Survey on Mandatory Celibacy, 2003-2004

San Jose Diocese Comments from Priest Survey

#3 No no age indicated
Querido usted asumio que yo entiendo ingles. Yo asumo que usted entiende español
Estoy en completo desacuerdo con la encuesta. Es más me parece de muy mal gusto.
No tengo ningun inters en cambier la praxis de la iglesia. "No debemos! No podemos. No querimos." Paul VI
Dear, you assumed I understand English; I will assume you understand Spanish. I am completely oppossed to your questionaire. It's in very poor taste. I have no desire to change the practice of the church. "We should not, we cannot, we do not want to."
(name withheld by editor, but was included by respondent.)

#5 Yes 51-60
Thank you, Ellen, for the effort at taking this survey. One would think that priests and bishops would themselves be sufficiently secure and intelligent to openly discuss any topic. That the presbyterate and episcopate do not, cannot, and/or will not makes me question by what authority they can any of them preach, teach, counsel or lead???
You have recognized that there exists no forum in which celibacy (or any item remotely connected to human sexuality or relationships) can be discussed. One is logically lead to the conclusion that the canonical discipline (as distinct from the charisma) of celibacy is really only about control.
Again, thanks for your effort.
P.S. Integrity goes with responsibility--so I sign my name. 11/30/03 (name withheld by editor, but was included by respondent.)

#7 Yes 41-50
The Holy Spirit of God always demands open discussion.

#13 Yes 61-70
I am presuming that the bishop, as a priest of the diocese, also received a copy of this survey. If not, it would be important to send one so that he is not blind sided when you send him the results.
I hope that any communication with the media you make sure that it is put into context and clearly enough that the media will not take things out of context for the 'sound bites' that the media is famous for.
(Editor note: copy was sent to the bishop and we will be as clear as we can when releasing to the media. We cannot control what pieces of the report the media chose to focus on.)

#17 No answer to question over 70
Christ's church is Hierarchical: Christ's successor is St. Peter -> John Paul II and all the Orthodox Bishops.
Christ's church is NOT a democracy

#25 Yes Over 70
I favor:
-Optional celibacy for Diocesan clergy
-Mandatory celibacy for Religious
-Activating current "inactive" priests -- if certain criteria are met
-I favor ordaining women--though I have not completely reasoned to my conclusion
-I admit to the fact that some of us would never make good spouses & should not marry.

#26 No 61-70
I suggest that you join the Episcopal Church; They believe as you do.

#32 Yes 51-60 member of religious order.
Absolutely Yes!
To tell us we can't even discuss it is to treat us like children. I cannot (sic) encourage you good people form CTA in your efforts. You will insure that our church does not die from close-minded leadership. You have my prayers and respect.

#38 No answer to question age 25-40
The term "open" discussion is rather misleading--kind of like "choice". Who isn't in favor of discussion even if the issue's resolution is obvious? It's part of our American way of looking @ things. A better ? would have tried to gauge the support for changing celibacy or not -> not for having a discussion or not.

#43 Yes 41-50 member of religious order
I favor open discussion on everything!

#45 No age 41-50
1. I am opposed to this discussion simply because I think it would be a waste of time. The rule of celibacy is not up to us, i.e., priests or faithful. No matter how much discussion takes place, we cannot change the law. Better to put energy into something that we can actually affect.
2. Any discussion of celibacy must, out of justice, include the subject of gay priests. In other words, if celibacy becomes optional, it must be optional for all. If people are not prepared for gay priests in open relationships with other gay men (including priests), they should not press for optional celibacy.
(name withheld by editor, but was included by respondent.)

#54 No over 70 retired
I can see no priestly reason for ever discussing the matter.

#55 No 25-40
Querida senora o senorita, lo que ud. pregunta me parece una pelotudes yo "elegi" el celibato libremente. Lo sineto mucho por usted y por los sacerdotes que se la apoyan.
Y no tengo mas tiempo para perder que dios le ben bigo.
Dear Mrs. or Miss, What you ask is nonsense. I freely chose celibacy. I feel sorry for you and the priests that support you. I have no more time to waste on this. God bless you.
(name withheld by editor, but was included by respondent.)

#64 Yes age 25-40 member of religious order
I have no theological objections to a married diocesan clergy: it's a matter of discipline. If the Holy Spirit is moving the Church to change that discipline to better serve the care and salvation of souls, so be it.
My concerns are in the practical realm. What lessons could we learn from the Eastern Catholic, Orthodox and Protestant churches who have a married clergy? From talking with people about this issue, I have found that most Roman rite Catholics who support a married clergy haven't thought through the practical ramifications. For example, what about housing in a parish with a married priest with children and a celibate priest? Are Catholics willing to give more money to pay priests a just wage that supports not only the priest, but also his wife who cannot work and their children? What happens when a widower pastor with children has to choose between going to an essential parish meeting that's been scheduled for months or taking his daughter to the emergency room with a 104° fever? Would the Church continue the tradition (observed in the Catholic and Orthodox churches) of consecrating only celibates as bishops? In my mind these kinds of questions must have a prominent place in the discussion, along side the more typical ones like, would having an option to marry prior to ordination attract more men to Latin rite priesthood?
Given the current cultural climate in our country this discussion will also inevitability (sic) lead to questions like, what about a gay seminarian or priest who wants to have a partner? Would married clergy (or at least the option to marry) further alienate the often denied but ever-present gay subculture within the clergy?