to apply to the Eucharist).
It was also felt that the
marital relation tied a man too closely to the order of creation and made it
harder to offer the Eucharist with an undivided heart (simpliciter is the word used in the canons). Continence has a
positive role in preparing for a fruitful administration and reception of the
sacraments. If the laity were willing to abide by the ancient discipline of
abstaining from intercourse for three days before receiving the Eucharist and
for the whole of Lent, perhaps it would not be necessary for the clergy to be
celibate (no one has suggested this reform!).
·
Clerical celibacy was a source
of contention even in the patristic period; clerics were often punished for
violating the canons.
·
Celibacy is a special thorn in
the flesh of our sex-saturated culture and is therefore perhaps even more
important today than it was in previous generations, which held marriage more
in honour.
·
Celibacy proclaims that it is
possible to live without sexual pleasure, a rebuke to those who make sexual
pleasure the centre of their lives and justify horrendous actions (such as
abortion) by the impossibility of refraining from sex. The mere existence of a
celibate clergy that is largely faithful is a sign to all those who are not
married (and perhaps cannot marry) that it is not an impossible burden to
refrain from sex.
While a lively monasticism
might help the laity realise this, a parish clergy keeps celibacy before the
eye of the laity at all times. This involvement with the life of the laity
makes celibacy both more difficult and more valuable.
SIGNS OF TROUBLE
Perhaps celibacy also serves
in the Catholic Church like the canary in the mines:
·
Problems with celibacy might
be the first sign that something else has gone wrong.
·
Both celibacy and Christian
marriage must have a firm foundation in ordinary Christian asceticism: prayer,
fasting, almsgiving, and the reading of Scripture.
·
Especially in our
sex-saturated culture, anyone who is serious about maintaining chastity—married
or single—has to refrain from many amusements (such as much that’s on
television and in the movies), and has to be serious about prayer.
Even the sacrament of
confession has been neglected today by priests at a time when there is all the
more need for spiritual counsel and direction.
·
The difficulties with celibacy
are simply an egregious manifestation of a general lack of discipline in the
Church, a discipline that must be mostly self-discipline, and a symptom of a
laxity and worldliness that were encouraged by some of the changes after the
Second Vatican Council.
·
Christians can live out the
apostolic faith in different ways. The Roman Catholic Church can maintain its
tradition of celibacy in the Latin rite without regarding the tradition of
other churches as second class. The celibacy of one part of the clergy would be
a valuable gift that the Roman Church could offer to the rest of Christendom.
A SPECIAL RESPONSIBILITY
Because of the chronic hostility of the world, the Church must maintain
the discipline of celibacy with great strictness. Human nature will not change
until the Parousia, but laxity and immorality are not inescapable. Not every
period of the Church has been as bad as the current one (although some have
been worse).
The nineteenth-century French
skeptic Ernest Renan was no friend of the Catholic Church, but he says of the
clerical scandals of his time: "The fact is that what is commonly said
about the morality of the clergy is, so far as my experience goes, absolutely
devoid of foundation. I spent thirteen years of my life under the charge of
priests, and I never saw the shadow of a scandal [je n’ai pas vu l’ombre d’un scandale]; I have known no priests but
good priests."
While sexual desire will continue to give us trouble until the end of
time, ecclesiastical practices and discipline can be adopted that may produce
clergy who lead exemplary lives. It bears repeating that the vast majority of
today’s scandals in the Catholic Church are due to homosexual priests, who
would not marry and raise families even ifthey were given the opportunity. The
problem is how to eliminate homosexuality from the priesthood. The chief remedy
for difficulties all clergy experience—Catholic, Protestant, and Orthodox—is
not more therapy and better legal and disciplinary procedures (although all
these are necessary), but prayer, penance, and spiritual discipline, by the
clergy and laity of all denominations. Both clerical (and lay) celibacy and
clerical (and lay) marriage should be exemplary.
While Christian celibacy and Christian
marriage can be a witness to our society, I think celibacy is both more
difficult and more needed today. The clergy bear a special responsibility
before God and man, for as Chaucer said,
"If
gold rust, what will iron do?"
Senior Editor Leon J. Podles
<mailto:Leepodles@cs.com> holds a Ph.D. in English from the University of Virginia Florida
Home <http://www.touchstonemag.com> - Online
Store <http://www.touchstonemag.com/docs/navigation_docs/products.html> -
Archives
<http://www.touchstonemag.com/docs/issues/back_issues_contents.html> -
Speakers & Conferences <http://www.touchstonemag.com/docs/navigation_docs/conferences.html>
- Contact Us <http://www.touchstonemag.com/docs/navigation_docs/contact.html
Downloaded
and improved on by Rev. Prof. J. J. Kenez for and on behalf of the bona- fide
members of A2 C3 organisation.
CHAPTER
TEN
CELIBACY AND THE PRIESTHOOD
ARGUMENTS IN FAVOUR OF THE IDEALS OF
CLERICAL CELIBACY
Fundamentalist attacks on priestly celibacy come in a
number of different forms—not all compatible with one another. There is almost
no other subject about which so many different
confusions exist. The first and most
basic confusion is thinking of priestly celibacy as a dogma or doctrine—a
central and ir-reformable part of the faith, believed by Catholics to come from
Jesus and the apostles.
Thus some Fundamentalists make a great deal of a
biblical reference to Peter’s mother-in-law (Mark 1:30), apparently supposing
that, if Catholics only knew that Peter had been married, they would be unable
to regard him as the first pope.
Again, Fundamentalist time lines of "Catholic
inventions", a popular literary form, assign "mandatory priestly
celibacy" to this or that year in Church history, as if prior to this
requirement the Church could not have been Catholic.
These Fundamentalists are often surprised to learn
that even today celibacy is not the rule for all Catholic priests.
In fact, for
Eastern Rite Catholics, married priests are the norm, just as they are for Orthodox and Oriental Christians. Even in the Eastern churches, though, there
have always been some restrictions on marriage and ordination. Although married
men may become priests, unmarried priests may not marry, and married priests,
if widowed, may not remarry.
Moreover, there is an ancient Eastern discipline of
choosing bishops from the ranks of the celibate monks, so their bishops are all
unmarried. The tradition in the Western
or Latin-Rite Church
Even today, though, exceptions are made. For example,
there are married Latin-Rite priests who are converts from Lutheranism and
Episcopalianism.
As these variations and exceptions indicate, priestly
celibacy is not an unchangeable dogma, like the Trinity, but a disciplinary
rule, like requiring clergy to have formal theological education (a discipline
followed in most non-Catholic churches). The fact that Peter was married is no
more contrary to the Catholic faith than the fact that the pastor of the
nearest Maronite Catholic Church is married.
IS MARRIAGE MANDATORY?
Another, quite different Fundamentalist confusion is the
notion that:
· Celibacy is unbiblical, or even "unnatural."
· Every man, it is claimed, must obey the biblical injunction to "Be
fruitful and multiply" (Gen. 1:28); and
· Paul commands that "each man should have his own wife and each woman
her own husband" in 1 Cor. 7:2.
· It is even argued that celibacy somehow "causes," or at least
correlates with higher incidence of, illicit sexual behaviour or
perversion.
All of this is false. Although most people are at some
point in their lives called to the married state, the vocation of celibacy is
explicitly advocated—as well as practised—by both Jesus and Paul.
So far from "commanding" marriage in 1
Corinthians 7, in that
very chapter Paul actually endorses celibacy for those capable of it: "To
the unmarried and the widows I say that it is well for them to remain single as
I am. But if they cannot exercise self-control, they should marry. For it is
better to marry than to be aflame with passion" (7:8-9).
It is only because of this "temptation to
immorality" (7:2) that Paul gives the teaching about each man and woman
having a spouse and giving each other their "conjugal rights" (7:3);
he specifically clarifies, "I say this by
way of concession, not of command. I wish that all were as I myself am. But
each has his own special gift from God, one of one kind and one of
another" (7:6-7, emphasis added).
Paul even goes on to make a case for preferring celibacy to marriage:
"Are
you free from a wife? Do not seek marriage. . . those who marry will have
worldly troubles, and I would spare you that. . . . The unmarried man is
anxious about the affairs of the Lord, how to please the Lord; but the married
man is anxious about worldly affairs, how to please his wife, and his interests
are divided. And the unmarried woman or girl is anxious about the affairs of
the Lord, how to be holy in body and spirit; but the married woman is anxious
about worldly affairs, how to please her husband" (7:27 -34).
Paul’s conclusion: He who marries "does well; and
he who refrains from marriage will do better" (7:38 ). Paul
was not the first apostle to conclude that celibacy is, in some sense,
"better" than marriage.
After Jesus’
teaching in Matthew 19 on divorce and remarriage, the disciples exclaimed,
"If such is the case between a man and his wife, it is better not to
marry" (Matt 19:10 ).
This remark prompted Jesus’ teaching on the value of celibacy "for the
sake of the kingdom": "Not
all can accept this word, but only those to whom it is granted. Some are
incapable of marriage because they were born so; some, because they were made
so by others; some, because they have renounced marriage for the sake of the kingdom of God 19:11 –12).
Notice
that this sort of celibacy "for the sake of the kingdom" is a gift, a
call that is not granted to all, or even most people, but is granted to some.
Other people are called to marriage. It is true that too
often individuals in both vocations fall short of the requirements of their
state, but this does not diminish either vocation, nor does it mean that the
individuals in question were "not really called" to that vocation.
The sin of a priest doesn’t necessarily prove that he never should have taken a
vow of celibacy, any more than the sin of a married man or woman proves that he
or she never should have married. It is possible for us to fall short of our
own true calling. Celibacy is neither
unnatural nor unbiblical. "Be fruitful and multiply" is not binding
upon every individual; rather, it is a general precept for the human race.
Otherwise, every unmarried man and woman of marrying age would be in a state of
sin by remaining single and Jesus and Paul would be guilty of advocating sin as
well as committing it.
"THE HUSBAND OF ONE
WIFE”
Another Fundamentalist argument, related to the last, is
that marriage is mandatory for Church
leaders. For Paul says a bishop must be "the husband of one
wife," and "must manage his own household well, keeping his children
submissive and respectful in every way; for if a man does not know how to
manage his own household, how can he care for God’s Church?" (1 Tim. 3:2,
4–5).
This means, they argue, that only a man who has
demonstrably looked after a family is fit to care for God’s Church; an
unmarried man, it is implied, is somehow untried or unproven. This interpretation leads to obvious
absurdities. For one, if "the husband of one wife" really meant that
a bishop had to be married, then by
the same logic "keeping his children submissive and respectful in every
way" would mean that he had to
have children. Childless husbands (or even fathers of only one child, since Paul uses the plural) would not qualify.
In fact, following this style of interpretation to its
final absurdity, since Paul speaks of bishops meeting these requirements (not
of their having met them, or of candidates for bishop meeting them), it
would even follow that an ordained bishop whose wife or children died would
become unqualified for ministry! Clearly such excessive literalism must be
rejected.
The theory that Church leaders must be married also
contradicts the obvious fact that Paul himself, an eminent Church leader, was
single and happy to be so. Unless Paul was a hypocrite, he could hardly have
imposed a requirement on bishops, which he did not himself meet. Consider, too,
the implications regarding Paul’s positive attitude toward celibacy in 1
Corinthians 7: the married have worldly anxieties and divided interests, yet only they are qualified to be bishops;
whereas the unmarried have single-minded devotion to the Lord, yet are barred
from ministry! The suggestion that the
unmarried man is somehow untried or unproven is equally absurd. Each vocation
has its own proper challenges:
·
the celibate man must exercise
"self-control" (1 Cor. 7:9);
·
the husband must love and care
for his wife selflessly (Eph. 5:25 ); and
·
the father must raise his
children well (1 Tim. 3:4).
Every man
must meet Paul’s standard of "managing his household well," even if
his "household" is only himself. If anything, the chaste celibate man
meets a higher standard than the
respectable family man. Clearly, the
point of Paul’s requirement that a bishop be "the husband of one
wife" is not that he must have
one wife, but that he must have only
one wife.
Expressed conversely, Paul is saying that a bishop must not have unruly or undisciplined
children (not that he must have
children who are well behaved), and must not be married more than once (not that he must be married).
The
truth is, it is precisely those who are uniquely "concerned about the
affairs of the Lord" (1 Cor. 7:32), those to whom it has been given to
"renounce marriage for the sake of the kingdom" (Matt. 19:12), who
are ideally suited to follow in the footsteps of those who have "left
everything" to follow Christ (cf. Matt. 19:27)—the calling of the clergy
and consecrated religious (i.e., monks and nuns).
Thus Paul warned Timothy, a young bishop, that those
called to be "soldiers" of Christ must avoid "civilian
pursuits": "Share in suffering as a good soldier of Christ Jesus. No
soldier on service gets entangled in civilian pursuits, since his aim is to
satisfy the one who enlisted him" (2 Tim. 2:3–4). In light of Paul’s
remarks in 1 Corinthians 7 about the advantages of celibacy, marriage and
family clearly stand out in connection with these "civilian
pursuits."
An example of
ministerial celibacy can also be seen in the Old Testament. The prophet Jeremiah,
as part of his prophetic ministry, was forbidden to take a wife: "The word
of the Lord came to me: ‘You shall not take a wife, nor shall you have sons or
daughters in this place’" (Jer. 16:1–2).
Of
course, this is different from Catholic priestly celibacy, which is not
divinely ordained; yet the divine precedent still supports the legitimacy of
the human institution.
Forbidden to Marry?
Yet none of these passages give us an example of humanly mandated
celibacy. Jeremiah’s celibacy was mandatory, but it was from the Lord. Paul’s
remark to Timothy about "civilian pursuits" is only a general
admonition, not a specific command; and even in 1 Corinthians 7 Paul qualifies
his strong endorsement of celibacy by adding: "I say this for your own
benefit, not to lay any restraint upon you, but to promote good order and to
secure your undivided devotion to the Lord" (7:35).
This brings us to
Fundamentalism’s last line of attack: that, by requiring at least some of its clerics and its religious not to
marry, the Catholic Church falls under Paul’s condemnation in 1 Timothy 4:3
against apostates who "forbid marriage." In fact, the Catholic Church forbids no one
to marry. No one is required to take a vow of celibacy; those who do, do so
voluntarily. They "renounce marriage" (Matt. 19:12 ); no one forbids it to them.
Any Catholic who doesn’t wish to take such a vow doesn’t have to, and is almost
always free to marry with the Church’s blessing. The Church simply elects
candidates for the priesthood (or, in the Eastern rites, for the episcopacy)
from among those who voluntarily renounce marriage.
But is there scriptural precedent for this practice of
restricting membership in a group to those who take a voluntary vow of
celibacy? Yes. Paul, writing once again to Timothy, mentions an order of widows
pledged not to remarry (1 Tim 5:9-16); in particular advising: "But refuse
to enroll younger widows; for when they grow wanton against Christ they desire
to marry, and so they incur condemnation for having violated their first
pledge" (5:11–12).
This "first pledge" broken by remarriage
cannot refer to previous wedding vows, for Paul does not condemn widows for
remarrying (cf. Rom.
The New Testament Church
THE DIGNITY OF CELIBACY AND MARRIAGE
Most
Catholics marry, and all Catholics are taught to venerate marriage as a holy
institution—a sacrament, an action of God upon our souls; one of the holiest
things we encounter in this life.
In fact, it
is precisely the holiness of marriage that makes celibacy precious; for only
what is good and holy in itself can be given up for God as a sacrifice.
Just as
fasting presupposes the goodness of food, celibacy presupposes the goodness of
marriage. To despise celibacy, therefore, is to undermine marriage itself—as
the early Fathers pointed out. Celibacy
is also a life-affirming institution.
In the Old
Testament, where celibacy was almost unknown, the childless were often despised
by others and themselves; only through children, it was felt, did one acquire
value. By
renouncing marriage, the celibate affirms the intrinsic value of each human
life in itself, regardless of offspring.
Finally, celibacy is an eschatological sign to the Church, a living-out
in the present of the universal celibacy of heaven:
"For
in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like
angels in heaven" (Matt. 22:30 ).
All these are very nice arguments in support
of clerical celibacy, if and only if those who take them keep it religiously.
When a greater percentage of clerics perjure the vow even at their canonical
ordinations, it becomes criminally sinful! That is exactly what this group of
concerned Catholic parents are stating unequivocally. We cherish and respect
the few Rev. Gentlemen who are continence. We love them. But they are in the
minority these days. They are not up to 0.05 % any more.
This calls for
immediate remedial actions before our daughters are debased by these “wolves in
sheep’s clothing” masquerading as priests in our parishes and institutions of
higher learning! These naïve adolescents believe whatever these renegade
priests or pastors tell them, and so are very vulnerable! How do you expect
them to be good Christian wives and ideal mothers when they eventually settle
down. “Nemo dat, quot non habet” is a well-known maxim, So how can they actually rear pious Catholic
children or become mothers to reverend fathers and sisters? Think about the
vicious circle that we are trying to pre-empt, not the logic beautifully
expressed above by an erudite theologian! The facts on the ground suggest
voluntary celibacy.
This and only this is
our grouse! Who will then teach our offspring ‘right from wrong’ when it is
their parish pastors that teach them fornication and initiate them into
unbridled sexual promiscuity? Asks Rev. Prof. J. J.
Kenez!
CELIBACY ISN'T THE PROBLEM
Cardinal
John J. O'Connor
It's
remarkable how determined some media and other people are that we priests
should be married. How they sympathise with us over the supposed cruelties of
celibacy that is being imposed upon us by a Pope, who purportedly, has no
understanding whatsoever of the compassion of Jesus.
The
tabloid writers may be the most maudlin, but most of them don't present our
case with a fraction of the vehemence of some of those serious journalists who
have taken up the cause of marriage for priests, as a mask of their own hatred
of the church. The latest journalistic outcry on the part of some of the Irish
press is illustrative. Two, or is it three, Irish bishops have questioned the
discipline of celibacy for priests. The Primate of Ireland, Cardinal Cahal
Daly, has questioned their questioning. The press is outraged. Who does
Cardinal Daly think he is to question another bishop?
I
happen to think highly of those Irish bishops. They happen to be friends of
mine, as is Cardinal Cahal Daly. But I disagree with them strongly. I agree
just as strongly with Cardinal Daly. The disaffected elements of the Irish
press can question what right I have, as a bishop of another country, to
disagree with a couple of Irish bishops. But this is a Church issue of concern
to every bishop, not a national issue, a political issue, a patriotic issue.
The fact
is
that certain sections of the media cannot accept today what they have never
really accepted through the centuries: 'Ubi Petrus, ibi ecclesia' - 'Where
Peter is, there is the Church.' We believe that John Paul II is Peter, as were
John Paul I and Paul Vl and John XXIII and countless others before them.
To some segments of the Irish press, the American
press, the Austrian and other presses and to a certain number of other people,
our belief is both absurd and inflammatory. That's the real problem.
And
that's really what is at issue here, not with the Irish bishops, of course, but
with those who would exploit their speculations and those of others. Neither
they, nor other pundits can accept any teaching authority other than their own.
'FREEDOM OF CONSCIENCE'
Isn't it extraordinary, for example, how many of the
current spate of articles calling for abolition of celibacy always chant the
same litany about 'freedom of conscience' regarding abortion, sexual activity,
receiving Communion regardless of life-style, marital status, etc.?
Everything has become a 'human right' and as
soon as this Pope
dies,
they assure us smugly, Catholics will be liberated! Even without this incessant
litany of alleged oppressions said to be single-handedly perpetrated by the
current pontiff, I have to disagree with the reasons most frequently given for
abolishing celibacy.
One of
these is simply outrageous, namely that it would end such tragedies as
paedophilia. And this, after all that has been published on this horror, all
the statistics gathered? Are those who propose this unaware that most sexual
abuse, including paedophilia, apparently occurs within families, not excluding
parental abuse of children and younger by older siblings? Do they not know that
married and single people of all walks of life are accused of perpetrating such
abuse on children and other minors? No one has ever been able to correlate
celibacy with sexual abuse. Some priests have perpetrated some sexual abuses.
That's tragic. But it has not been directly the fault of clerical celibacy.
SEXUAL RELATIONS
Some priests are tempted to engage in sexual
relations with women. Marriage, it is said, would cure their temptations.
Perhaps, this is only true in some cases. But are no married men tempted to be
unfaithful to their wives? Are there none of the huge number of divorces in the
US
Human nature is weak. Would a priest who
married a particular woman never again have 'sexual problems'? That is, would
he lose his humanity, hence, his weakness?
But of course, given a priest's training and
self-discipline and understanding and sensitivity, one might expect his
marriage to be idyllic. Would there be no illness, no poverty, no afflicted
children, no drugs, no drunkenness, no boredom, and no discouragement? Is that
the case? Is it honest to say of a priest who is unhappy because
he is
required to be celibate: 'Only lift the requirement, and he will be happy'?
In my
judgment, but wanting to be both sympathetic and realistic, many priests are no
more exempt from an impossibly romantic concept of marriage than are many very
young lay persons in love. Some expectations are rarely fulfilled, if not
indeed, unfulfillable. Some marriages are, indeed, wonderfully happy, bordering
on the idyllic. But pain free, sorrow free, trouble free? No! Never ever!
UNDERSTANDING
Make no mistake. We have some priests who are
unhappy because they may not marry and continue to function as priests. I
understand that and feel for them very sincerely. Their unhappiness is no
reason either to condemn them or to abolish celibacy. I meet with a certain
number of them who wish to marry. I talk very sympathetically with them because
I honestly feel they’re suffering. Ultimately, some are dispensed and do marry. Some happily, some unhappily.
That is exactly the point being raised by this
pious remedial organisation. Clerical celibacy ought to be optional neither
compulsory nor mandatory!
I
understand them. I don't like to see them unhappy. I believe they know I want
to help them. They also know that I believe wholeheartedly in the incalculable
value of celibacy and in the mystery of grace that makes it not only tolerable,
but immensely
liberating.
They know that I will encourage them to remain celibate and to continue as celibate
priests, but that if they leave, I will condemn neither them nor the women they
marry, but will try to expedite a request for dispensation, if they wish and
Holy See
approves.
I try
to treat them and their spouses sensitively, whatever happens. No kudos to me
for this, I don't personally know any bishop who doesn't do the same. Priests
tempted are still my brother priests, and I love them.
But I
know other priests who are unhappy for reasons quite unrelated to celibacy.
It's the human condition and again priests are not exempt. Marriage would not
change it. We all struggle to be happy, but priests seem to hear in a special
way the words of
Christ
to the rich young man: 'if you would be
perfect, go, sell what you have and give to the poor. Then come follow me.'
We are told in the Scriptures that the young man turned away sorrowing, because
he had many possessions. And Jesus, too, was sad, because He had loved the
young man and hated to see him lose what might have been his - not his soul,
but a very special friendship with Jesus.
Most
priests, most men and women religious, have never had to give up great material
wealth to follow Jesus in this special way. Most of us come from families of
very modest means. But we are asked by Jesus, to give up that which can be
worth far more than money or other possessions, the love of a good wife, the
pleasure of happy,
healthy
children of our own, a home that is ours, truly ours. For some, it's harder
than for others. Some turn away sorrowing, because they love Jesus and He loves
them.
But
most try to use the sacrifice cheerily, heavy though their hearts may be at
times to follow Him in a way to which only a few are called, and to be His
close friends, not pretending to love Him more than others, or to be loved more
intimately in turn. Priests are no
better than millions of married and single people in the world. But we have
made a choice. I don't think many of us are looking for sympathy even from our
friends, and certainly we don't need the crocodile tears of the Church's
less-than-covert enemies.
SHORTAGE OF VOCATIONS
We cannot ignore the repeated proposal that
our shortage of priests and prospective priests is attributable to the
requirement for celibacy. This seems to be the primary concern of one or two
Irish bishops. I disagree with them. Virtually endless studies of
men
eligible for the priesthood have been done. Why doesn't that answer, if true,
leap out at us? But it does not. I talk to literally hundreds of young men and
women about vocations to religious life.
The
'problem' of celibacy is generally far down on their list of
reasons
for hesitating or turning away. Why would so many be advancing into early
middle age with no intention and often no serious desire to marry if celibacy
were the primary obstacle to priesthood or a religious vocation? I'm not
speaking of profligates.
I'm
speaking of good, decent people. On the contrary, I find many men who have
thought little about becoming priests, women of becoming religious, because no
one ever seriously asked them. Indeed, some will tell me that their parents,
peers or even priests
and
religious women have discouraged them! There are far more complicated reasons
for shortages of vocations.
Why
did we go for centuries with huge numbers of vocations in the United
States
believe seriously that men and women are more
'sexed' today (not more tempted by a promiscuous environment, but more
'sexed')?
Nor do
I believe there has been a quantum change in the need or desire for
companionship. Had those who became priests 50 years ago, as myself, or women
who became religious, no desire to marry? Were we some kind of freaks? Has
celibate life been easier for us? Fewer hormones perhaps? I don't believe any
such thing. It was
tough
then, it's tough now.
The
Church will survive and flourish with a celibate priesthood. And one day,
sooner rather than later but in any event in God's time - we will be bursting
our seams once again with joy-filled healthy celibate priests willing to make
the sacrifice. God will wait.
Taken from the Friday, 18 August 1995 issue of "The Irish Family". The IrishFamily,
P.O. Box 7Co. Westmeath. IRELAND
Phone/Fax: 044-42987.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Provided courtesy of: Eternal Word Television Network,
COMMENTARY:
The Cardinal was and must be seen as being apologetic from his Irish
point of view. He, however did not offer us any answer to the existential
question he rightly posed at the end of his erudite paper:
Yes, times have changed, but are we to
believe seriously that men and women are more 'sexed' today (not more tempted
by a promiscuous environment, but more 'sexed')?
The honest answer to that crucial question is an affirmative YES!
Judging
from his age, he grew up in a more clement time akin to the Victorian era. So
he cannot and will never be in the position to comprehend that truly our
children now live in a computer age and that morality has gown down the drain.
We have no virgins at the teenage bracket nowadays, talk less of the adolescent
ages. Right from primary school to tertiary levels of education, 7 – 29 years
of age, the present crop of laity are scandalised, corrupted and demoralised by
the very teachers that ought to inculcate morality. The sad situation is
worsened when the trained pastors or priests who should evangelise and teach
them the catechism of the church are the very agents of promiscuous indulgence.
Paedophiles
are not a preserve of the American culture. It is here with us and illicit
heterosexual relationships have joined forces with homosexual and lesbian
versions of moral depravity to compound the already psychopathological state of
incontinence in our parishes.
Candidates
for the religious vocations, male and female alike do not fall from the skies
over here in Africa . They are the products
of this depraved generation that have been scandalised and initiated into
promiscuous lifestyles. They are so involved that they see it as the norm in
the society rather than an aberration that should be frowned at! Do you blame
them? Westernisation has thorn them away from their cultural roots so much so,
that they neither know the Christian social norms nor the traditional mores
their grandparents observed.
Just
like their parents and teachers, they owe no true allegiance to any one
religious denomination. There are more than a thousand mushroom churches to
choose from and there are no confessionals in most of them! Morality today has
no standards. So to expect honest vows of celibacy from the products of our
society is like expecting a refreshing drink of water from a stone in a desert.
Just like Our Lord Jesus, the Christ forewarned
in the New Testament narratives, “if the blind lead the blind, both will fall
into a dark pit”. And the Old Latin adage sums it up succinctly: ‘Nemo
dat, quot non habet’‘ And this, unfortunately, is the true position of
things.
It is
not only foolhardy but also dishonest to expect our naïve young men and women
to keep vows they are ill equipped for since all their growing years they have
indulged in illicit sexual relationships! Most married parents cannot even keep
their marital vows, so how do you expect these kids to live a life no one had
modelled for them? Therefore, we are resolute in demanding that the Catholic
Church change with the prevailing climate and dutifully make CELIBACY OPTIONAL.
Even
the Biblical references do not hold any water. All the apostles were married
except for John the Evangelist, who remained a virgin by choice. As a reward he
was the blessed author of both the angelic gospel and the divine apocalypse.
And we also should realise and know that sexual intercourse once indulged in overpowers
the culprit for life. It is a well-known “all or none principle” in the science
physiological psychology. Only genuine virgins right from childhood can
practise celibacy! Other genres that can easily do so are those suffering from
endogenic impotency. Whether male or female, “some are eunuchs by nature, some
are made eunuchs by others and some have made themselves eunuchs for the
kingdom of heaven”
Saul
of Tarsus Damascus
LET’S
STOP THE BUFFOONERY OF IMITATING THE IMPOSSIBLE! EVEN THOUGH JESUS RECOMMENDED
IT TO THOSE WHO COULD WITH THE SPECIAL GRACE OF THE HOLY SPIRIT, IT WAS
OPTIONAL, NEVER MANDATORY NOR COMPULSORY! WE CAN NEITHER EQUATE OUR HUMAN
NATURE WITH THAT OF JESUS CHRIST, WHO WE ARE MEANT TO BELIEVE WAS TRULY GOD AND
TRULY HUMAN NOR EMULATE HIM COMPLETELY. MOREOVER HE HAD NOT REACHED THE AGE OF
MARRIAGE IN HIS CULTURE AND EPOCH BEFORE HE WAS CRUCIFIED!
Chastity
is not same as virginity. It is deceitful to assume that a non-virgin can later
in life become chaste! Chastity is the state of a married virgin who performs
the roles and duties of the sacrament of matrimony without committing adultery.
It is not for repentant girls and boys who had been promiscuous in their early
life! No amount of contrition can obliterate the concupiscence of sexual drive
from the nervous system of anyone that has willingly indulged in any form of
heterosexual or homosexual relationship prior to ordination! Ask any qualified
Clinical Psychologist or Psychiatrist you know!
So all
said and done, this association demands of the Pope and his Catholic hierarchy
that we revert to the optional status of clerical celibacy as was the tradition
with the earl Church Fathers! This is the only sane to do in the face of the
prevailing circumstances and the low standards of morality within the clergy
and the religious as at now!
Commentary
was contributed by Rev. Prof. J. J. Kenez
CHAPTER ELEVEN
NEW INFORMATION ON MANDATORY
CELIBACY AND CLERGY ABUSE
Louise Haggett
In recent weeks, several local and national media have published and televised statements by church-sponsored psychologists and others who say, “Celibacy doesn’t cause child abuse” or that paedophilia in the Roman Catholic celibate priesthood is “no different than the general population.” The fact is, as some acknowledge, there has been very little scientific research conducted that isolates Roman Catholic priests as a target audience, from that of the general population. Therefore, the issue of celibacy claims as to its relationship to child sexual abuse cannot be established either positively or negatively.
The Catholic hierarchy has formed task forces in the past, similar to that, which will be gathering inBoston
In recent weeks, several local and national media have published and televised statements by church-sponsored psychologists and others who say, “Celibacy doesn’t cause child abuse” or that paedophilia in the Roman Catholic celibate priesthood is “no different than the general population.” The fact is, as some acknowledge, there has been very little scientific research conducted that isolates Roman Catholic priests as a target audience, from that of the general population. Therefore, the issue of celibacy claims as to its relationship to child sexual abuse cannot be established either positively or negatively.
The Catholic hierarchy has formed task forces in the past, similar to that, which will be gathering in
Because there are no studies, the Center for the Study
of Religious Issues (CSRI) was begun to fill this research void.
·
The first study asked priests
how they felt about mandatory celibacy.
·
The second study in 1999 was
conducted to determine if the demographics might be different between victims
of celibate priest predators vs. the general population.
CSRI’s findings were then compared to a 1994 literary
study combining statistics from nineteen (19) “general population” studies from
a paper produced by Dr. David Finkelhor, Director of the Crimes Against
Children Research Center at the University of New
Hampshire Boston
The following is some of the information revealed when
the General Population Victims (GPV) were compared wit the Roman
Catholic Clergy Victims (RCCV)
Variable: GPV RCCV
Age at time of abuse 7-10 years old 10-15 years old
Age of offender Average Early 30s 53.3% over 40
Gender of victims 5-10% male 63.6% male
Length of abuse 68.5% one time only 19.2% one time only
Abuse one year or longer mostly incest 55.5%
Penetration* 48%, mostly incest 98.5%
Variable: GPV RCCV
Age at time of abuse 7-10 years old 10-15 years old
Age of offender Average Early 30s 53.3% over 40
Gender of victims 5-10% male 63.6% male
Length of abuse 68.5% one time only 19.2% one time only
Abuse one year or longer mostly incest 55.5%
Penetration* 48%, mostly incest 98.5%
*According
to Finkelhor, the longer the abuse, the more chance for penetration.
Analyses from above:
1. Finkelhor-19: General Population Studies: predators are paedophiles (victims under 10 years old).
2. Finkelhor 19: male victims account for 10-20% of abuse. The victims of Catholic clergy predators are 63.6% male.
3. Finkelhor 19: 68.5% of sexual abuse is one time only. Only 19.2% of Catholic clergy abuse are one-time only.
4. Finkelhor 19: abuse that lasts one year or more generally applies to just incest cases. 55.5% of abuse by Catholic clergy lasts one year or longer.
5. Finkelhor19: 48 % of abuse among the general population involves penetration, occurring
mostly in incest cases.
CSRI: 98.5% of Catholic clergy abuse involves penetration. (According to Finkelhor, penetration is even more emotionally damaging.)
6. Finkelhor 19: the average age of the offender is “early 30's.” 53.3% of Catholic clergy predators are over the age of 40*.
1. Finkelhor-19: General Population Studies: predators are paedophiles (victims under 10 years old).
2. Finkelhor 19: male victims account for 10-20% of abuse. The victims of Catholic clergy predators are 63.6% male.
3. Finkelhor 19: 68.5% of sexual abuse is one time only. Only 19.2% of Catholic clergy abuse are one-time only.
4. Finkelhor 19: abuse that lasts one year or more generally applies to just incest cases. 55.5% of abuse by Catholic clergy lasts one year or longer.
5. Finkelhor
CSRI: 98.5% of Catholic clergy abuse involves penetration. (According to Finkelhor, penetration is even more emotionally damaging.)
6. Finkelhor 19: the average age of the offender is “early 30's.” 53.3% of Catholic clergy predators are over the age of 40*.
Priests were generally ordained between the ages 25 and 27, having spent 10-15 years in seminary. According to qualitative research conducted by Johns Hopkins psychologist A. W. Richard Sipe, priests who had their sexuality suppressed at12 or 13 years of age as seminarians, began struggling with their sexuality within 9-13 years after ordination.
CSRI’s demographics of married
priests who return to public ministry indicate that 38% of them left during the
same period. An additional 23% left within 5-8 years and 21%, between 14 and 18
years. Another quantitative study by
Schoenherr and Young, 1985, which was commissioned by the bishops, concluded
that 90% of priests who have left church ministry did so because of mandatory
celibacy.
The issue of extra-familial abuse of
young males in CSRI’s study could not be examined against the Finkelhor 19
studies because some of the Finkelhor 19 subjects might be Catholic clergy
victims, thus providing an inaccurate reading of “general population” male
victims in this comparison. Some may conclude that Catholic priest perpetrators
may have a tendency toward homosexuality.
While it may be the case in some instances, we can look to studies conducted among prisoners where it is indicated that lack of normal sexual release can promote deviant sexual behaviour, especially among heterosexuals. Therefore, no conclusion either way regarding Catholic priests is possible at this time. This may be only the beginning of new research regarding Roman Catholic clergy abuse, but it does raise some questions:
1. If there is no conclusive evidence of a relationship between mandatory celibacy and paedophilia, why does the hierarchy discourage this very specific research?
2. If bishops refer to priest predators publicly as paedophiles, why are priests told privately that they are not?
3. If predators are using the priesthood as a “hiding place” for their supposedly pre-disposed problem, why is the average age of a predator priest (40+)--at least ten years older than an average predator (30) as indicated in general population studies?
4. Why are the other characteristics of the abuse of priests so different from victims among the general population?
BIBLIOGRAPHY:
Gill, James J. 2002. Celibacy Doesn’t Cause Child Abuse. Feb. 17.Hartford
Greeley, Andrew. 2002. Celibacy Not Priests’ Problem. Feb. 22.Chicago
Fraze, Barb. 1993. Canadian Bishops Move Vigorously on Sex Abuse Problems. July 2. NationalCatholic Reporter. P3
Connors, Fr. Canice. 1993. The Issue of Sexual Misconduct & The Clergy, as presented at the 25th Annual National Federation of Priests Council (NFPC) Convention and House of Delegates. May 3-7- 1993. Hyatt Regency, Chicago. (author in attendance)
The following article appeared in theBoston March 17, 2002 , validating this unpublished study that was
privately provided to Michael Paulson, Globe staff writer.
While it may be the case in some instances, we can look to studies conducted among prisoners where it is indicated that lack of normal sexual release can promote deviant sexual behaviour, especially among heterosexuals. Therefore, no conclusion either way regarding Catholic priests is possible at this time. This may be only the beginning of new research regarding Roman Catholic clergy abuse, but it does raise some questions:
1. If there is no conclusive evidence of a relationship between mandatory celibacy and paedophilia, why does the hierarchy discourage this very specific research?
2. If bishops refer to priest predators publicly as paedophiles, why are priests told privately that they are not?
3. If predators are using the priesthood as a “hiding place” for their supposedly pre-disposed problem, why is the average age of a predator priest (40+)--at least ten years older than an average predator (30) as indicated in general population studies?
4. Why are the other characteristics of the abuse of priests so different from victims among the general population?
BIBLIOGRAPHY:
Gill, James J. 2002. Celibacy Doesn’t Cause Child Abuse. Feb. 17.
Greeley, Andrew. 2002. Celibacy Not Priests’ Problem. Feb. 22.
Fraze, Barb. 1993. Canadian Bishops Move Vigorously on Sex Abuse Problems. July 2. NationalCatholic Reporter. P3
Connors, Fr. Canice. 1993. The Issue of Sexual Misconduct & The Clergy, as presented at the 25th Annual National Federation of Priests Council (NFPC) Convention and House of Delegates. May 3-7- 1993. Hyatt Regency, Chicago. (author in attendance)
The following article appeared in the
PRIEST ABUSE CASES FOCUS ON
ADOLESCENTS
By Michael Paulson and Thomas
Farragher,
Globe Staff, 3/17/2002
It has become the shorthand label for a sex abuse
scandal that now haunts most of the dioceses around the nation: the paedophile priest crisis. But the vast majority of priests who
sexually abuse minors choose adolescent boys - not young children - as their
targets, according to lawyers and academics who study clergy sexual abuse.
Although public attention has focused on a handful
of alleged serial paedophiles such as defrocked priest John J. Geoghan of Boston
''There have been very few instances where clergy
got involved with prepubescent children,'' said Rev. James J. Gill, a Jesuit
priest and physician who directs the Christian Institute for the Study of Human
Sexuality in Chicago
That pattern of abuse by priests has been seized
on by some that would link the assaults to the high number of gay priests in
the church. Scholars say that somewhere
between 1 and 10 percent of the general population is gay, but that in the
priesthood it may be as high as 50 percent. Yet many scholars say the link
between homosexuality and the abuse of teenage boys is unclear.
Specialists also don't know what percentages of
the priests who molest boys are gay. And, they say, there are other equally
important factors in the abuse of adolescent boys by priest. These include;
·
the stunted psychosexual
development of some priests,
·
the access priests have to
teenage boys, and
·
the authority priests have
over them.
The current crisis is forcing the church to take
a more serious look at the issue of clergy sexual abuse; on Thursday the US
Conference of Catholic Bishops promised to discuss a comprehensive national
response to the issue during the bishop's next meeting in June.
But the church has repeatedly declined to
undertake its own study of the prevalence of homosexuality or sexual abuse
among priests, and there is no indication that the church plans to examine the
roots of the problem now.
Although they don't agree on the explanation,
almost everyone who has examined the phenomenon of sexual abuse says the
pattern of adolescent male victims is clear.
·
''Clearly the vast majority of victims were boys around 12 and 14 - that
kind of range,'' said Robert A. Sherman, a local attorney who has represented
120 clergy sexual abuse victims over the past decade.
·
Roderick MacLeish Jr., a Boston lawyer, said 90 percent of the nearly 400
sexual abuse victims he has represented are boys, and three quarters of them
are post-pubescent.
·
And the Rev. Donald B. Cozzens, a seminary rector in Ohio
One of those targeted was Peter Isely, who was 13
when he said a priest at a high school seminary in Wisconsin
''He came up from his chair and came around and
began massaging my shoulder,'' said Isely, now a psychotherapist, who ran a Wisconsin
treatment centre for victims of clergy abuse in the 1990s.
''I had not a clue. What it felt like was that my
head was being pumped with gas and my body was being pumped with gas. It was
like anaesthesia. He moved down by body, into my pants and began fondling me.
Then he stopped like nothing happened.''
Isely, a Harvard Divinity School New Mexico
''I was convinced that it was my fault,'' said
Isely, who said the assault led to a
dramatic weight loss, a sleep disorder, and a sharp decline in his grades.
''I thought there was something in me that was so evil and I didn't know what
it was that was making him do this. ... Was Gale a homosexual? I don't know.
What he was doing, in his mind I think, was some kind of initiation into a
special experience of love. I was a boy who needed love and this was what love
was to him. But it was really all coercion, force, and terror for me.''
The church has in recent years tightened the
requirements for entrance to seminaries, hoping to find only candidates who are
suitable for ministry and willing to honour a commitment to celibacy.
Many of the priests who have been accused of abuse
attended seminaries at a time when sex was barely discussed in class. But
today, seminaries offer courses on human formation that are supposed to discuss
candidly how priests are to manage sexual desire and live celibate lives. The
Archdiocese of Boston has declined to make local seminarians or seminary
professors available to discuss how this issue is handled locally.
The
archdiocese says it puts potential seminarians through detailed psychological
testing and criminal background checks. But experts say it is extremely
difficult to identify a potential child abuser who has never previously
molested a child.
The church also offers some treatment for priests
with sexual problems at facilities such as the St. Luke Institute in Maryland Boston
Sexual activity with a person under age 16 is
illegal in Massachusetts America
But there are distinctions between the abuse of
small children and assaults on adolescents - law enforcement officials
acknowledge the difference, and so do Mental Health professionals.
In Massachusetts
·
The maximum prison sentence
for indecent assault and battery on a child under age 14 is 10 years;
·
It is five years for indecent
assault and battery on older children.
·
The maximum sentence for rape
of a child under age 16 is life in prison;
·
For rape of anyone older it is
20 years.
And a recent study of federal sentencing found
the higher the age of a victim of a sex crime, the lower the sentence.
The American Psychiatric Association defines paedophilia as sexual urges or behaviours
toward a prepubescent child by someone who is over age 16 and at least five
years older than the victim. The association does not have a formal
diagnosis for people who are attracted to adolescent children, although some
are now talking about calling the pathology ephebophila, or hebophilia.
''There
is a fair amount of research that suggests that whether people abuse
prepubescent or post-pubescent children does make a difference,'' said
David Finkelhor, Director of the Crimes against Children Research Centre at the
University of New
Hampshire
Finkelhor said that describing priests who get
sexually involved with adolescents as paedophiles is not only technically
inaccurate but misleading. ''It suggests an inevitability of re-offending that
may be exaggerated,'' he said.
Some go even further.
J. Philip Jenkins, a professor of religious
studies and history at Pennsylvania State University
''For a normal heterosexual man to be attracted
to a 16- or 17-year-old girl might be a very stupid and dangerous thing in lots
of ways, but most of us would not look at it and say, this person should be
locked up for the rest of his life,'' Jenkins said. ''For gay men, maybe there is going to be an attraction to 16- or
17-year-old boys. Is it stupid? Yes. Is it immoral? Yes. But it's in a very
different category from paedophilia.''
The role of homosexuality in the sexual abuse of
teenage boys by priests is vigorously debated.
Sylvia
M. Demarest, a Texas lawyer who won a $119 million jury award for
former altar boys abused in Dallas in the mid-1990s, called a priesthood that some scholars have said is 50 percent gay ''the dead elephant in the middle of the
room'' that few in the Catholic Church want to address.
At the same time, some observers theorise that
some priests suffer from stunted sexual development - that their sexual
feelings stopped changing when they entered the worlds of the seminary and the
priesthood, or even before, so they act as if they were adolescents themselves.
Rev. Prof. J. J. Kenez, a Consultant Clinical Psychologist, agrees with
this assertion: “This theory is very probable, scientific and reasonable, but
we need to confirm it by a good research study!”
''If you're exploring your sexuality and you find
that your sexuality is homosexual, where are you going to find a partner?
You're going to find a partner with someone in your emotional age range,''
Demarest said. ''This is where these guys are not only mentally and emotionally
sick but blatantly wrong. Look for your age mates! I'm not a bang-on-the-drum
antigay person, but people need to stop dancing around this issue.''
But
others caution that there is no evidence suggesting that gay men are more
likely to abuse teenagers than straight men. For example, Dr. Fred
Berlin, founder of the National Institute for the Study, Prevention and
Treatment of Sexual Trauma, said he is aware of no scientific data about how
- or whether - the misconduct of gay priests with adolescent boys differs from
that of the gay male population in general. Nor, he said, do gay and
heterosexual adults appear to have different patterns of involvement with
adolescents or younger children.
''There is no evidence that an adult gay male is
any more likely to seek out a boy for sexual activities than would there be a
likelihood of an adult heterosexual man seeking out a little girl for sexual
activities,'' said Berlin
In the general public, the majority of adolescent
sex abuse cases involve female victims. So why do boys seem to be victimised
more frequently than girls by priests? Specialists say the answer is probably
in part easy accessibility to the boys: until recently, only boys were altar
servers, for example.
''It
has always been welcomed by parents when they see a priest taking a boy to a
ballgame, or hunting or fishing or camping - the priest acts as a chaperone as
well as companion - and conventionally, people have not raised an eyebrow,'' said
Gill, the Chicago priest and doctor. ''If a priest is taking a girl off for
walks or swimming or any of these social or athletic events, there is some
question. I think parents are a little more sceptical about turning girls
unreservedly over to the priest for companionship.''
And part of the answer may lie in the culture of
the priesthood. ''The priesthood is a homo-social culture - all the values
within the culture are male, and the reason there has been such a tolerance
across the board of sexual activity by priests or bishops is because there is a
boys-will-be-boys atmosphere,'' said A. W. Richard Sipe, a psychotherapist and
former priest. ''It's kind of a spiritual fraternity - like a college
fraternity, but with a spiritual aura around it.''
When you're young and vulnerable, being too close
to that fraternity can sometimes be dangerous.
''This is an issue of power and it plays out with
adolescent boys because they are particularly vulnerable in that part of their
lives.'' said Arthur Austin, 53, who has a claim pending against the Rev. Paul
R. Shanley. He allegedly molested numerous young people in his 20 years as a
priest in Boston
These priests are virile young men and so,''Their hormones are just totally out of
control. They are vulnerable to that kind of perdition. They can be made
confused very easily around issues of sexuality because they don't understand
it themselves.''
''Catholicism is also, and has always
been, a culture of deference. To be deferential to these guys is like second
nature. It was almost like breathing. And they expected it from the laity.''
Copyright March 15, 2002, Sacha Pfeiffer and Michael Rezendes of the Globe Staff contributed to
this report.
Michael
Paulson can be reached at mpaulson@globe.com
Thomas
Farragher at farragher@globe.com
ã Copyrights 2004- –
The Boston
CHAPTER TWELVE
CELIBACY IS A PROBLEM FOR PRIESTS
AND THE LAITY TOO
A. W. Richard Sipe
With relative certainty it can be said that 90 to
93% of Roman Catholic priests in the United
States
Of course, sexual activity of any adult with a
minor is criminal. In addition, it is clearly a violation of celibacy that is
expected of Catholic priests. To pretend that sex with minors is the only or
even the most frequent violation of celibacy by Catholic priests and bishops is
a fiction of the fifth magnitude.
I have never disputed the power of the ideal of
celibacy—the complete and unflinching sacrifice of one's sexual life for the
undivided service of others. Nor have I ever advanced or advocated the argument
that simply discarding the rule of mandatory celibacy will make priests more
sexually responsible or mature.
The
crisis of celibacy is far more complex than any change in law alone can remedy.
But celibacy is undeniably a problem for priests.To
understand the problem of clerical celibacy and to debate cogently it is only
right to seek what is known about how celibacy is practiced by those who
profess it. And a great deal is already known.
A
study of Swiss priests published on May 12, 2003 revealed that 50% of that clergy had mistresses.
Father Victor Kotze, a South African sociologist conducted a survey of the
priests in his country (1991) and found that 45% had been sexually active
during the previous two year period.
Pepe Rodriguez published his book length study of
the sexual life of clergy in Spain
He further refined the figures of 354 priests who
were having sexual relations: 53% of
these were having sex with adult women, 21% with adult men, 14% were sexually
active with minor boys and 12% with minor girls. Although Rodriguez' book
caused a monumental debate no one has challenged the reality of his numbers.
My 25 year ethnographic study of celibacy
published in 1990 had drawn comparable conclusions about the celibate/sexual
activity of Catholic priests in America 1994 a BBC
television reporter faced Cardinal Jose Sanchez, Prefect of the Congregation of
the Clergy at the Vatican
Arguments abound that claim
that any voice-urging debate about celibacy has an "anti-Catholic" or
"anti-celibacy" timbre. That is absolute nonsense. The
viciousness of those claims is substantiated by listening carefully to shrill
voices, like Fr. Andrew Greeley's, that raise up to squelch any debate about
celibacy. Repeatedly Greeley
The question of the psychological maturity of
clergy, however, is undoubtedly related to questions of celibate practice, but
it is not a substitute for the simple inquiry: How do priests and bishops who claim to be celibate actually practice
it?
The importance of clerical
maturity/immaturity is significant to the resolution of the celibacy crisis.
Most answers to the questions about the psychosexual maturity of priests do not
register quite as rosy a picture as Greeley
Numerous studies and observations by priests and
other professionals portray a clerical landscape filled with a majority of
psychically underdeveloped men with the proportion of mal-developed equalling
the developed—about 8%. Thus spoke the 1972 Kennedy/Heckler psychological study
of priests commissioned by the US Rome
Questions about the psychological maturity of
priests and candidates for the ministry are not just a recent concern.
Priest-psychiatrist Thomas Verner Moore raised questions from 1929 and 1935
onward in ecclesiastical journals.
In 1968 W. J. Coville authored a paper on
candidates for the priesthood and presented it at St.
Vincent 's Hospital. Although was quite small (107 male
candidates), it is evocative. Eight
percent were (8%) were labeled "sexually deviant" while 70% were
described as "psychosexually immature, exhibiting traits of heterosexual
retardation, confusion concerning sexual role, fear of sexuality, effeminacy,
and potential homosexual dispositions."
The Vatican
·
excluding homosexual
candidates from the ministry,
·
revamping seminaries,
·
reinforcing strict doctrinal
orthodoxy, and
·
urging bishops to holiness.
The score will never realise a public performance
simply because the system intended to welcome maturing men and produce celibate
priests, which is itself largely sexually active.
Many
of the bishops, rectors of seminaries, and spiritual directors who are
entrusted with the responsibility of training priests are themselves sexually
active and at times with the men they purport to mentor. The
horror of the sexual abuse crisis of minors has demonstrated this disturbing
pattern within seminaries and the priesthood generally. Numbers of priest
abusers were themselves sexually active with other, sometimes highly placed
priests.
The problem of the Church's espousal of celibate
standards in law rather than life deeply affects Catholic laity also. The
official teaching of the Church on sexuality is that every sexual thought,
word, desire and action outside of marriage is mortally sinful. And any sex
within marriage not open to procreation is likewise mortally sinful. No compromises. This sexual standard
remains valid for those who freely choose to be celibate. It is not a
reasonable guide to healthy, mature, sexual development.
The Catholic Church's sexual teaching is built on
a house of cards—abstract assumptions about human sexual nature rather than
reality. People do not believe the church on sex; nor do they live that way. A
majority of Catholics are grateful to their ministers for the services they
provide. They wish them well, but they in ever-greater numbers also demand
honesty. They are rightfully resentful
and rejecting of bishops and priests who hurl thunder bolts about
contraception, abortion, premarital sex, divorce, and masturbation from pulpits
when they are aware that these men are not observant of their own basic rules,
let alone their ideals.
The reform of sexually abusing priests the
Vatican talks about, will not take place without two essential elements:
·
Those who claim to be celibate should be what they claim to be, and
·
Secondly there must be a free and open dialogue, and finally,
·
The married have things to teach the Church about honesty, sex, and celibacy
too.
COMMENTARY:
This is the first time an insider is telling the
whole truth! If other priests or ex-priests can open up, we may then eventually
resolve the sorry issue of compulsory celibacy, which has become a cancerous
wound that has refused to heal. The clergy are lethargic about giving it a
serious treatment, hence the formation of this association to bell them out. We
must do all we can to salvage the image and authenticity of our dear Holy and
Apostolic Catholic Church.
Downloaded and edited by:
Rev. Prof. J. J. Kenez, Animator, A2 C3
CHAPTER THIRTEEN
CELIBACY SEX SCANDALS IN AFRICA
The Malawian Example
NEWS IN BRIEF:
·
A local bishop dismissed the leaders of a diocesan
women's congregation in Malawi
·
Women who wanted to become candidates for religious life
had to provide sexual favours for priests.
·
A priest raped one convert from Islam to Catholicism
when she went to him for a certificate needed to join the local congregation.
She became pregnant. When she talked to the bishop, he told the priest to go on
a two-week retreat.
·
Often sisters who become pregnant have to leave their
congregations while the priests remain in post. One diocesan congregation dismissed more than 20 sisters
because they became pregnant.
·
Some African nuns who become pregnant have to become
second or third wives because of their lost status in the community - the only
alternative is prostitution.
·
Some priests forced nuns to go on the pill, letting them
believe it would protect them from HIV. Others encouraged them to have
abortions. One nun was taken
for abortion by the priest who had made her pregnant. She died during the
operation and he officiated at her funeral.
It is the blindness brought about by religious belief and the naive acceptance of social institutions handed down to us by less
enlightened generations that leads us to
ignore the profound immorality inherent in the celibacy of priests and nuns. It is commonplace to
contrast the sympathy we have with those suffering from physical illness and
the intolerance and lack of empathy we have with those suffering from mental
illness. We can see the broken bones and
understand that the victim of a hit and run accident cannot walk - we
sympathise with his condition and place ourselves in his shoes. But we cannot see a mental illness - only
its effects, and do not so easily understand and sympathise with the victim
- we may even suggest that he 'pull himself together' or 'get over it'.
There is a similar contrast between female
circumcision of young women (culturally associated with the Moslem religion)
and the indoctrination of young men and women to lead a life of celibacy. The cruelty of this Female Genital
Mutilation is a visible thing - we can see the mutilation of the woman's
sexual organs and the loss of the sensitive tissue that makes lovemaking a
pleasurable experience as part of a healthy and wholesome life.
The cruelty of indoctrinating the young or impressionable, the naive and
sexually inexperienced, to lead lives of celibacy is not so clearly visible to
us - but
the mutilation of their minds is no less real, followed as it is by a
systematic programme of psychological manipulation and control with the express
aim of ensuring the victim's compliance with this sexual perversion. It is a
far less visible cruelty, but no less cruel in spite of that - it is a perversion of the sexual instinct
no less than Female Genital Mutilation is a corruption of the body. We can wonder at
the psychological mechanism that causes female circumcision to be perpetuated
by those same women who were circumcised in their youth. We acknowledge that the young victims of sexual abuse
are far more likely to become abusers in their turn when they become adults.
The enlistment of others into celibacy involves a similar mechanism,
follows a similar pattern, and most probably, a similar pathology.
It is the celibate who themselves encourage
others to join their ranks, deploying a range of psychological tricks and
social contrivances to bring about this end.
(A psychological trick would be the
identification of a 'vocation' to make the young person feel special and a
social contrivance would be the manner in which he is made the centre of attention
and prestige in his community).
Like abusers of any kind they visit their abuse on the generation that
succeeds them - not hesitating to justify their abuse.
Pederasts typically claim that young children are capable of making sexual
choices and are willing accomplices and not victims. Priests make much the same
claim about the children whose minds they abuse - training them for the sexual
perversion that is celibacy and teaching them lies as fact (e.g., when has a
priest ever told you that the Gospels were not written by Mathew, Mark, Luke
and John - but he knows that this was not so - ask him).
It is a simple matter to recognise how evil it is to castrate a young man
- to retain his services as a choirboy, for example, but for some reason many do not recognise
mental castration for the evil that it is. The enlistment of young men and women for
lives of celibacy and the methods of
indoctrination and psychological manipulation designed to achieve this end are
breachs of their human rights. The
victims are condemned to lives of sexual repression, solitary masturbation and
psychological stress (but for a lighthearted perspective on this download MP3 file -
3.14 Mb <Monty%20Python%20%20Every%20sperm%20is%20sacred.mp3
They are denied the comfort, both physical and
psychological of (a) normal physical
relationship(s) with (an) other human being(s) and the potential of raising
their own children - participation in
the natural generational cycle of life. As a result of this mental cruelty
many of the victims themselves become a danger to others - often the children
entrusted to their care. The celibacy of priests and nuns is nothing less than a
system of institutionalised sexual abuse
- normally of children and young adults, and, like physical sexual abuse, carried out by those they most feel they
can trust. It is a clear example of the moral hollowness that is religion -
in particular the Catholic Church.
No conceivable moral code starting from first principles could encompass
the denial of normal sexual relations to another human being that has done no
wrong. While there are greater evils in the world,
the perpetuation of this particular evil has no satisfactory excuse, and a person who attempts to influence a minor
to take up a celibate priesthood should be treated as a sex offender.
If someone is
trying to convince you or indoctrinate you to become a celibate priest or nun
you are being sexually abused. The state should offer a programme of rehabilitation to
the victims of this abuse, including the offenders themselves.
THE TIP OF THE ICEBERG
In 1999 400 Roman Catholic priests in the U.S.A.
As an example, Murphy O'Connor, now head of
the Catholic Church in the UK Ireland
However,
the failure of an institution such as the Catholic Church - with a priesthood
made up entirely of the victims of a perverted teaching about sex - to regulate
its own members can hardly be surprising. In Scotland Canada
Out of Africa - sex with nuns The Vatican Vatican Third World , says the National Catholic
Reporter (USA).
In Africa , where priests previously sought
out prostitutes, the high levels of AIDS have caused them to prey on nuns and
young girls to avoid contracting the virus. Priests often demand sex in return
for favours, such as certification to work in a particular diocese - or even certificate
of good Catholic Practice permitting young women to train to become nuns.
Sister Maura O'Donohue, Cafod (Catholic Fund for Overseas Development )
AIDS coordinator, says that nuns have been identified as 'safe' targets for
sexual activity, and quotes a case in 1991 of a
community superior being approached by priests requesting that nuns be made
available to them for sexual favours: "When the superior refused, the
priests explained they would otherwise be obliged to go to the village to find women
and might thus get AIDS".
Sister Maura reported incidents of sexual
abuse in 23 countries including India Ireland Italy Philippines United States
What was the Vatican Africa , put together a paper on the sexual abuse of religious women in Africa she met what she described as a 'conspiracy of silence' and bishops suggested that it was disloyal of
the sisters to have reported the abuse.
She said nuns had repeatedly informed the
authorities: "Sometimes they were
not well received. In some instances they are blamed for what happened. Even
when they are listened to sympathetically nothing much seems to be done". When something is done - the priests are sent away for studies but the nuns are usually chased
away from their orders.
Often too scared to return to their families they become outcasts or even
prostitutes. Atheism Central
calls for a Public Enquiry in the UK Torbay , Devon , England
For more details , visit :Australia & World
<http://www.aifs.org.au/nch/netw.html> Why
priestly celibacy is morally wrong - sexual abuse and HIV - sex
with nuns
The
scenario is not different here in Nigeria Ghana
Compiled by Rev. Prof. J. J. Kenez for AACCC
CHAPTER
FOURTEEN
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS
In
the main body of this book, a passionate appeal has been made for the
restoration of the pristine norms and mores of the clergy by making celibacy
optional in the Catholic Church. We ought to realise that no one has ever
succeeded in cheating human nature for a lifetime without disastrous
consequences. This, it argued will re-direct our erring brothers and sisters in
their vocations and thereby guarantee sanity in the sexual behaviour of
candidates for ordination or religious profession in the Holy and Apostolic Church
One may want to ask this
all-important question:
WHAT
EXACTLY IS THE OBJECTIVE OF THIS BOOK?
The answer is very simple:
THE
EDITOR AND HIS CREW OF CONTRIBUTING WRITERS ARE CRUSADERS FOR THE RETURN OF
SANITY IN THE SEXUAL BEHAVIOUR OF ERRING RELIGIOUS MEN AND WOMEN IN THE HOLY CATHOLIC CHURCH
The
urgency of this project demands that an inner caucus of dedicated and concerned
parents forms an egalitarian and altruistic ASSOCIATION FOR THE ABROGATION OF CELIBACY IN THE CATHOLIC CHURCH, which must
obtain the signatures of at least ten million Christians that support the
essential demands of the book. This project, which is divinely directed, can be
itemised thus:
·
That the
papacy reconsiders the legislation on compulsory or mandatory celibacy,
·
That a full
scale research be carried out to evaluate the merits and demerits of the sex
scandals rocking the church, and
·
Thereafter
institutionalise optional prescriptions by which two religious lifestyles are
available for candidates to choose from in their vows at ordinations or
religious professions.
Any
sane Christian will naturally see the immediacy of these demands. Such
patriotic individuals are hereby invited to suggest the best methods for us to
achieve the objective by registering with the founding fathers of the
humanitarian organisation and championing the liberation of our serving priests
and nuns from the shackles of an obnoxious, outdated and unnatural celibate
life!
Those
already in this bondage cannot champion this crusade! They will be singled out
and castigated by the dishonest ones revelling in the spoils of the ignominious
lifestyle! So, it is left for the few pious and concerned laity to galvanise
support for the abrogation of the compulsory celibacy imposed on our children
by an insensitive Church hierarchy living in iron clad towers in Rome
Take
a decision on the side of truth today by meditating on the issues raised in
this divinely inspired sanitation exercise. You will be counted among the
heroes and heroines that future priests and nuns will forever remain indebted
to! Join us today! The campaign train is on the move! Our destination is the
restoration of ethical standards in all the denominations of Christianity
world-wide!
I
can not end this messianic plea without giving you a wise passage from my
psychotherapy master. So here is an advice for those who delight in taking false
oaths or vows. Sirach 23, vv. 7–11:
(GNB)
“TAKING OATHS
v.7: My children, listen to
what I have to say about proper speech; do as I teach you and you will never
get trapped.
v.8: Sinners are caught by their own arrogant,
insulting words.
v.9: Don’t fall into the habit of taking oaths,
and don’t use God’s holy name too freely.
v.10: A slave who is constantly beaten will never
be free of bruises; someone who is always taking an oath by the Holy Name will
never be free of sin.
v.11: A
man who takes oaths all the time is sinful to the core, and punishment is never
far away from his household. If he fails to fulfil his oath, he is guilty. If
he ignores his oath, he is twice as guilty. If his oath was insincere in the
first place, he cannot be pardoned and will have a house full of trouble.”
Our
young brothers and sisters could only have had the genuine intention of keeping
the vow of celibacy, if and only if they were truly virgins at the time they
took them. These few honest ones may later succumb to amorous advances by the
disciples of Satan who were neither virgins ‘áb initio’ nor had any intentions of being chaste whatsoever.
These dishonest ones deliberaty took the vow falsely! It to these later ones
that Jesus, the son of Sirach truly addresses the wise counsel above, to avoid
‘a house full of trouble’.
We,
the serious minded and pious married laity must daily pray that such perjurers
do not continue to infiltrate the rank and files of our truly dedicated
religious servants in the Catholic Church. May the few who are devout and
sincere in their sacred vows also pray that the Holy Spirit may strengthen
their resolve and subsequently deliver them from these recalcitrant sexual
perverts!
And
for both the laity and the religious, vv. 16 –27 of the same chapter are very
revealing as to the remote causes of the failures in either their marriages or
their religious vocations:
“SEXUAL SINS
v. 16: There are any number of ways to sin and bring
down the Lord’s anger, but sexual passion is a hot, blazing fire that cannot be
put out at will; it can only burn itself out. A man who lives for nothing but
sexual enjoyment will keep on until that fire destroys him.
v.17: To such a man all women are desirable, and he
can never get enough as long as he lives.
v.18: The man who is unfaithful to his wife thinks
to himself, “No one will ever know. It is dark n here, and no one sees me. I
have nothing to worry about. As for the Most High, he won’t even notice.”
v.19: This man is only afraid of other people. He
doesn’t realize that the eyes of the Lord are ten thousand times brighter than
the sun, that he sees everything we do, even when we try to hide it.
v.20: He knew everything before he created the
world, as will as after.
v.21: That sinful man will be caught when he least
expects it, and punished publicly.
v.22: The same is true of a woman who is unfaithful
to her husband and presents him with a child by another man.
v.23: In the first place, she has broken the Law of
the Most High . In the second place, she has wronged her husband. And in the
third place, she has made a whore of herself by committing adultery and bearing
the child of a man not her husband.
v.24: The children will suffer for her sin. They
will not be able to find a place in society or establish families.
v.25: She herself will be brought before the
assembly, and permanently disgraced.
v.26: There will be a curse on her memory.
v.27: After she is gone, everyone will realize that
nothing is better than fearing the Lord, nothing is sweeter than keeping his
commands.”
I
have neither added nor subtracted from the prophetic counsel of the sage.
However, I separated and clarified verses 24, 25& 26 that are muddled up in
the GNB edition that I have! Your version of the Christian Bible may have a
different translation, but the calamities in the desecration of our churches
and marriages are neatly predicted by the Wisdom of Jesus the Son of Sirach!
So
what can we do to salvage the sad situation? Write to the protem Secretary or
the President of KENEZ INTERDENOMINATIONAL PHILOSOPHERS’ FORUM now. Your useful
suggestions are very welcome! Do not forget that there are seven points in this
sanitation exercise. This book has only introduced the modality for you to use
in your write–up! The focal points are listed in the title page thus:
·
ABROGATE
CELIBACY IN THE CATHOLIC CHURCH
·
AVOID THE
CASTIGATION & LABELLING OF OTHERS
·
SANCTION ALL
PROSPERITY GOSPEL PREACHERS
·
EXCISE
COMMERCIALISATION DURING CRUSADES
·
HALT THE
EXPLOITATION OF ALL CONGREGATIONS
·
DE-EMPHASISE
THE CRAZE FOR SIGNS AND WONDERS
·
EXCOMMUNICATE
INFILTRATORS AND OCCULTISTS
May the Omniscient God
enlighten your mind to appreciate this holy and onerous task and infuse you
with his divine wisdom to assist us!
EPILOGUE
SALVATION IS A
PERSONAL AFFAIR
There
are alternatives to the Christian religion, in case everyone thinks God will
send those of other faiths to hell! There were many ‘Saints in Heaven’ before
the arrival of the Lord Jesus, the Christ, on planet earth! The Bible records
at least one hundred such good men and pious women who enjoyed the fellowship
of God at their individual deaths! Of these, I will refresh your mind with only
Patriarch Enoch, Genesis 5 vv. 18 - –4, and Prophet Elijah, 2nd
Kings 2 vv. 1-16 and finally The Prince of Faith and Patience, Patriarch Job,
in the Book of Job, Chapter 42 vv. 7 – 16.
Gentile
nations were more repentant and God-fearing than the Israelites. If you doubt
me, then read the whole of chapter 3 of the book of Jonah, the reluctant
prophet! There were revered priests of equivalent sanctity and faithfulness in
this part of Africa at the same epoch in history! Sages that showed their generations
justice, fair play, honesty and truthfulness in their daily living! The
spurious claim “the chosen people of God” has been debunked in the three
volumes of THE ANGELIC VERSES by the trio of master bakers
of
the World’s Hottest Cake; Jude, Jideofo and Kenez!
In
the New Testament narratives, Jesus stated unequivocally the requirement for
making heaven thus “Only those who do
the will of my Father who is in heaven.” So our great grandfathers who did
the right things before the arrival of Modern Christianity that has been
polluted by promiscuous priests and nyphomaniacal nuns are definitely there in
heaven. You too can get there if only you think accurately and realise where
religious power comes from by reading and reflecting on this treatise:
THE SOURCE OF
RELIGIOUS POWER
The Primitive
Origins of Respect for God
The
Kenezians worship the Almighty Creator out of respect for the macrocosms and
microcosms they observe in their natural environment. They reason that since
they were not responsible for such beings some supernatural being is. And
because they all have the innate power of reproduction which man shares with
all animate beings, they revere this Supreme Giver of the procreative ability!
It is this reverence for such an invisible Caretaker of us all that really
informed the code of traditional ethics streamlined as our modes of worship,
prayer and morality!
Before
the arrival of the first white man on African soil, we had developed rural
political and social administrative structures, with a legal system that
ensured justice and democratic rights. All were based on what we observed in
nature around us. We worshipped the sun, moon and land on which we walked,
cultivated and built our homes as the great messengers of this Almighty Creator
since we depended on them for light, warmth and the growth of our yam seedlings
and other fruits and vegetables we depended on for food!
Later,
with the colonial administration, our forefathers were then introduced to two
brands of Christianity, namely the CMS and the RCM. We were born into families
that already owed varying levels of allegiance to the competing versions of Christianity
and equally tutored to deride or denounce those not belonging to our particular
denomination and religious or faith practices. It was not long after the
Nigeria-Biafran civil war that various brands of Pentecostalism arrived on the
scene. And today, these nouveau-riche prosperity preachers dominate the
religious horizon. So flabbergasted and genuinely overwhelmed are we, by the
stiff rivalries going on between these pseudo-religious outfits that we are
constrained to ask:
WHICH
ONE OF THEM REALLY LEADS TO THE ETERNAL FATHER OUR FOREFATHERS WORSHIPPED AS
THE TRUE GOD, THE ALMIGHTY CREATOR OF THE HEAVENS AND THE SUN AND MOON WE
DEPEND ON?
Religions deal with powerful human fears and
drives - the fear of death and the drive to sex. All
religions eventually become very successful by manipulating these forces. By talking constantly of death, the
charismatic leadership hierarchy or the recognised priesthood of every religion
can appear to control life and death!
When recognised and revered priests of any
religious group offer sacrifices of dead people or animals they vividly give
the impression of controlling death. And this type of death is evidently right
at the heart of Christianity in the crucifixion at Golgotha - a
barbaric and fascinating spectacle of torture, blood, pain and suffering which
all Christians are asked to contemplate in their weekly or daily worship.
The call to 'drink this blood and eat this body',
which is the message of the Last Supper, is strange at the least (no matter how
symbolic), and a rather unhealthy idea. It is primitive!
Certainly, it has as its central focus the
notion of control over the forces of life and immortality. A particular instance of this 'death control' is found with the
Jehovah's Witnesses. According to their priests, the Bible does not permit
blood transfusion and members of the religion are not permitted to accept
blood, for themselves or their children, even in life-threatening
circumstances. What a powerful tool for manipulating people's minds! How
impressive it is for the individual Witness to think that his priest and his
religion have the power of death over the congregation! How impressed must be
the individual with his control over the forces of life and death when he takes
that power to himself and denies life-blood to his child! What an anxious congregation the priest can constantly manipulate to
ensure compliance with God's Will, of course! No opposition!
How
strange it is that for some reason other Christian denominations do not
interpret the Bible in the same way! This approach can be seen in the bible
itself: "Whoever
comes to me and does not hate father and mother, wife and children, brothers
and sisters, yes, and even life itself, cannot be my disciple." - Luke
14:26
Wielding such awful forces or rather
pretending to do so, really impresses the faithful adherent greatly. Cutting
oneself off from the natural family in order to commune with this bigger
community of believers is a big thing and is made to seem quite heroic too. The
impressionable are thus led sheepishly to a point of no return.
Once they have cut themselves off
from their families it is impossible for them to contemplate their mistake and
their dependence on the church is increased. This mind-game was clearly
practised in the early church. Similar mind-games are now practised by the
Scientologists.
In the same way, sex can be used as a potent
means of social control. Many religions have encouraged promiscuous sexual
behaviour in order to gain converts, while fake celibacy to position themselves
as possessing angelic virtues and powers!
This was often the case in ancient times when
temples had divine women one would sleep with to gain spiritual intercourse or
cordial relationships with the gods! And in more recent times a religion gained
converts by encouraging its female members literally to lure every wealthy male
friend in. Some nuns are deliberately sent to seduce millionaires or business
tycoons! The richer they are, the greater they fall! This was called 'flirty-fishing'.
However,
the following quotation from George Orwell's classic novel, '1984' illustrates both why promiscuity
is not as successful as you might think and why the opposite, sexual
repression, is a much more effective tool for social control. Here in a religio-political context, you can
see the parallels between social politics and religion:
"Unlike Winston she (Julia) had grasped
the inner meaning of the Party's sexual puritanism. It was not merely that the sex instinct created a world of its own
which was outside the Party's control and which therefore had to be
destroyed if possible. What was more
important was that sexual privation caused hysteria, which was desirable
because it could be transformed into war-fever and leader-worship. The way
she put it was 'When you make love
you're using up energy; and afterwards you feel happy and don't give a damn for
anything. They can't bear you to feel like that. They want you to be bursting
with energy all the time. All this marching up and down and cheering and
waving flags is simply sex gone sour. If you're happy inside yourself why
should you get excited about Big Brother and the three-year Plans and the Two
Minutes Hate and all the rest of their bloody rot?'"
"Sex gone sour" is certainly a better
way of keeping people in line than sexual freedom - the worse you can make
people feel about their natural instincts and behaviour the stronger the
control you can have over them.
Perhaps
the most extreme evidence of this in popular culture was the widespread belief
in the last century that sexual desires, and masturbation in particular, led to
mental and physical illness. Although this idea masqueraded as science, it had
its origin in religious culture. 'Too
much sex makes you short-sighted' was not originally a joke - people believed
it to be true.
One of the neatest religious sexual tricks was
practised by an ancient Chinese religion. It taught that when a man ejaculated
into a woman he gave some of his life force to her. This had the effect of
shortening his life and lengthening hers. Of course, the emperor wanted to have
sex with as many women as he could - all he had to do was to avoid ejaculating!
It is not hard to imagine what effect this nonsense must have had on the
relationship between the sexes. What power it must have given to the
priesthood!
Religious teachers play powerful mind games
with the children in their care: Children
are often given the most frightening threats to prevent them questioning
religious teaching: "If you don't believe in God and do what He says
you will go to hell when you die."
These threats are really a form of child abuse and often ministered outside
parental control.
"When
you are older you will meet people who will tell you that their god is right
and yours is wrong or even that there is no god. Their arguments will seem so
reasonable and they'll tell you all sorts of lies they'll call evidence and it
will just be Satan tempting you and the more you want to believe their
arguments the more it will be Satan tempting you. And if you believe them
you'll go to hell."
Sooner
or later there is the likelihood that we will question our beliefs or hear the
arguments of others who question them and then the mind game comes into play.
This is often described as the 'Virus Theory' because it is like being infected
by a computer virus.
Another mind-game is characteristic of the Moslem
religion, and of Christianity (it is less common in the UK
Both
the Bible and the Koran contain texts to this effect. It is difficult to
imagine a more immoral argument in favour of religious belief and also it is a
bit tricky for a gullible individual who hears the same argument from more than
one religion!
Children are particularly vulnerable to
indoctrination. As children we are given an interpretation of the
universe around us by a variety of factors in the environment in which we
develop. We do not know of the existence of these factors because we cannot see
the wood for the trees.
We
might, for example, grow up with a low sense of self-esteem because of the way
we are treated by our parents, or conversely, feel that we are better than
anybody else is, because that is the way our family behaves. It is not
necessary for anyone specifically to say these things - we pick them up
naturally. It may not be until quite late in life that we discover that we have
suffered from low self-esteem or behave like snobs. We can absorb a religious
notion of the universe in much the same way.
Those
people who are brought up in a religious tradition and who question it
successfully often have a kind of 'road
to Damascus
It is
a very rewarding experience and I sometimes wonder if my children are missing
anything by being brought up as atheists in a non-theistic environment. This
text has been reproduced in the Handbook for Idaho Atheists Inc. or visit: atheist@micron.net.
It happens in Israel
Religion
is traditionally the child of ignorance and poverty and it is significant
that there has been a drop of 60% in the number of women entering religious
orders in the Catholic Church as a whole over the last 6 years (Sunday Times,
15 August 1999, 'Nuns put faith in their shrink', John Follian, Rome).
However, we must not be complacent. What we need to look out for is new
religious groups with new techniques for achieving social power. An example
that readily comes to mind is the Scientologists, who were banned here in the UK
In the
United States of America
In the
UK
Most
significantly, in the UK Freemasons, who used to have the approval of the
Church of England but no longer do so, have infiltrated the Police Force and
the judiciary. Membership of the Order of Freemasons may well be conducive to
promotion within these groups. As a result, it is now a legal requirement that
membership is declared in these occupations.
In the former Soviet Union the population is especially vulnerable to
religious quackery of all kinds - not having developed the natural scepticism
that can result from living in an open democratic country. American religious
fundamentalist groups have been doing very good business using their brand of
prosperity gospel of Pentecostalism to fleece the wealthy.
Sex is a powerful tool, tactfully
manipulated by religious leaders to increase the numerical strength of their
congregation and so their purse swells correspondingly. Elegant maidens singing
in the choir and swinging their slim figures may only be seducing you right
there in the church. Wonder how many of them are really the true disciples of
the “repentant Mary of Magdala” seriously out to secure a flamboyant husband!
By the time you know it, you have already been hooked by a pregnancy you cannot
disown! Do not say I didn’t warn you!
For
now, Keep the faith, Obey all the Natural Laws in Creation and you will be
welcomed into heaven as Patriarch Enoch was! Only intellectual dwarfs can be
really deceived or scandalised by our present day demons masquerading as Rev.
Frs. and Rev Srs.
An honest
word is enough for a wise man!
Insert
a picture of large fish dying on a seashore,f ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
BONUS! BONUS!! BONUS!!!
I.S. M
IS A FELLOWSHIP BUILT ON SIMPLE TRUTHS OBSERVABLE
AROUND MANKIND!
The
difference between this spiritual fellowship for all mankind irrespective of
one’s nationality, philosophy of life, social status, educational achievement
or political persuasion is that there is nothing here that is built on belief
systems or revealed truths!
Rather,
what the founder of this interdisciplinary, inter-ethnic and integrational
spiritual fellowship is to provide simple facts of nature that unites rather
than divides the human race. It argues that since there is only;
·
One created
universe, of which we all share its amenity,
·
One earth, on which we all stand,
plant and harvest our food and build our physical structures,
·
One
atmospheric air that we all breathe to live,
·
One rainfall that provides the water that
we drink,
·
One sun and
moon
that illuminates the world of which we are all equal heirs to;
·
There must One
Almighty Creator, who is Our Father and we are all sons and daughters of this Infinite
truth that grants us life! Aren’t we brothers and sisters irrespective of our
skin colour, language and peculiar child rearing practices?
This truth
is international, inter-religious and, if you like, equally
interdenominational! Simple truths like these are incontestable, aren’t they?
So why must follow demonic leaders, spiritual or temporal, who delude us into
fight and killing each other? It is not only irrational but also psychopathological!
And
to demonstrate the supremacy of this truth, let me introduce you to the debate
by naïve but wise three young bodyguards to an emperor who was suffering from
insomnia! Get a complete copy of the GNB and turn with me to 1st Esdras, Chapters 3 & 4:
The Debate
of the Bodyguards before the Emperor
v.1: Darius the emperor gave a great banquet for
all these under him, all the members of his family and staff, all the leading
officials of Persia
v.2: All his officers, administrators, and the
governors of the 127 provinces stretching from India Sudan
v.3: When everyone had had enough to eat and
drink, they left, and Darius went to bed. He fell asleep but soon awoke.
A Contest Is
Proposed
v.4: Then the three young men who served Emperor
Darius as his personal bodyguard said to one another,
v.5: “Let each of us name the one thing that he
considers the strongest thing in the world. The emperor will decide who has
given the wisest answer to this question and will give magnificent gifts and
prizes to the winner.
v.6: He will wear royal robes, drink from a gold
cup, and sleep in a gold bed. He will have a chariot with gold-studded bridles,
wear a fine linen turban, and have a gold necklace.
v.7: Because of his wisdom he will be an adviser
to the emperor and will be given the title ‘Relative of the Emperor.’ ”
v.8: Then each of them wrote down the best answer
he could think of, sealed it, and put it under the emperor’s pillow. They said
to one another.
v.9: “When the emperor wakes up, the statements
will be given to him. He and the three leading officials of Persia
v.10: The first wrote, “There is nothing stronger than wine.”
v.11: The second wrote, “There is nothing stronger than the emperor.”
v.12: And the third wrote, “There is nothing stronger than a woman, but truth can conquer
anything.”
v.13: When the emperor woke up, the written
statements were given to him, and he read them
v.14: Then he sent messengers and called together
all the leading officials of Persia
v.15: He took his seat in the council chamber and had
the three statements read aloud.
v.16: “Bring in the three young men,” he said, “and
let them explain their answers.” So when they were brought in,
v.17: They were asked to explain what they had
written.
The
Speech about Wine
The
bodyguard who had written about he strength of wine spoke first:
v.18: “Gentlemen,’ he began, “wine is clearly the
strongest thing in the world. It confuses the mind of everyone who drinks it.
v.19: It has exactly the same effect on everyone:
king or orphan slave or free, rich or poor.
v.20: It makes every thought happy and carefree,
and makes everyone forget sorrow and responsibility.
v.21: It makes everyone feel rich, ignore the power
of kings and officials, and talk as if he owned the whole world.
v.22: When men drink wine, they forget who their
friends and neighbours are, and then they are soon drawing their swords to
fight them.
v.23: then, when they sober up, they don’t remember
what they have done.
v.24: Gentlemen” he finished by saying, “if wine
makes men act in this way, it certainly must be the strongest thing in the
world.”
CHAPTER 4:
The Speech
about the Emperor
v.1: The bodyguard who had written about the
strength of the emperor spoke next.
v.
2: “Gentlemen,” he began, ‘nothing in
the world is stronger than men, since they rule over land and sea and in fact,
over everything in the world.
v.
3: But the emperor is the strongest of
them all; he is their lord and master, and men obey him, no matter what he
commands.
v.4: If he tells them to make war on one another,
they do it. If he sends them out against his enemies, they go, even if they
have to breakdown mountains, walls, or towers.
v.5: They may kill or be killed, but they never
disobey the emperor’s orders. If they
are victorious, they bring him all their loot and everything else they have
taken in battle.
v.6: Farmers do not go out to war, but even they
bring to the emperor a part of everything they harvest.
v.7: Although the emperor is only one man, if he
orders people to kill, they kill, if he orders them to set prisoners free, they
do it;
v.8: if he orders them to attack, they do; if he
orders destruction, they destroy; if he orders them to build, they build;
v.9: if he orders crops to be destroyed or fields
to be planted, it is done.
v.10: Everybody, soldier or civilian, obeys the
emperor. And when he sits down to eat or drink and then falls asleep,
v.11: his servants stand guard round him, without
being able to go and take care of their own affairs, for they never disobey
him.
v.12:
Gentlemen” he ended by saying, “since people obey the emperor like this,
certainly nothing in the world is stronger than he is.”
The Speech about
Women
v.13: The bodyguard who had written about women and
the truth – it was Zerubbabel – spoke last.
v.14: “Gentlemen,” he began, “the emperor is
certainly powerful but, men are numerous, and wine is strong, but who rules and
controls them all? It is women!
v.15: Women gave birth to the emperor and all the
men who rule over land and sea.
v.16: Women brought them into the world. Women
brought up the men who planted the vineyards from which wine comes.
v.17: Women make the clothes that men wear; women
bring honour to men; in fact, without women, men couldn’t live.
v.18: “Men may accumulate silver or gold or other
beautiful things, but if they see a woman with a pretty face or a good figure,
v.19: they will leave it all to gape and stare, and
they will desire her more than their wealth.
v.20: A man will leave his own father, who brought
him up, and leave his own country to get married.
v.21; He will forget his father, his mother, and
his wife.
v.22: So you must recognise that women are your
masters. Don’t you work and sweat and then take all that you have earned and give
it to your wives?
v.23: A man will take his sword and go out to
attack, roband steal, and sail the seas and rivers.
v.24: He may have to face lions or travel in the
dark, but when he has robbed, stolen, and plundered, he will bring the loot
home to the woman he loves.
v.25: Ä man loves his wife more than his parents.
v.26: Some men are driven out of their minds on
account of a woman, and others become slaves for the sake of a woman.
v.27: Others have been put to death, have ruined
their lives, or have committed crimes because of a woman.
v.28: So now do you believe me? “The emperor’s
power is certainly great- no nation has the courage to attack him.
v.29: But once I saw him with Apame, his concubine,
the daughter of the famous Bartacus. While she was sitting at the emperor’s
right,
v.30: she took his crown off his head, put it on
her own, and then slapped his face with her left hand.
v.31: All the emperor did was look at her with his
mouth open. Whenever she smiles at him, he smiles back; and when she gets angry
with him, he flatters her and teases her until she is in a good mood again.
v.32: Gentlemen, if a woman can do all that, surely
there can be nothing stronger in the world.”
v.33: The emperor and his officials just looked at
each other.
The Speech
about Truth
Then
Zerubbabel began to speak about truth.
v.34: “Ÿes, gentlemen,” he said, “women are very
strong. But think how big the earth is, how high the sky is; think how fast the
sun moves, as it rapidly circles the whole sky in a single day.
v.35: If the sun can do this, it is certainly
great. But truth is greater and stronger than all of these things.
v.36: Everyone on earth honours truth; heaven
praises itl all creation trembles in awe before it. “There is not the slightest
injustice in truth.
v.37: You will find injustice in wine, the emperor,
women, all human beings, in all they do, and in everything else. There is no
truth in them; they are unjust and they will perish.
v.38: But truth endures and is always strong; it
will continue to live and reign for ever.
v.39: Truth shows no partiality or favouritism; it does what is right, rather
than what is unjust or evil. Everyone approves what truth does;
v.40: its decisions are always fair. Truth is
strong, royal, powerful, and majestic for ever. Let all thins praise the God of
Truth!”
The Response
v.41: When Zerubbabel had finished speaking, all
the people shouted, “Truth is great- there is nothing stronger!”
v.42:
Then the emperor said to him, “You may ask anything you want, even more than
what was agreed, and I will give it to you.
You will be my adviser, and you will be granted the title ‘Relative of
the emperor.’ ”
COMMENTARY
Of
course Zerubbabel went ahead to request a greater favour for the whole of his
nation that was in bondage! Read the rest of the story. What should interest
you is that TRUTH IS SUPREME.
Give
truth a special place of honour in your heart and speech. Truth is bitter, but
so is any medicine taken to recover from any debilitating disease. The world
today needs an overdose of truth to recover from religious fanaticism, social
prejudice and the various forms of idolatry existing today in human
relationships! God is the Infinite truth and is definitely stronger than the
sun, wine, emperor and women! And so should all that worship him!
I.S.M is the medicine that our generation desperately needs to sanitise the landscape of personality
cults that today parade as religions! Take out time, days and weeks to evaluate
every sentence you have read. Join us in this onerous duty!
Contribute
your quota by identifying the natural laws in creation. Teach them to others!
Then obey them!
ITE LIBRUM
EST!
That ends the
story of this wonderful inspiration from the Holy Spirit of the Creator of this
wonderful universe that we mortal men occupy on lease. Some call themselves
landlords and are arrogant all their lives. It is the same Job, who reminds
them that life itself is like forced military service. You have no option than
to live it. So live it the best way you can. Make friends and leave a good
legacy for posterity and the welfare of your offspring!
MAY ALMIGHTY GOD BLESS US ALL!
Permit us to
sign off here,
CHEFS JUDE,
JIDEOFO & KENEZ!
Also known as
Rev. Prof. J. J. Kenez
REGISTRATION
FORMS FOR PROSPECTIVE MEMBERS
To qualify for
membership you must have read this book in its entirety, evaluated, assessed
and criticised it positively and thereafter convinced ten more people to buy it
and propagate its contents. If you cannot do this, please, don’t bother to apply.
NAME……………………………………………………………….
RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS………………………………………….
……………………………………………………………………….
PROFESSION……………………………………………………….
QUALIFICATIONS…………………………………………………
OFFICIAL ADDRESS……………………………………………….
………………………………………………………………………..
POSITIVE CRITICISM OF WHAT YOU HAVE READ SO
FAR
………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………….
……………………………………………………………………….
……………………………………………………………………….
Names of your proposed new contacts and their
observations so far:
……………………………………………………………………….
………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………….
……………………………………………………………………….
………………………………………………………………………
Your
signature…………………….Phone No, & E-mail Address
Dr Jideofo Kenechukwu Danmbaezue, D.Sc.
(Here are the minute details of moral
ethics that lubricates the founder)
PSALM 15
WHAT GOD REQUIRES
Lord, who may enter your Temple Zion
·
A person who obeys God in everything and always does
what is right,
·
Whose words are true and sincere, and who does not
slander others,
·
He does no wrong to his friends nor spreads rumours
about
his neighbours.
·
He despises those whom God rejects, but honours
those who obey the Lord.
·
He always does he promises, no matter how much it
may cost.
·
He makes loans without charging interest and cannot
be
bribed to testify against the innocent.
WHOEVER DOES THESE THINGS WILL ALWAYS BE
SECURE.
As a young boy in the 1960s,
the contents of this nice Psalm credited to King David engraved its moral
ethics on the mind of this teenager. And so it was, that throughout youth, he
never allowed the simple lifestyle enunciated therein to be blurred in his
social interactions! He was called names, “Sancta!” Later, at the university
level it graduated to “Mr. Do Good!” But, during the late 1990s it settled down
to the permanent appellation; “Saint Kenez!” by even his critics.
The lesson:
You may be called names as you practise these tenets, however, do not lose hope
nor feel frustrated! You’ll
be rewarded as the years roll by, for you will shine
like the stars!
ADD THE
FOLLOWING PRAYERS ON A DAILY BASIS
PSALM 1
TRUE
HAPPINESS
Happy
are those who reject the advice of evil men, who do not follow the example of
sinners or join those who have no use for God. Instead, they find joy in
obeying the Law of the Lord, and they study it day and night.
They
are like trees that grow beside a stream, that bear fruit at the right time,
and whose leaves do not dry up. They succeed in everything they do.
But
evil men are not like this at all; they are like straw that the wind blows
away. Sinners will be condemned by God and kept apart from God’s own people.
The righteous are guided and protected by the Lord, but the evil are on their
way to their doom.
PSALM 3
MORNING
PRAYER FOR HELP
I
have so many enemies Lord, so many who turn against me! They talk about me and
say, ”God will not help him.” But you, O Lord, are always my shield from
danger; and you give me victory and restore my courage.
I
call to the Lord for help, and from his sacred hill he answers me. I lie down
and sleep and all night long the Lord protects me. I am not afraid of thousands
of enemies that surround me on every side.
Come
Lord! Save me my God! You punish all my enemies and leave them powerless to
harm me. Victory comes from the Lord, may he bless his people.
PSALM 39
THE
CONFESSION OF A SUFFERING MAN
I
said, “I will be careful what I do and will not let my tongue make me sin; I
will not say anything while evil men are near.” I kept quiet, not saying a
word, not even about anything good!
But
my suffering only grew worse, and I was overcome with anxiety. The more I
thought, the more troubled I became; I could not keep from asking: “Lord, how
long will I live? When will I die? Tell me how soon my life will end.”
How
short you have made my life! In your sight my lifetime seems nothing. Indeed
every living man is no more than a puff of wind, no more than a shadow. All he
does is for nothing; he gathers wealth, but doesn’t know who will get it.
What,
then, can I hope for, Lord? I put my hope in you. Save me from all my sins, and
don’t let fools laugh at me. I will keep quiet, I will not say a word, for you
are the one who made me suffer like this.
Don’t
punish any more! I am about to die from your blows. You punish a man’s sins by
your rebukes, and like a moth you destroy what he loves. Indeed a man is no
more than a puff of wind!
Hear
my prayer, Lord, and listen to my cry; come to my aid when I weep. Like all my
ancestors I am only your guest for a while. Leave me alone so that I may have
some happiness before I go away and am no more.
(This is
surely a prayer for forgiveness that a repentant person should use whenever he
falls short of the divine principles of a Kenezian lifestyle. We are mortals
who occasionally fall short of our principles.)
PSALM 101
A KING’S
PROMISE
My
song is about loyalty and justice, and I sing it to you, O Lord.
My
conduct will be faultless. When will you come to me?
I
will live a pure life in my house, and will never tolerate evil.
I hate
the actions of those who turn away from God;
I
will have nothing to do with them.
I
will not be dishonest, and will have no dealings with evil.
I
will get rid of anyone who whispers evil things about someone else; I will not
tolerate a man who is proud and arrogant.
I
will approve of those who are faithful to God and will let them live in my
palace. Those who are completely honest will be allowed to serve me.
No
liar will live in my palace; no hypocrite will remain in my presence. Day after
day I will destroy the wicked in our land; I will expel all evil men from the
city of the Lord!
PSALM 131
A PRAYER OF
HUMBLE TRUST
Lord,
I have given up my pride and turned away from my arrogance. I am not concerned
with great matters or with subjects too difficult for me.
Instead,
I am content and at peace. As a child lies quietly in its mother’s arms, so my
heart is quiet within me. Israel
PSALM 117
IN PRAISE
OF THE LORD
Praise
the Lord, all nations! Praise him all peoples! His love for us is strong and
his faithfulness is eternal Praise the Lord!
DESIGN OF THE BACK COVER
The material in this book is meant only for mature minds who want to
see a better society where their descendants are not fooled nor scandalised by
religious leaders with questionable credentials, low moral standards or worse
still, psychopathological traits bordering on inadequate psychosexual
development.
We are living in an age where homosexuality and paedophilia have become
rampant among fraudsters parading as religious men and women who claim to be
celibates. Protect your offspring from these disciples of Satan adorned in
white cassocks, gowns and veils. All that glitter is not gold! If you are naïve
enough to leave your fathering or mothering duties today, do not blame anybody
tomorrow when your kids are initiated into secret cults or the sexual
perversions of homosexualism and lesbianism.
The Internet is saturated with pornographic materials not
good for growing minds, but this can be monitored and satisfactorily censored
by responsible parents. However, that innocent looking priest, pastor, brother
or sister you trust, can do more damage to your child’s morality, because you
will least suspect them! Read this book, reflect on its genuine concerns and
join us in providing an insurance cover for the normal personality development
of your lovely children.
Sex scandals are rocking Christendom now!
Rev.
Prof. J. J. Kenez, an exemplary ex-seminarian since the 1970s, is a stoic of
the first class genre, a known moral crusader of no mean order, a veteran
Biafran Commando Officer at age 19, as well as a retired Nigerian Air Force
Officer since 1979! So he owes no one any apologies for his strong views in
this crusade to sanitize the Holy Catholic Church in particular, and all the
other Christian denominations in general! Heed his wise counsels today and
secure the health, success and happiness of your family. May God bless everyone
who does so!
No comments:
Post a Comment