THE two-part column of former priest Orlando Carvajal on married clergy was based on a faulty understanding of how the Church was instituted by God. This will be a detailed rebuttal of his claims.
Firstly, Carvajal imagines that Christ established a community only, while alleging that the clergy is a later invention. He even goes as far to call them “elites.” In Jesus’s own lifetime, he already made priests of the apostles when he mandated them to offer the Sacrifice of His Body and Blood (Luke 22:19) and to forgive sins in his name (John 20:23). Furthermore, several New Testament letters, such as 1 Timothy, Titus, and James, make mention of deacons, presbyters (priests), and bishops. Clearly, even in the first century, there were already leaders in the Church tasked with shepherding the faithful.
Now, does this mean that the clergy will just lord it over the lay people with impunity? Of course not. Christ says several times, “whoever wants to be the first must be your servant.” Carvajal also assumes that since priests are tasked to minister to communities which they don’t belong to, they are bound to fail because they are outsiders who don’t sympathize with them. All the more that since it is in a different environment, the priest has more incentive to go out and minister to them. Remember, priests will be answerable to God for the souls in their care.
He also generalizes the majority of clerics as unfaithful to celibacy and attached to money. While there have been notable cases of disobedient priests, the majority of them heroically live out their vocation. Imagine if you take away the vow of celibacy for priests; their attention would be heavily diverted and there would be even more room for abuses such as in the clerical sex abuse crisis in the West. “The unmarried man is concerned about the Lord’s work,” says St. Paul, who was also celibate.
Many believe that by lifting priestly celibacy, it would answer the shortage of priests and that more men would consider priesthood. That is wrong, because even among Catholic rites, which allow marriage for priests (e.g, Eastern Catholics), there is still a shortage of clerics. Instead, it is the rapid secularization of our culture, with its blatant impurity and hedonism, which kills of so many vocations. Very few men are hearing the call of God because the call of the world drowns it out.
Lastly, Mr. Carvajal seems to be imagining a “church” according to his own human whims. He envisions a “church” where there is no hierarchy, where there is no dogma/doctrine, and one that always catches up with the world. To him, the only doctrine should be that anything which causes disharmony is to be discarded.
Don’t be surprised that the real Church is often at odds with the world. If we follow Carvajal’s “doctrine of harmony with the world,” would moral evils like abortion, euthanasia, and adultery be allowed because they are contentious and debated issues? --Gerard Biagan