My last post of 6/2/09 deserves a follow-up as some of the reader comments were thought-proving and others wandered into other directions. I appreciate both because some of my posts have been criticized for covering too much territory. I originally thought about breaking this up into smaller posts but I do not want to litter TMV with so much on this one topic. Instead I have put it all here in an effort to close this topic untill there are new developments.
As far as supporting documentation with respect the views of lay Catholics, there have been a number of studies and surveys over the past several decades. They are found all over the Internet. Comparing and combining the results indicate a clear majority of the Catholic laity (including both conservatives and liberals) would fully support a married Priesthood in percentages varying from 60 to 70 percent. A majority of lay Catholics do not support women Priests or openly gay priests, but the results in favor of women have been improving slowly over time. Inactive Catholics were not always part of all these surveys.
Additional surveys within the Priesthood itself acknowledge that at least one-third of current Priests are closet homosexuals. Even some Bishops and Priests have suggested dropping the celibacy rules but were quickly squelched by Rome. The majority simply voted with their feet, leaving the Priesthood in large numbers over the past few decades to get married. This is happening all over the world in the Church. Considering reality, the prohibition against ordaining gay priests is also questionable.
Though the Church claims to have over 1 billion adherents, that number includes hundreds of millions of people, principally in Europe and the Americas who are “lapsed” Catholics. These people attend mass infrequently (only major holidays, weddings and funerals), or have joined other religions or Christian sects, or are humanists, agnostics or atheists now.
In 1960 there were 40 million Catholics in the U.S. with an overall population of 180 million. There were 60,000 Priests or one for every 667 lay persons. Today, the U.S. Catholic population is around 65 million out of a total population of more than 300 million. However the number of Priests is just over 40,000 or about 1,625 Catholics per Priest. Even discounting the “lapsed” Catholics in the past and today, the disparity in available Priests is enormous. The disparity is far worse around the globe.
The Church hierarchy’s hypocrisy extends to some existing Catholic Priests in Africa, Asia and even South America who keep “wives” and have children. Because there is such a world-wide shortage of Priests, the authorities in Rome also overlook these men unless they make a big issue of it (have way too many kids) or publicly try to get married.
My prior post listed the inconsistencies in Church policy with respect to eastern rites within the church that have married priests and that if a married Episcopal Priest converts to Catholicism, he can remain married. Of course everyone knows that Rome let local Bishops cover up pedophile Priests for decades in the U.S. and elsewhere.
With respect to church attendance and closures of churches in the East and Midwest of the U.S., and in Canada, some of it is a result of dwindling numbers of mass attendants, but also to the fact that most of the smaller parishes have no assigned full-time priests. Catholics have generally suburbanized themselves with the rest of America. The Church essentially operates as a “franchise.” Money flows up, not down. You get a “Roman Catholic” moniker on your church by meeting certain standards and making a profit in your operations. There is very little sharing of revenues between parishes serving vastly different economic and social groups within the same Diocese.
Essentially the Church is closing poor parishes down because their parishioners do not give as much to put into the collection plate that flows upward to the local Bishop and later the Vatican. But those same parishes provide many social services to the poor, such as soup kitchens, temporary refuges, and they are often the only weekly social outlet for many inner-city poor and elderly Catholics. A religious organization kills its inner spirituality by operating as a business concerned only with the bottom line. In newer areas of the American southwest, the Church prefers mega-parishes with at least 7,500 active members in each.
From an artistic or architectural point of view, many of these great old inner-city churches are beautiful, historical and architectural treasures of American History, who unfortunately need significant funds for repairs and maintenance. It may be better to keep these churches functioning but open to serve a variety of local denominations. The Church could reserve a time for one Catholic Mass each Sunday in the old building and during the rest of the week other religious or community groups could use and help financially support these grand neighborhood edifices.
What drove many Catholics away includes the fact they could not go to their Priests for marital, sexual or related spiritual advice because they have no real-world expertise in those important areas. Arguably many Church positions on life, death, sex, marriage, divorce and childrearing, might be very different if the hierarchy consisted of married heterosexual men instead of the current leadership of asexual celibate men.
A few comments brought up the idea of property preservation considerations having been a factor in favor of a celibate Priesthood. Perhaps it played a small role but under civil and cannon law, a Priest or Bishop upon his death cannot “give” away church property he does not own. Roman Catholic real estate and property are ostensibly held in the name of the local Bishop – but that means the living Bishop. In addition, the Church and its subsidiaries are fully incorporated non-profit religious organizations in the U.S. and most countries around the world. Again, employees and trustees of such organizations cannot transfer any assets that they do not own. Finally, Priests today are completely free to write wills and give their property upon death (including money saved, collectibles, stocks and real estate) to anyone they choose, including back to the Church or to family members or friends. The claim of maintaining control over property and real estate is a ruse and non-issue.
A single Priest with a vow of poverty does not have to be paid a salary nearly as large as would have to be paid to a Priest with a spouse and children. As far as operating expenses are concerned, this may be a major consideration. However, an organization (for-profit or non-profit) has to spend money to make money. If having many more married priests can get more parishioners through the doors on a regular basis, then everyone benefits (profits.)
As far as the charges that the GLBT community preys on children, that possibility may apply to a small minority, as pedophilia occurs rarely in the straight community. Sex with all minors, regardless of the type, is morally and criminally wrong in all U.S. jurisdictions. We are finally shedding light upon the whole mess in society. If one commentator claims that gays want to convert children, then that would support the critics that argue alternative sexual preferences are only choices that should be repressed or could be reversed. I would think most in the GLBT community would beg to differ.
I wrote a prior post indicating that my spouse and I believe that sexual preferences are often a mixed result of chromosomes, hormones, and to a small extent environmental. With the breakdown of strict religious prohibitions on a variety of sexual practices, many more people might come out as bi-sexuals in the future rather than just as strictly homosexual males or lesbian females. However, about 90% of the population will remain heterosexual.
Most of my gay friends are not interested in having children. They simply want to be married with all the important civil rights that come with such unions. Only a small minority wants children. Many others want to remain single, as do many heterosexual individuals. But neither group wants to give up “sex” even though many single people go thru long periods of involuntary celibacy.
The difference between “civil unions” and “marriage” is and will be more of semantics than of substance. (My spouse and I were married before a Municipal Court Judge in a lovely downtown park next to the courthouse.) Not only do we have a son, we could legally adopt another child without the benefit of a “church” marriage. The same should apply to all other couples in civil unions or marriages.
Heterosexuals have made such a mess of both religious and civil marriages that gays couldn’t do worse. My spouse and I think every child needs both male and female parental influences. Many children of divorced heterosexuals are frequently missing at least one of those people. Some gay couples with children make supplemental arrangements with relatives and friends to fill in some of those gaps as do many single heterosexual parents. Most of all, children need loving, patient, and supporting parents and adults who will guide them into adulthood by setting up reasonable limits and enforcing them appropriately.
There is no conflict between religion and science since they attempt to answer different questions. The Catholic Church has openly embraced the Big Bang and evolution, unlike many ignorant Protestant sects in the U.S. Most Jews share this same scientific outlook with educated Catholics. Should not Christians respect and rely upon current Jewish Bible interpretations for those parts (i.e. Genesis) that were originally written by and for Jews?
I am intrigued that if Justice Sotomayor joins the Supreme Court, there will be 6 Roman Catholics, 2 Jews, and just one Protestant on the High Court. This is indicative of the prominence of Catholics and Jews in all aspects of American politics, business, law, medicine, the arts and sciences, and academia. Compared to many other groups in America, Jews and Catholics (and some new immigrant groups) highly value a good education that often includes graduate studies. The U.S. Supreme Court actually resembles the combined populations of New York, Chicago and Los Angeles – essentially Catholic-Jewish cities with some Protestants, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, and others thrown in for variety.
Signum Crucis: In nómine Patris et Fílii et Spíritus Sancti. Amen.
By Marc Pascal in Phoenix, AZ