The Voice Of One Crying Out In Suburbia

OK, how bad of an idea is this….

The Cincinnati Enquirer is reporting that the Archdiocese of Cincinnati is reinstating into active ministry one Reverend Raymond Larger. Why was he suspended in the first place? Why nothing serious, he just solicited an undercover MALE cop for sex in a Dayton park in August of last year.

Is it a coincidence that the Cincinnati Enquirer just ran a series on the shortage of priests in Cincinnati and they reinstate a guy who was soliciting a male undercover cop for sex in a park? Accorsing to the Cinci Archdiocese, it wasn't really that bad…

>>>More than a dozen archdiocese priests have been suspended during the past two years for misconduct, mostly for sexually abusing children.

While most of those priests remain banned from ministry, church officials said they viewed Larger's case differently because it did not involve children. <<<

Oh, that makes it OK then, no doubt he doesn't find other men attractive until their 18th birthday. After all, he should be fine because he said he is sorry >>>"I am deeply sorry for my wrongdoing," Larger said in a statement<<< and his psychologist said he is just fine >>>They also noted that Larger's psychologist believes "it would be appropriate for Father Larger to return to active ministry." <<< Heck, it has been like 9 whole months since he last (as far as we know) was trying to pick up male hookers for gay sex. Back to the altar you go!

Check my math here, but this has numerous problems associated with it. A) He is a practicing homosexual, b) he is clearly not living a celibate lifestyle as mandated by the church and c) HE BROKE THE LAW, not only being sexually active in contravention of Catholic church laws but he broke the civil law by soliciting what he thought was a prostitute. So he is an oathbreaker to the church and a common criminal. This guy is sneaking off to Dayton to solicit some guy in a park for random sex. But it is OK because the person he was soliciting wasn't a child.

Once again, we see the error of the celibate priesthood as being unbiblical and impractical. Let's review what the Catholic theology and the Bible says.


Max Thurian, Catholic theologian, makes this claim in defense of the celibate priesthood reprinted on the Vatican website: "Christ never married. His life is valid justification for the vocation to celibacy." Well maybe, but Christ was also without sin and immune to the temptations of this world. "Observing celibacy for the sake of the kingdom of heaven does not mean being any the less a man; by renouncing a natural form of existence, the priest discovers life in all its fullness. Christ was certainly no less of a man because he did not have affections other than those for his brethren, and a bride other than the Church." Christ was no less a man, but again He was also fully God and thus is NOT the same as mortal, sinful man. In another poor reading of the Word, Thurian says: "for in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven» (Mt 22:30)." Did he catch the context or even the words? In the resurrection. We haven't come to that point if we are still alive and indeed there will be no marriage in heaven as there is no procreation and no sin. Christ is responding to the Sadducees trying to trip Him up and he is speaking of the situation AFTER the resurrection, which means nothing in context of priests marrying.

What does the Bible say? A couple of the passages Catholics use to defend the celibate priesthood are1 Cor 7 and Matthew 19. In 1 Cor 77-9, Paul says: "For I wish that all men were even as I myself. But each one has his own gift from God, one in this manner and another in that. But I say to the unmarried and to the widows: It is good for them if they remain even as I am; but if they cannot exercise self-control, let them marry. For it is better to marry than to burn with passion. " Paul wishes all men were as himself but he knows that is not the case, and thus should man marry rather than burn with passion. The difference is mandatory versus a truly voluntary celibacy.

In Matthew 19:11-12, Christ teaches: "But He said to them, "All cannot accept this saying, but only those to whom it has been given: For there are eunuchs who were born thus from their mother's womb, and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men, and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He who is able to accept it, let him accept it." " He who is able. Not all who seek to be ministers of the Gospel, only those who are able. In fact, the office of bishop is set forth in the Bible and the qualifications for being a bishop include: "A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, temperate, sober-minded, of good behavior, hospitable, able to teach; not given to wine, not violent, not greedy for money, but gentle, not quarrelsome, not covetous; one who rules his own house well, having his children in submission with all reverence (for if a man does not know how to rule his own house, how will he take care of the church of God?)" ( 1Tim 3) Precisely. How can a man with no family officiate over a church family. While the Bible expressly calls for bishops to be husbands and fathers, it also expressly forbids being "given to wine" and no one packs away the booze like a Catholic priest.

Is voluntary celibacy a bad thing? Certainly not! Indeed one who is not married, but choice or otherwise should live a chaste life. But man from the every beginning was in need of a helper, a woman to complete his mortal existence until returning home, a woman with which to have a family and raise the next generation until such time as Christ returns. In Genesis 2, the Lord says: ""It is not good that man should be alone; I will make him a helper comparable to him….Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh" Job, Noah, Moses, Abraham, David, all were great servants of the Lord and all had wives.

By insisting on an unbiblical celibate priesthood, the Roman Catholic church will continue to have two major problems amongst their priests, one a lack of quality candidates and two an attraction to the priesthood by homosexuals and other deviants. We have only scratched the surface of the problem of homosexuals, pedophiles and other deviants in the ranks of the Catholic priesthood, and undoubtedly the truth runs much deeper. In concept and theory, in man's limited understanding, the celibate priesthood makes sense. In the real world, it leads to perverts in the priesthood and situations like homosexual priests trying to pick up prostitutes in parks. Follow the Word of God, not the wisdom of man, and you get better results every time.