Author: Pia de Solenni

Catechism 101 on Married Priests for Sean Hannity

July 18, 2014 10:02 am July 18, 2014

2 min read

1296 views

Earlier this week, on Monday, I was flipping through the channels and caught the end of an interview between Sean Hannity and Fr. Jonathan Morris. The interview covered issues of…

Earlier this week, on Monday, I was flipping through the channels and caught the end of an interview between Sean Hannity and Fr. Jonathan Morris. The interview covered issues of pedophilia and married priests related to a recent account of a conversation with Pope Francis. (Scalfari, the editor who wrote up the interview has stated publicly that he takes no notes, records nothing, and just goes from memory. In other words, when he sits down with the Pope, he plays his own personal game of Telephone….)

Back to Hannity. As he closed the interview, he asked Fr. Morris if he would start dating if the Roman Catholic Church changed its rule on celibacy.

Ouch. This question was wrong on so many levels, some of which I won’t go into here.

But the most important part is that the tradition of married priests in the various Catholic Rites has been about married men who become priests, not priests who get married. In every Catholic Church (and perhaps the Orthodox, too), a priest must be married before he’s ordained.

As a married priest, if his wife dies, he will not be able to marry again. Just like the rule for married deacons, which is why younger married men are not encouraged to pursue the permanent ~~deaconate~~ diaconate – it’s too early in their lives for most of them to be able to make that commitment.

And for what it’s worth, none of the Rites that allow married priests allow them to ascend to the levels of the hierarchy.

Now, if Hannity were a non-Catholic media personality, I’d chalk this up to ignorance or laziness, including his producers. But Hannity is a professed Catholic and Fr. Morris is a FoxNews regular. There’s just no excuse for this kind of sloppy reporting. If he was confused, he or one of his producers could’ve asked Fr. Morris before the segment.

Catholics, above all, should take the time to inform themselves. If not, hire a moral theologian, like myself, or another Catholic expert (or use the experts you’ve already got) to get the questions and issues right.

I’m sorry I don’t have the clip – have been looking for it and haven’t found it. If a reader has it, I’m happy to post it.

Continue Reading

Marriage. What Does Peace Have To Do With It & Are We Ready To Do The Work Of Peace?

July 16, 2014 10:44 am July 16, 2014

3 min read

1249 views

We talk about peace, but it’s generally an abstract concept describing relations between nations. Nevertheless, at every Mass we hear the words of Jesus, “My peace I give to you.”…

We talk about peace, but it’s generally an abstract concept describing relations between nations. Nevertheless, at every Mass we hear the words of Jesus, “My peace I give to you.” That’s huge. I’ve often thought that we don’t allow ourselves to experience that reality, especially in our closest relationships. Maybe it’s because we don’t know how.

Now, few months ago, I started following the work of Kevin A. Thompson, a Christian pastor who writes a lot on marriage and family issues. I find that he consistently offers solid, practical advice, which is clearly based on his pastoral experience and his faith. I also like that his wife is his editor and works closely with him.

This morning’s post, “The First Step to Solving a Marital Problem,” includes a link to a previous post, “Why Nobel Peace Prize Winners Get Divorced” or “What Nelson Mandela Taught Me About Marriage,” which I found even more insightful.

For example:

We often think of marriage as the holy matrimony of two completely compatible individuals. In reality it’s the Blue and the Grey, the Hatfields and McCoys, the Roadrunner and Wiley Coyote.

A husband and wife are two completely different people, with different experiences, different backgrounds, different genetic makeups, and with different expectations trying to live life together. Conflict is guaranteed. While we shouldn’t seek it, we should embrace it because making peace in the midst of conflict is the task of marriage.

And:

Notice it is peacemaking. Not peace-receiving.

Peace is made. It is struggled for and fought for. It is attained through hard work, sacrifice, energy and effort. Peace is not something which magically comes to us. Jesus didn’t say, “blessed are the peace-receivers.

He goes on to discuss the beatitudes and how they should play a role in marriage. I find it particularly interesting as the beatitudes have been on my mind a lot. I just spoke at a Vatican conference on the beatitudes and am currently teaching an Intro to Moral Theology class. The beatitudes are the road map for the Christian life and a complete reorientation from the Old Testament. While the beatitudes promise us nothing on earth (they are all about the Kingdom of God that we hope to join in the future), the practice of them can lead to happiness in this life. And they’re not just about works of charity towards people we may not know well or at all. I find it very helpful to see them applied to marriage and they could just as easily be applied to any relationship, particularly familial relationships.

Do read his entire piece here.

Peace is not received; it’s made. And it takes everything we have to make it.

Amen.

Continue Reading

Married Priests

July 12, 2014 12:08 pm July 12, 2014

2 min read

1389 views

One of the standard hurdles thrown at Catholics is the question of why doesn’t the Catholic Church allow married priests, particularly when there’s a vocation crisis? [Aside – In interviews,…

One of the standard hurdles thrown at Catholics is the question of why doesn’t the Catholic Church allow married priests, particularly when there’s a vocation crisis?

[Aside – In interviews, I generally try to point out that we need to define what is meant by a “vocations crisis” because vocations to the clerical and religious lives are in fact thriving in some areas..]

Fr. Dwight Longenecker, fellow blogger at here Patheos has a great column in ZENIT addressing precisely this question. Here’s a quick glimpse. [Emphasis mine]:

Not necessarily. Having married priests would certainly help the vocations crisis, and married men might relate better to married people. However, believing that married priests are the answer assumes that they are mature, happily married men. With a bit of reflection we can all see that marriage in and of itself does not automatically make a man mature, self giving and happy….

Remember married men are not perfect. Married clergymen are often workaholics. Many married clergymen are immature. Some married clergymen have sexual problems just like celibate men do. Married clergymen have drink problems. Married clergymen struggle with porn and same sex attraction and abuse children. When a clergy marriage breaks down it is usually disastrous and scandalous and the hurt and pain ripple right through the whole church. I don’t mean to paint a horrible picture of married clergy–just reminding people that it’s not all quite as happy and wonderful as they seem to think.

There are other practical problems. Catholics say they want married clergy, but do they want to pay for them? As a married man with a family I get by because I earn an extra income through my writing and speaking. In addition to this my wife runs her own business. Not all married priests and their families can do this.

Do read the whole piece here. Fr. Dwight’s experience as a married priest brings a lot to the discussion.

The point about whether we’re willing to pay for married priests is particularly interesting. Based on what I’ve seen of diocesan budgets, appeals, and parish giving, I see no indication that we are.

Continue Reading

Why the Hobby Lobby Decision Brings Out the Feminist in Me

July 7, 2014 8:49 am July 7, 2014

3 min read

1445 views

The more I think about it, the more the Supreme Court’s decision on the Hobby Lobby case bothers me. I don’t disagree with the decision, but I don’t like what…

The more I think about it, the more the Supreme Court’s decision on the Hobby Lobby case bothers me.

I don’t disagree with the decision, but I don’t like what it reveals about our culture. Case in point, Deroy Murdock listed all the contraceptives that were covered by Hobby Lobby before the decision and that would be covered after the decision.

Here you go –

Male condoms

Female condoms

Diaphragms with spermicide

Sponges with spermicide

Cervical caps with spermicide

Spermicide alone

Birth-control pills with estrogen and progestin (“Combined Pill)

Birth-control pills with progestin alone (“The Mini Pill)

Birth control pills (extended/continuous use)

Contraceptive patches

Contraceptive rings

Progestin injections

Implantable rods

Vasectomies

Female sterilization surgeries

Female sterilization implants

Sixteen. And only two of them are used by men. The other fourteen are a woman’s “responsibility.” [The Supreme Court decision simply backed Hobby Lobby’s decision to not fund the other four included in the HHS mandate which can work as an abortifacient by causing the embryo to not attach to the wall of the uterus, thereby causing this unique human organism – that’s science, not religion – to die.]

If we’re supposed to be dealing in a world of equality, shouldn’t there be a few more types of contraception that apply to men? After all, they’re the ones who are fertile all or most of the time.

Some of the hormonal contraceptives have had fatal effects on women. (Google it.) Makes it seem like women are sort of … disposable.

Every once in a while, a news story will surface about a pill for men. And then it disappears. I think it’s Prof. Janet Smith in her “Contraception, Why Not?” talk who referenced early attempts to create a pill for men, but some of the men in the study suffered…”shrinkage.”

Death v. “shrinkage.” I’ll just leave it at that.

But there is news of a remote controlled birth control computer chip that could be implanted in a woman for up to sixteen years. A remote control could be used to turn it on and off.

Wow. Just wow.

Can we not see the potential for abuse? Does it take a Law & Order SVU episode to see how a woman’s fertility could be controlled by a man – an abusive husband, boyfriend, pimp, trafficker. And so on.

As it was, I didn’t think that contraception empowered women. This list just reminds me of how much women can be burdened with contraception, particularly the responsibility for any child that might be conceived. Maybe the dad can be forced to pay child support, but that’s it.

And, by and large, we as a culture are ok with that.

This is exactly the result of some forms of feminism that concentrate on a woman’s pelvic region.

So much for progress.

Continue Reading

And So It Starts – Spinning The Hobby Lobby Case

July 2, 2014 11:56 am July 2, 2014

1 min read

1382 views

This is a picture of yesterday’s San Jose Mercury News, front page, above the fold. The headline: CONTRACEPTIVE BENEFIT TAKES HIT Underneath that it reads: COMPANIES THAT OBJECT CAN NOW…

This is a picture of yesterday’s San Jose Mercury News, front page, above the fold. The headline:

CONTRACEPTIVE BENEFIT TAKES HIT

Underneath that it reads:

COMPANIES THAT OBJECT CAN NOW AVOID COVERAGE.

Well, yes, maybe; but mostly no.

Fact #1: The only companies that can avoid coverage are those which family run, have strongly held religious beliefs, and are closely run by the family.
Fact #2: Most companies will not even consider cutting contraceptive coverage because offering contraception reduces the costs of pre-natal, maternity, and delivery care.

In other words, most people who rely on their health insurance for their contraception (because working people can’t afford the average $9/mo for contraceptive pills, I guess) will still be covered. Contraception will still be widely available and easily accessible, often even free (paid for by the government, that is). It’s just that now the Supreme Court has ruled that a small segment of the population doesn’t have to pay for someone else’s contraception.

Even if you support the use of contraception, there is no war against you.

Continue Reading

Of Gods And Men

July 1, 2014 10:13 am July 1, 2014

2 min read

1486 views

A couple of weeks ago, I wrote about the situation of Christians in Iraq. It was not good, judging from the email sent by a Dominican who was there. And…

A couple of weeks ago, I wrote about the situation of Christians in Iraq. It was not good, judging from the email sent by a Dominican who was there.

And things look worse now:

Last Sunday, for the first time in 1600 years, no mass was celebrated in Mosul. The Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) seized Iraq’s second largest city on June 10, causing most Christians in the region to flee in terror, in new kinship with the torment of Christ crucified on the cross. The remnant of Mosul’s ancient Christian community, long inhabitants of the place where many believe Jonah to be buried, now faces annihilation behind ISIS lines. Those who risk worship must do so in silence, praying under new Sharia regulations that have stilled every church bell in the city.

You should read the entire article by Drew Bowling & Andrew Duran at The Daily Beast.

But here are a couple more key paragraphs:

The media has largely ignored the horrifying stories that are emerging from Mosul. On June 23, the Assyrian International News Agency reported that ISIS terrorists entered the home of a Christian family in Mosul and demanded that they pay the jizya (a tax on non-Muslims). According to AINA, “When the Assyrian family said they did not have the money, three ISIS members raped the mother and daughter in front of the husband and father. The husband and father was so traumatized that he committed suicide.”

And:

As the horrors unfolded in Iraq, back in Washington, in the briefing room of a presidential hopeful, an Iraqi bishop made a desperate plea for help via phone as a delegation of Iraqi Christians seeking greater support for the Kurds. “We have no food, no petrol, no [means] to protect ourselves. Where are America’s values? Where is our dignity?” Many in Washington are keen to see greater Kurdish autonomy, viewing them as the prudent third way between the Sunni states that have supported Islamist militants (Turkey, Saudi, Qatar) and Shia Iran and its puppets. The Kurds represent not only the best hope for an American ally in an increasingly Islamist-dominated region, but also the best hope for the survival of Christians and other religious minorities in the Middle East.

Tragic. They need our prayers.

Continue Reading

Action! – Two Quick Thoughts on the Hobby Lobby Decision.

July 1, 2014 8:47 am July 1, 2014

3 min read

1346 views

Yesterday’s SCOTUS ruling on the Hobby Lobby case was a welcoming gesture not only towards religious freedom, but also freedom of conscience. Lots of people are commenting; so I’ll offer…

Yesterday’s SCOTUS ruling on the Hobby Lobby case was a welcoming gesture not only towards religious freedom, but also freedom of conscience.

Lots of people are commenting; so I’ll offer a few quick thoughts myself. This decision doesn’t mean that we rest and that the battle is over. Here are two considerations:

Some states, definitely Washington state, already required businesses to offer contraception coverage before the HHS Mandate. Now that the Supreme Court has ruled clearly that closely run family businesses can exempt themselves from the Mandate, I hope that these businesses will be taking the necessary steps, even turning to the courts. For those businesses which have had to pay for the coverage but have not utilized it, I wonder if a good attorney could even get them a reimbursement of funds they were required to pay…illegally.
Health care reform has a long way to go. Justice Alito didn’t say this specifically in his decision for the majority, but some of his language could be taken to hint at it. Setting aside the financial mess of our current system, there are at least two other considerations.

Yesterday’s witness before the Supreme Court was fantastic. The news coverage that I saw showed mainly pro-lifers. ABCNews interesting identified them as “anti-abortion rights pro-lifers.” I love that “pro-life” got into the mix. That could be the sign of a big shift in language, not unlike when Planned Parenthood started to be identified on cable and network news as “the largest provider of abortions.” The commentator also said that there were some NOW protesters. But the cameras never showed them. Hmmmm….

Also the face of the movement against the HHS Mandate was that of young women for whom pregnancy is still relevant. Too often, I’ve seen these protests/discussions/debates carried out by women (on both sides of the issue) who are obviously too old for this to be a personal issue.

And I saw Lori Windham, one of the attorneys for Hobby Lobby, give her remarks on the steps of SCOTUS. She was simply amazing. Her analysis was good, her delivery was great. She did not sound like an attorney.

Despite the work ahead of us, there’s much to celebrate. Cheers!

Continue Reading

When You Want Something Done, Ask A Woman – Archbishop Sample Consecrates Portland Archdiocese to the Immaculate Heart

June 29, 2014 7:55 am June 29, 2014

1 min read

1320 views

I’m making my way south to Los Angeles where I’ll be teaching an adjunct theology course next month. Last night, we attended a vigil Mass in Brookings, Oregon, the southernmost…

I’m making my way south to Los Angeles where I’ll be teaching an adjunct theology course next month. Last night, we attended a vigil Mass in Brookings, Oregon, the southernmost part of the Archdiocese of Portland.

Much, much, much to my surprise, at the end of Mass, the pastor announced that the Archbishop had asked each pastor in the Archdiocese to consecrate his parish and flock to the Immaculate Heart of Our Lady of Fatima. This is surprising if you know anything about the more recent history of the Catholic Church on the west coast/in the pacific northwest. Here’s the Archbishop’s letter, explaining his decision – namely that he’s following the example of Pope Francis.

Admittedly, such a decision might seem old school, but it’s really amazing. I love that the Pope, Archbishop Sample, his pastors, and many other Church leaders around the world, see the necessity of entrusting the Catholic Church to Mary, the Mother of God. It’s an act of trust, of submission, and of love. It says that we can’t do this on our own, that we need the help of a woman who gave herself entirely to God and who gives herself to anyone who asks her help, all without losing her dignity. On the contrary, her dignity comes from her supreme gift of self. “Be it done unto me according to Thy will.” [Note – the “Thy” here is God, not anyone or anything else.]

As the saying goes for feminists of varying stripes, when you want something done, ask a woman!

Continue Reading

Type on the field below and hit Enter/Return to search