Celibacy's geography

Regarding Fr. Richard McBrien's review of Fr. Donald Cozzens' book about celibacy (NCR, Feb. 9): I have always thought it strange that geography seems to be the determiner regarding the difference between the celibate West and the marrying East. Why is it that in the West the priest must be celibate as Christ was? He must not have family responsibilities because it would take away from the time and attention he should be giving his flock, he can be a loving father to the whole parish and not just his own family, but once one crosses, say, the Danube River, these principles no longer apply? Is there some celibacy line of demarcation that divides the unmarried Western clergy from the marriageable Eastern clergy? Does God have such an odd sense of humor that he lays sexual/commitment restrictions on his Western clergy but he permits his Eastern clergy to experience this beautiful fulfillment of human yearning in the marriage relationship? Does this make sense?

If the answer is basically that it is a historical/traditional development and that both Roman and Eastern churches as a whole stick by their traditions, that makes no better sense considering the costs to the Roman church in terms of fewer clergy to serve the faithful in providing the support of the sacraments. Let priests marry, wishing them much happiness. They deserve it.

BRENDAN CURTIN

Elmira, N.Y.

COPYRIGHT 2007 National Catholic Reporter
COPYRIGHT 2008 Gale, Cengage Learning