I recently discovered an extraordinary, rare book which might interest readers of this blog, and even historians and theologians researching the subject of clerical celibacy. People writing theses on the subject should know about this unpublished book, written over a century ago, which recounts the efforts of a Spanish Cardinal to eradicate the common practice of priests “living in sin” in the Basque Country of the 15th century.
“Not exactly my cuppa tea”, I hear some readers mumble. But it is a subject of some interest to many people today, especially those who like myself left the priesthood precisely to get married (or would like to …). It remains one of the most controversial subjects of contemporary Catholicism.
The book in question is accessible only on the Net :
http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k1030513
It was written in French by an erudite Anglican clergyman who was ordained a priest exactly one hundred years before me. Wentworth Webster (1828-1907) was ordained in 1861 in England, but spent his life living, ministering, researching and writing in France, and more specifically, in my beloved French Basque Country. His “Les Loisirs d’Un Etranger au Pays Basque” (“The Leisures of a Foreigner in the Basque Country”) – “non mis dans le commerce” (“not published commercially”) – is a fascinating study of subjects ranging from “Inscriptions in the Basque Country and its Environs” to “The Insurance of Cattle in South-West France and Northern Spain”. But it is the chapter “The Basques Defended in 1788 by an Englishman against the Calumnies of a Spaniard, Bishop and Cardinal” that interests us.
Webster’s source is a book in English by John Talbot Dillon on the history of Peter the Great, King of Castille and Leon, in which he speaks of a certain Bishop of Gerona, during the reign of Ferdinand and Isabella, attacking the Basque people, and notably their clergy, as irreligious : “All their priests, without exception, have concubines, without whom they claim they cannot live, and that it was absolutely necessary so as to convert the married men of the parish.” Webster, a distinguished linguist, corrects Dillon’s mistranslation of the Latin text : the reason for the approval of the priests’ concubinage was not to convert husbands but to avoid priests “turning to” their wives ! It would seem, in fact, that the parish obliged the priests to have concubines to protect their own families from the clerical potential predators ! Our author suggests that this practice was already an ancient tradition, and that rather than corrupt the morality of the clergy, its effect was “plutôt le contraire” – “rather the exact opposite”.
Some might question the objectivity of a married Anglican priest in such a discussion. But there is food for thought here. As a young priest aged 31, I came to the conclusion that obligatory celibacy and even voluntary vows of chastity were meaningless and a contradiction of human nature. Allowing priests to marry is not, however, a necessary concession due to the danger of their sexual exploitation of their female parishioners. It is a fundamental human right and a source of human fulfillment and equilibrium. Its recognition by the Church is a consummation devoutly to be wished, but unlikely to happen anytime soon. The Vatican has forgotten what the Manufacturer said on His assembly line : “It is not good for man to be alone” (Genesis 2:18). I’m glad that I, at least, woke up forty-five years ago.
Married priest ?
It is a problem already solved by lot of christians, (protestants, etc …)
It is still a more insignificant subject when we think of the foundaition of monothéism
I am triying to study “ethique” from spinoza
I found a website that is original and helpful :
http://spinoza.fr/
LikeLike
The question of clerical celibacy is indeed of minor importance compared with the God-question. But every aspect of religious belief and practice deserves discussion on the blog if I am to succeed in helping Believers on the Brink let go of all the nonsense.
LikeLike
English is a difficulty for me ; chronological blog also. I prefer hierarchical forum where it is easier to focus on a subject … So I apology if I don’t enter at the best place
The title of the blog “blind faith”, some subjects about atheists, credibility, …. made me think that you consider the monotheism in general, that when you speak of “God”, you speak of the god invented by jewishs
Particularities of such or such sub religion, christian and islam, and Inside christian, the particularities of such or such division, catholic, protestant, etc …, is far from the subject, even if that variety is a kind of proof of the weakness of god evedence !
Do you intend to write specially on the old testament ?
LikeLike
Love your website, Frank, and especially your insightful, well written, witty articles! I’ve always wondered how we could attract good (not even great) leaders of our church when attracting only those who are willing to accept a “contradiction of human nature”.
LikeLike
One of the delightful ironies of Vatican sophistry is that if you happen to be a legally married Anglican priest and “see the light” or the “error of your ways” and “convert” to Catholicism you can be a legally married Catholic priest.
Canon Law (no – not a brother of Jude in the Anglican Communion, but the body of juridical legal proscriptions and prescriptions that govern the governance of the Catholic Church) has all sorts of incredible loop-holes.
A cynic might suspect that much of the content of Canon Law was made by priests for priests – allowing them to carry on as they wished. The average parishioner can always go to “Confession” and say Three Our Fathers, Three Hail Marys and Three Glory Bees – and be none-the-wiser that maybe he/she hadn’t sinned at all.
LikeLike
Your insightful reply has provoked my posting “The Truth about Clerical Celibacy”.
LikeLike
I think it would be better for the RCC to let their priests marry.
LikeLike