progressive involvement: The Catholic Church should end celibacy and start ordaining women

“(The Pope) is at a crossroads,” said Marco Politi, a veteran Italian Vatican journalist (in the New York Times today). “What’s extraordinary is that the scandal has reached the heart of the center of the church. Up to now it was far away — in the States, in Canada, in Brazil, in Australia. Then it came to Europe, to Ireland.

“Then it came to his motherland,” Mr. Politi added of Benedict’s native Germany. “Then it came to his diocese, and now it’s coming to the heart of the government of the church — and he has to give an answer.”

The irony is that, up until just recently, Pope Benedict was getting rather high marks for his handling of the sexual abuse scandal. He actually met with affected families, and issued what seemed to be sincere apologies.

He was perhaps barely inching ahead of it when the scandal erupted anew in Ireland, one of the most Catholic countries in the world. Church attendance in Ireland had already been declining, from a high of 90% to somewhere in the 30's. That decline can only have been accelerated recently, perhaps dramatically.

Ireland is angry, and Benedict's letter to Ireland, while seemingly heart-felt, said nothing specific about any repercussions for anyone for past actions, or any changes to be made in the future. There are two scandals here: (1) the original actions, and (2) the failure of the church to do much about it. Nothing can undo what has already taken place, but actions can be taken now, both to punish offenders and make the changes that need to be made to help prevent future crimes.

One change that should be made is to end the celibacy requirement. It was only begun around the year AD 1000 anyway, and the reason had little to do with spiritual purity, and more to do with the offspring of priests inheriting property.

Lauding celibacy is fine, I guess, if you want to put yourself at odds with God. The Lord God took a high view of sexuality, working it into an integral aspect of everything that lives on this planet. To set yourself apart from that, especially in the belief that doing so makes you "holier," seems not only wrong-headed but hubristic.

Plus, the scriptures say nothing about the supposed virtues of celibacy. The closest you get is Paul telling people not to marry unless they just can't stand to go without sex--(that Paul, such a romantic). In fact, while the scriptures encourage sexual responsibility, it would be a mistake to see them as being anti-sexual. The Christian faith celebrates sexuality and the body because of the Incarnation of Christ.

Nor does the limitation of the priesthood to men make sense any longer, if it ever did. The late Pope John Paul II was asked why the church insisted on a male-only priesthood, and he responded that all the Lord's disciples were men. The obvious rejoinder is that they were all Jews too, but that doesn't mean Catholic priests should be Jews. They were all middle-eastern as well. Should all Catholic priests be middle-eastern?

In fact, it's not even true that all the Lord's disciples were men. Jesus had tons of disciples. Many people followed him, both men and women. The inner core was The Twelve, true, and they were all men, but the rest of the disciples were both men and women.

Moreover, apostles--those who proclaimed the gospel after the resurrection--included both men and women as well. In at least one early Christian community--the Johannine community, centered, it is believed, around the Beloved Disciple and Mary, the mother of Jesus--both men and women lived in full equality.

In fact, as the scriptures attest, it was women who supported the Jesus movement financially (Lk 8:3). Women are good enough to write checks, but not good enough to be priests? As for the twelve named disciples, in none of the four gospels are The Twelve meant to provide a model for the priesthood.

The days when male-dominated heirarchies could run things and expect everyone else to fall in line are over, finito, done. The Catholic church must change. Granted, the odds against change are long indeed. In Vatican II, however, one can see that change is at least possible. The problem is that the church is currently being run by theological revanchists whose goal is to subvert Vatican II and all it represents.

Benedict wants to re-evangelize Europe, he says. You might think such a strategy would call for engagement of European culture and society. You might think that such a strategy would pronounce "good news" to the European people. But no. Benedict has chosen to hunker down with the Francisco Franco-wing of Catholicism and try to ride out the secular storm. Such a strategy is theologically antiquated, sociologically blind, psychologically harmful, and politically inept.