THE RIGHT TO THE EUCHARIST

A recently encountered quotation from a letter of Karl Rahner has provoked much soul searching.  He wrote: “If the Church everywhere, or in certain areas, is unable to find enough clergy unless she abandons celibacy, then she must abandon it;  for the obligation to provide enough pastors for the Christian people takes precedence.”

            This seems so obvious that it should hardly need stating.  Yet it runs counter to  official Church teaching and would be roundly condemned as such by various bodies, if allowed to come up for discussion.

             Christ emphasised time and again that the apostle’s duty was to carry his message of salvation to the ends of the earth.  And this is precisely what the Apostles did as we can see from The Acts.  But nowhere was it stated that celibacy was a condition for this.  Many of the Apostles and priests in the early Church were married and this in no way invalidated their ministry.

            Human rules and regulations should facilitate God’s designs, not hinder them.  Man-made laws can never take precedence over divine ones.  Failure to accept this was one of the reasons the Pharisees were condemned by Jesus.

            This is not to suggest that celibacy is the only or even the main cause of the dramatic fall in vocations in so many countries.  There are other reasons connected with wider issues affecting society as a whole.  Young people today seem more reluctant than in the past to take on permanent commitments at a relatively early age, either to celibacy or to marriage. This phenomenon calls for serious analysis and a relevant response.

            Nor is any of the above intended to be disrespectful or dismissive of celibacy in itself.  The celibate life should always be highly valued in the Church as a generous and  eloquent witness to the Gospel, a vocation freely embraced by many religious, male and female, in their vow of chastity.

            What does now seem undesirable is to make it a condition for ordination to the priesthood and the power to celebrate Mass.  For if it can be waived, as in the case of growing numbers of Anglican and Lutheran ministers already married and entering into full communion with Rome, why can it not also be waived for unmarried people who feel a genuine call to the priesthood yet shy away because of it ?

            On this point it should also be borne in mind that Eastern-rite Churches, in communion with Rome and with sacraments recognised as valid, have no problem in ordaining already married men.  Conversely it should be remembered that, in some cultures, an unmarried person is not considered a full or complete member of their tribe or society.

Questions such as these need to be faced honestly and debated by the Catholic Church as a whole, and not only in marginal groups often wary of making their opinions known for fear of disapproval. This is important because, in its official documents, the Church goes so far as to claim: “The celebration of the Mass…. is the  centre of the whole Christian life for the universal Church, the local Church and for each and every one of the faithful.” (General Instruction of the Roman Missal, 1)

 The possibilities are many.  They could include:

(1)        The explicit renunciation of marriage at the beginning of the present ordination ceremony should be removed for diocesan priests, thus leaving them free to marry, if they so wish.

(2)        Permit those who have ceased an active ministry as priests in order to marry to continue to celebrate Mass and exercise their ministry since they are still priests.

(3)        Ordain married lay people to act as priests, either permanently or perhaps for a specific time, in areas where shortages are acute and the faithful deprived of the sacraments.

Other modifications of current rules may also be required if the Church is to

continue and improve its much needed ministry in our modern world.  To discuss and propose these should not be considered unfaithful, anti-Catholic or childish, but rather an expression of love for the Church which she should value, badly needs and was the aim of Vatican II.   

Michael Campbell-Johnston SJ