BishopAccountability.org
	The Celibacy Tradition May Be Less of a Tradition Than It Seems By R. John Kinkel Online Catholics [Rome] October 11, 2005 R. John Kinkel responds to the synod intervention of Cardinal George Pell Synopsis of the Intervention of His Eminence Cardinal George Pell, Archbishop of Sydney, at the XI Ordinary General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops, Rome, October 11, 2005 Many Synod Fathers have spoken of the difficulties experienced by the Church throughout the world. Some of these are caused by our own mistakes. The Second Vatican Council brought great blessings and substantial gains; for example, continuing missionary expansion and the new movements and communities. But it was also followed by confusion, some decline, especially in the West, and pockets of collapse. Good intentions are not enough. Two areas of decline in Oceania are the number of priestly vocations in Australia and New Zealand (but not everywhere in Oceania) and the confusion evident in the proliferation of Communion services. My recommendations to the Synod on how to deal with these "shadows" presuppose the maintenance in the Latin Church of the ancient tradition and life-giving discipline of mandatory celibacy for the diocesan clergy as well as the religious orders. To loosen this tradition now would be a serious error, which would provoke confusion in the mission areas and would not strengthen spiritual vitality in the First World. It would be a departure from the practice of the Lord Himself, bring significant practical disadvantages to the work of the Church, e.g. financial, and weaken the sign value of the priesthood. It would weaken, too, the witness to loving sacrifice, and to the reality of the Last Things, and the rewards of Heaven. We should remember the situation of the Church 500 years ago just before the Reformation, a small weak community separated from the East. The enormous expansion since then and the purification of Church leadership (imperfect but substantial) were achieved primarily under grace, through the lives of celibate sisters, brothers and priests. The recent sexual scandals have not invalidated these gains. I request the Synod to draw up a further list of suggestions and criteria to regulate the celebration of Communion services, especially on Sundays. "Liturgies awaiting a priest" is a better title than "priest-less liturgies." There is no such thing as "lay-led liturgy," because lay people can only lead devotional prayers and para-liturgies. The suggestion of Archbishop Paolo of Haiti that we use the title "special ministers of Holy Communion" is much better than "ministers of the Eucharist." I support the suggestion that a list of topics for thematic homilies be drawn up for theliturgical year. One such topic should be the nature of the Eucharist and the essential role of the ministerial priest. Communion services or liturgies of the Word should not be substituted for Mass when priests are available. Such unnecessary substitutions are often not motivated by a hunger for the Bread of Life, but by ignorance and confusion or even by hostility to the ministerial priesthood and the sacraments. To what extent are regular celebrations of Communion services, Sunday after Sunday, a genuine development or distortion, a Protestantization, which risks confusing even regular Church-goers? R. John Kinkel's response: The speech by Cardinal Pell of Australia at the Roman Synod sounds an alarm to most observers: some church officials do not know history. Mandatory celibacy for priests is not an "ancient tradition" but rather a practice imposed on the church in the middle ages. It is a medieval concept. The Apostles for the most part were married and Catholic clergy with their wives served the church with distinction until the 12th century when mandatory celibacy was imposed on the Roman church. Married priests were a solid tradition dating back to antiquity. Orthodox Christians had already split from the Roman Catholic Church in 1094 and so they were not affected by this decision. We should praise all the fine priests and bishops who have served the church as celibates since the 12th century. What the church needs now, however, is a two track system for priests: one for those who wish to follow the tradition of celibacy; the other for those who want to marry and have a family as well as serve the church as priests. The synod taking place in Rome is focusing on the Eucharist but several bishops rightly point out that Catholics throughout the world cannot celebrate the Eucharist on a regular basis because of the priest shortage. Many bishops and cardinals have concluded that the Eucharist is more important than hanging on to mandatory celibacy. There seems to be a real, honest dialogue going on about how to deal with this problem in a rational and logical manner. Restoring the ancient tradition of a married clergy would give the church renewed vigour and determination for the long road ahead: renewal and reform of the Catholic church. I think we have a good chance to move forward and get change in the church on this matter but it will not be easy. Conservative forces are at work trying to keep the church the way they like it. They totally ignore what the needs of the people of God are and what we must do to grow the church. The key thing is that we leave our children and grandchildren a church they can love and respect. But, you know, it did not have to be this way….. WHAT IF… the pope in 1966 followed the advice of the papal birth control commission and stated that this was a matter of conscience for all Catholics. Yes, and what if he had the courage to say that in 1930 the church had overstepped its bounds in condemning artificial birth control. We made a mistake. Many people would not have left the church and looked upon it now as a group of conservatives trying to impose their human understanding of the world on the people of God. We lost many Catholics when we failed here. We were viewed as out of touch with reality. WHAT IF… in about 1975 the Catholic Church saw the need for a married clergy to give our ministry the diversity it needed in dealing with the challenges of the modern world. How much pain and suffering could have been avoided. But no, we continued on our merry way, asserting the value of the past and that change was not needed. Allowing married clergy in 1975 would have helped us deal with the sex abuse crisis in the church since married men with children would not have let fellow clergy abuse other children with impunity. If we had made a decision on the married clergy issue we would not have a priest shortage today. WHAT IF… in about 1988 the church understood the importance of women: at that time we could have restored the role of women by ordaining them to the diaconate. Hans Kung points out that we had women deacons in the church up until the 5th century. Had we ordained women to the diaconate we would not be looking like this stodgy old male-dominated church with many women left out in the cold. Now we have a lot of angry women and fewer families attending church on Sunday. Maybe we need a woman preaching a sermon once in a while. The lesson is clear: we may get some meaningful change out of this new pope and the synod. But it will be change way overdue and the failures of the past tell us we must reform this church so we gradually move forward in the modern world without waiting until a gigantic crisis forces us to admit there is work to be done and change to be made. Yes, we need to return to an ancient tradition, all right; it is the tradition of Paul and the early church. As I review the wonderful story of the first generation of Christian believers, I see the desire to grow the church and to share the message of the risen Christ: live a new and transforming life. St Paul always tried to go the extra mile for his gentile converts. Nothing would separate them from the risen Lord. In Galations we read that some powerful forces in the community want to impose the Jewish customs of circumcision and dietary practices on the new gentile converts. Paul saw that such a move would turn some of his new converts away. They would not know Christ. So he went to Peter and confronted him to his face. Such doctrinaire procedures would turn people off. Peter saw the folly of his ways and back off. Paul won one for his people and for the church. Later, Paul saw that conversion to Christianity put a lot of stress on the marriage and family. If a woman converted to Christianity but her husband remained pagan, this could mean that the couple would not live peaceably. Separation and divorce often followed. Paul came to the aid of his parishioners with what we call the Pauline privilege. Paul's understanding of marriage permitted the divorced Christian to marry again but in the Christian faith. The old marriage did not count. Paul was always trying to find ways to make the church work for people. Bishops should take note: Read your bible. R. John Kinkel, Ph.D. teaches sociology at Baker College, Michigan and is author of the book ‘Chaos in the Catholic Church.’
Any original material on these pages is copyright © BishopAccountability.org 2004. Reproduce freely with attribution.