St. Paul

, , , , , , , , ,

Will the Catholic Church allow married priests in the western Latin rite? Should It?

, , , , , , , , ,
Will the Catholic Church allow married priests in the western Latin rite? Should It?

QUESTION:

Will the Catholic Church allow married priests in the Western Latin rite? Should It?

THE RELIGION GUY’S ANSWER:

The new year began with the surprise revival of this perennial issue by a prominent Catholic insider who asserted that the mandate for priests to be unmarried and celibate “was optional for the first millennium of the Church’s existence and it should become optional again.”

This came in a media interview with Archbishop Charles Scicluna, 63, named by Pope Francis in 2015 to lead the church in the nation of Malta. As he indicated, celibacy for all priests, not just those under vows in religious orders, was not made an absolute rule till the Second Lateran Council in A.D. 1139. Back then, one reason was to stop corrupt bishops from handing sons their lucrative posts.

Catholicism is the only branch of Christianity that imposes this requirement.

Sciclina is an especially influential figure due to his 2018 appointment by Francis to a second post as Adjunct Secretary of the Vatican’s all-important agency on doctrine. Over the years, the Vatican has also entrusted the archbishop, who holds doctorates in both secular and canon law, to prosecute delicate cases of sexual abuse by priests.

As Scicluna noted, the Catholic Church has long welcomed priests who marry prior to ordination in its Oriental and Eastern Rite jurisdictions, centered in Ukraine, India, Lebanon and in the Mideast. Such is also the tradition in Eastern Orthodoxy, which ordains married men, but requires celibacy for bishops. (Catholicism occasionally ordains married Protestant ministers who convert, such as Anglicans and Lutherans.)

The archbishop asked, “Why should we lose a young man who would have made a fine priest just because he wanted to get married? And we did lose good priests just because they chose marriage.” He said “experience has shown me this is something we need to seriously think about.” For one thing, some priests cope with the rule “by secretly engaging in sentimental relationships” and “we know there are priests around the world who also have children.” Therefore “if it were up to me I would revise the requirement.”

Was Scicluna nudging delegates who next October will attend the second and final session of Pope Francis’s Synod of Bishops at the Vatican?


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , , , , , , ,

Pointers for journalists covering the neverending U.S. Protestant LGBTQ+ wars

, , , , , , , , , ,
Pointers for journalists covering the neverending U.S. Protestant LGBTQ+ wars

Few expect to find religious substance on cable-news channels and websites.

But on New Year’s Eve, MSNBC posted a liberal overview of the same-sex dispute that is splitting the large United Methodist Church (UMC) and affects U.S. Protestantism over-all. The writer was Robert Allan Hill, dean of the chapel and New Testament professor at Boston University.

The Guy assumes that MSNBC has neither sought nor posted any theological article on this by a doctrinal traditionalist, any more than we’d expect Fox News to post a liberal’s religious commentary on this topic. Such are the “silos” that shape today’s cable “news” offerings and audiences.

As of December 31, the dispute over the Bible and sexual morality caused 7,660 congregations, roughly a quarter of the UMC, to depart, the largest U.S. schism since the Civil War. But Hill is upbeat because there’s now “a way forward” for “creative repositioning” in the UMC.

Sexual traditionalists have won every UMC showdown the past 52 years, but their voting power is seriously weakened by the big U.S. walkout, raising the odds that liberals can finally change official belief at the General Conference in Charlotte April 23 to May 3, or else at a special 2026 conference called by the bishops.

The media still have some difficulty explaining why this conflict has been so persistent and disruptive, so The Guy will sketch some pointers from the immense literature on this from scholars. Whatever the case with Catholic and Orthodox churches, for Protestants it’s all about the Bible, what it says and how that’s to be interpreted and applied.

Hill charged that current supporters of the Christian teaching across the centuries “have apparently not read all of the Bible, or at least have not read some parts of it carefully, faithfully and fully” so that the issue “is biblically misunderstood.”

For starters, he says there’s a “paucity of any biblical material” on homosexuality, with only six passages. Traditionalists cite a larger number but, leaving that question aside, they argue that both the Old and New Testaments clearly teach a moral aversion to same-sex activity and no verse tolerates it.


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , , , , ,

Why do 21st Century Christians favor, or oppose, same-sex marriage? (Clue: doctrine)

, , , , , , , ,
Why do 21st Century Christians favor, or oppose, same-sex marriage? (Clue: doctrine)

THE QUESTION:

Why do 21st Century Christians favor, or oppose, same-sex marriage?

THE GUY’S ANSWER:

Just before Christmas, a top Donald Trump-loving conservative on New York City talk radio professed disbelief that some Americans persist in opposing same-sex marriage because of some book (unnamed) written ages ago.

Obviously, The Guy again realizes that journalism has important work to do explaining the basics of centuries of Christian thinking, both con and pro.

The teaching against gay and lesbian sexual relationships stood essentially unquestioned for 2,000 years but now that’s changing.

Still, on the global level some 2 billion people belong to Catholic, Orthodox, conservative Protestant, and Independent indigenous churches where there’s no prospect of any major change, though individual members dissent. (The same for a billion Muslims.)

In the U.S., the traditionalists are on defense with gay and lesbian marriage legalized by the U.S. Supreme Court and now Congress. They seek recognition by courts and government agencies of their conscience claims, hope to avoid penalties, and worry that ostracism from polite society may lie ahead.

Many “mainline” Protestant churches in North America and Western Europe recently enacted historic breaks with tradition, approving same-sex marriages for clergy and parishioners. U.S. landmarks: Change was first formally proposed to Presbyterians in 1968 and the United Methodist Church in 1972. Evangelical Lutheran Church in America Lutherans published four major books advocating change between 1983 and 1999. The Episcopal Church consecrated its first openly gay bishop in 2003, deepening an international divide among Anglicans.

Among resulting walkouts, the biggest may be the United Methodist one that is finally erupting.

Protestant disputes always center on the Bible


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , , , ,

What's is behind the symbolism of shepherds and wise men worshipping newborn Jesus?

, , , , , , ,
What's is behind the symbolism of shepherds and wise men worshipping newborn Jesus?

THE QUESTION:

What’s signified by shepherds and wise men worshipping the newborn Jesus?

THE RELIGION GUY’S ANSWER:

The world’s most-read and most-recited narratives are quite likely the two independent and contrasting accounts of Jesus’ birth that begin the biblical Gospels of Matthew and Luke.

A particularly striking difference is that Matthew has a Jewish flavor yet features Gentile “wise men from the East” of high status and Luke, aimed at a Gentile audience, tells us of humble Jewish shepherds. Intriguingly, neither Gospel knows of the other’s visitors who came to worship the baby of Bethlehem.

Several decades later, the Book of Acts records, the earliest Christians were busily converting not only Jews but a visiting Ethiopian official, hated Samaritans and Roman occupation soldiers, and then multicultural Gentiles across the Mediterranean region.

In the Christian understanding, the birth in Bethlehem fulfilled God’s promise in calling Abraham that “by you all the families of the earth will bless themselves” (Genesis 12:3) and the revelation to the prophet Isaiah that Israel would be “a light to the nations” (42:6, 49:6, 60:3).

By the early 50s A.D., the greatest of the early missionaries to Gentiles, St. Paul, would cite the universal call of Abraham as he taught believers that “there is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus. And if you are Christ’s then you are Abraham’s offspring, heirs according to promise” (Galatians 3:6-9 and 28-29).


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , , , , ,

Here's a soundbite for you: In the Bible, does St. Peter call women the 'weaker sex'?

, , , , , , , ,
Here's a soundbite for you: In the Bible, does St. Peter call women the 'weaker sex'?

THE QUESTION:

In the Bible, does St. Peter call women the “weaker sex”?

THE RELIGION GUY’S ANSWER:

Yes.

But why? What did that mean? What was he saying about women’s status in a culture far different from that of the 21st Century?

A preliminary point. Word limits do not allow adequate examination here of liberal scholars’ contention that St. Peter did not really write the two New Testament letters the texts attribute to him, or of the reasons conservatives are convinced that these are authentic words from the figure Catholicism uplifts as the first pope and all Christians revere as an apostle, founder and martyr. The following discussion will assume Peter was the author.

Jackson Wu, an evangelical theologian with the Global Training Network, raised the question about I Peter 3:7 in this June 29 blog item. The verse at issue reads “likewise you husbands, live considerately with your wives, bestowing honor on the woman as the weaker sex, since you are joint heirs of the grace of life. …”

That’s the Revised Standard Version translation. Using the ever-handy www.BibleGateway.com, you can quickly compare 60 other English renditions.

Others that say “weaker sex” are the Living Bible, a modern U.S. paraphrase; Expanded Bible, which includes alternate translations; and the original New Revised Standard Version, but not last year’s updated edition. Others say weaker “partner” and many have weaker “vessel,” which is the more exact translation of the original Greek. That’s important.

Peter’s letter is abundantly clear that women are not inferior spiritually, or morally, or of any lesser status than men in the eyes of God.


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , , , ,

Many like to speculate: What was the biblical 'thorn in the flesh' that plagued St. Paul?

, , , , , , ,
Many like to speculate: What was the biblical 'thorn in the flesh' that plagued St. Paul?

THE QUESTION:

What was the biblical "thorn in the flesh" that so plagued St. Paul?

THE RELIGION GUY'S ANSWER:

We'll never be sure. But the question is perennially fascinating.

"Thorn in the flesh" is one of many commonplace phrases we take from the Bible. It appears in 2 Corinthians chapter 12, where St. Paul writes that he knew "a man" -- modestly referring to himself -- who was "caught up into Paradise and heard things that are not to be told." He describes the aftermath of his powerful experience in verses 7-9:

To keep me from being too elated, a thorn was given me in the flesh, a messenger of Satan to torment me, to keep me from being too elated. Three times I appealed to the Lord about this, that it would leave me, but he said to me, “My grace is sufficient for you, for power is made perfect in weakness.” So, I will boast all the more gladly of my weaknesses, so that the power of Christ may dwell in me. (New Revised Standard Version)

Other English translations say "arrogant," "conceited," "lifted up," "proud" or "exalted" instead of "elated."

Christians through history have pondered what so plagued this New Testament writer and Christian founder (though we can imagine his close colleagues knew). Some say it was a interior spiritual or psychological challenge, while others see opponents, obstacles or persecution his pioneer missionary work coped with.

Many focus on the telltale word "flesh" and insist it must have been some physical malady.


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , , , , ,

Updates for a very #2020 day: Trump, COVID-19, Twitter, Bob Dylan and words from St. Paul

, , , , , , , ,

Journalists are trained to react to major news stories in a very particular way. A voice inside your head is supposed to say, no matter how earth-shattering the news: What happens next?

Continuing with that line of thinking, in the wake of the news that President Donald Trump and his wife Melania have tested positive for COVID-19, journalists will be asking: What is the next story? And, in particular, how does this affect my beat, the topic that I cover day after day.

You may have seen those mock headlines about the end of the world? What’s the headline at The New York Times for this religion story? "God says world to end tomorrow (story and analysis on page B11)." Or how about USA Today: "WE’RE DEAD!" The Washington Post: "World to end tomorrow; Polls look bad for GOP." The Wall Street Journal: “Stocks are down, market closing early tomorrow.”

Right now, there are political-beat reporters who are being tempted to tweet: “Take that, all of you white evangelicals.”

Surely it says something bad — about me and our times — that the SECOND thing I thought of was this: Blue-checkmark journalists are going to be tempted to show their stuff on Twitter. The THIRD thing was: Brace yourselves for some really bad “thoughts and prayers” wisecracks.

What was my first reaction? I hesitate to share it, since regular GetReligion readers are probably aware that I have been a #NeverTrump guy since his first announcement that he was running for president. I simply didn’t think he was qualified for the office, as a basic issue of temperament and political skills.

But, I confess that my first thought this morning was this: “God is not mocked.”

Yes, that’s a theological reflection and I need to stress that this is actually a pretty good scriptural reaction to all kinds of serious news events, as opposed to being a comment about Citizen Trump alone. For serious believers, that’s a comment about the state of the world — period.

Care for some context?


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , , , , , , ,

BBC and Easter: If culture is upstream of politics, might doctrine -- for many -- be upstream of culture?

, , , , , , , , , ,
BBC and Easter: If culture is upstream of politics, might doctrine -- for many -- be upstream of culture?

Ask most Americans to name the most important day on the Christian calendar and I'm afraid (as a guy who took a bunch of church history classes) that the answer you will hear the most is "Christmas."

That is a very, very American answer. As the old saying goes, the two most powerful influences on the U.S. economy are the Pentagon and Christmas. There's no question which holiday puts the most shoppers in malls and ads in newspapers (grabbing the attention of editors).

But, as a matter of liturgical reality, there is no question that the most important holy day for Christians is Easter, called "Pascha" in the churches of the East. I realize that St. Paul is not an authoritative voice, in terms of Associated Press style, but this is how he put it:

... If Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith. More than that, we are then found to be false witnesses about God, for we have testified about God that he raised Christ from the dead. But he did not raise him if in fact the dead are not raised. For if the dead are not raised, then Christ has not been raised either. And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins. Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ are lost. If only for this life we have hope in Christ, we are of all people most to be pitied.

Now, I am not here to argue about doctrine. What "Crossroads" host Todd Wilken and I talked about during this week's podcast (click here to check that out) was the fact that what religious believers affirm in terms in doctrine often plays a crucial role in how they live and act. Thus, it is often wise for reporters to ask core doctrinal questions in order to spot fault lines inside Christian communities, especially during times of conflict.

Here at GetReligion, I have repeatedly mentioned (some witty readers once proposed a drinking game linked to this) the "tmatt trio" of doctrinal questions that I have used for several decades now. Here is a version taken from some of my conversations with the late George Gallup, Jr.

* Are biblical accounts of the resurrection of Jesus accurate? Did this happen?


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , , ,

Were Paul, and Jesus himself, mistaken about when Second Coming would occur?

, , , , , ,
Were Paul, and Jesus himself, mistaken about when Second Coming would occur?

NORMAN’S QUESTION (summarized and paraphrased):

The New Testament letter of 1st Thessalonians regards the coming of the Kingdom as imminent. But don’t 2nd Thessalonians and later New Testament letters indicate the church was coming to terms with the fact that Paul (and Jesus himself) were mistaken about this?

THE RELIGION GUY’S ANSWER:

Experts say the first of the two letters Paul, Silvanus and Timothy sent to friends in the Greek city of Thessalonika was the earliest New Testament book to be written, dated only a couple decades after Jesus’ crucifixion.

Both that letter and 2nd Thessalonians (which some few think might actually have been written before 1st Thessalonians) demonstrate that from the very beginning Christians looked forward to the return of Jesus as the culmination of history. After 20 centuries, expectation of the “Second Coming” or “Second Advent” or “Parousia” (Greek for “presence”) remains a central belief.

The Religion Guy consulted numerous resources on this complex terrain and relies especially on the late F.F. Bruce of England’s University of Manchester, a clear thinker and writer and, significantly, a major evangelical Protestant scholar. That movement has focused muich attention on the End Times for a century and more. Bruce wrote a commentary on the two Thessalonian letters, and treated related material in the Gospels in his classic “Hard Sayings of Jesus” (1983).

Norman has a point because of one pronoun in 1 Thessalonians 4:15: “We who are alive, who are left until the coming of the Lord, shall not precede those who have fallen asleep” (that is, have died).

Though the three letter-writers did not expressly say so, Bruce wrote, their first person plural pronoun “we” indicates that in the first blush of newborn faith -- yes -- they thought they and their contemporaries might well still be alive when Jesus returned.


Please respect our Commenting Policy