It’s not aggressive to defend priestly celibacy
SIR – Sadly, Jack Robbins (Letter, April 22) has mistaken robust defences of priestly celibacy for having an “aggressive tone” and casting aspersions on married priests who have converted to the Catholic Church. No one doubts that they are dedicated both to their families and to their priestly duties. Clearly, however, it is the doctrine of the Church that has attracted them, yet for many years there has been a body of Catholic opinion dedicated to “bringing the Church up to date” by changing various doctrines – failing that, changing the practice so that doctrine no longer matters. This is despite the fact that other Christian denominations already have married and female priests, the acceptance of divorce and remarriage, abortion, same-sex partnerships and so on, and such denominations are not increasing but in decline. And no wonder, since every relaxation of doctrine makes another more likely, until eventually there will be no difference between being inside the Church and being outside it. True, Jesus did not command his disciples to embrace celibacy, but he saw himself as the bridegroom of the Church, and when he called them to “follow” him, he meant that they must do as he did – give their whole selves to the Church. The rewards, he promised, would be out of all proportion to the sacrifice. This is the example followed by the celibate priesthood. Yours faithfully, Ann Farmer (Mrs) Woodford Green, Essex
