Sex lies at the root of all life, and we can never learn to reverence life until we learn how to understand sex.” (Havelock Ellis: Studies in the Psychology of Sex)

The Catholic Church has long required priests to abstain from sex for their lifetimes. I share the view with the Vatican that self-control is an extremely honorable quality. However, recent revelations and lawsuits involving priests molesting children make it clear that it is crucial to balance self-control with the expression of natural biological drives.

In order to understand this critical equilibrium, let’s look at an analogy to sex. We need food to live, but eating too much food is destructive to the body. Similarly, it is important to have sex, but keeping it limited to a long-term partner is in the best interest of our health and our society. Just as perpetual fasting leads to anorexia, no sex at all can lead to strange and unhealthy behavior.

In the last 15 years, the Church paid close to one billion dollars for court cases, settlements, attorney fees, and victim awards in cases that deal with sexual abuse in the clergy. According to church records, close to one in ten Catholic priests and brothers have been accused of sexual abuse. Not all occurrences have come into the light; it is estimated that child molesters commit an average of 60 additional offenses for every incident reported. The numbers are extremely threatening to the Catholic community.

To make matters worse, the Church faces a vacuum in leadership. There are less than half the number of priests and nuns today that there were in the 1960’s. In the mid 60’s there were over 20,000 seminary students, while today there are less then 4,000. Over 5,000 parishes in the country are without a resident priest. Many Catholic communities are completely without spiritual leaders.

Sexual abuse in the church setting, an increasing demand for clergy, and the insistence on celibacy creates a dangerous opportunity. Priesthood becomes the ideal work situation for a pedophile: close contact with children, a position of authority, and the protection of a fraternal organization that operates behind closed doors.

If priests were allowed to marry and have families, more people would be attracted to leadership roles in the clergy. In addition to these priests being sexually satisfied, they would perhaps be more effective leaders because they could relate better to the lives of their congregation.

For the first five centuries of the Christian era, priests were not forced to abstain from sex. In 1079 under Pope Gregory VIII, the Church began requiring priests to take a vow of chastity, but it was not strictly enforced. Priests continued to have concubines and secret affairs. Both Pope Urban II (1088 – 1099) and Pope Calixtus II (1119– 1124) tried to separate priests from their concubines, with little success. It wasn’t until the Council of Trent in 1545 that marriage of priests was formally prohibited. A married man who wanted priesthood was required to leave his wife, and she too was required to be celibate.

Today, as the Vatican seeks to solve the crisis of priests molesting children in the church setting, they should look back to the long historic precedent they have for tolerating marriage within the clergy.

The last thing I intend to do is disregard the rich tradition and culture of the Catholic faith. However, Rome has neglected to address the fundamental element of their problem: being human. To deny oneself sex is to deny biology. The Church fails to see the hazardous situation that has prevailed as a result enforcing celibacy. If Rome wants to solve it’s problems, it must look at its past, to a time when the clergy was permitted to marry. Still upholding the virtue of restraint, the Church must recognize that self control can be balanced with an expression of natural biological drives.

Even people who devote themselves to God have room in their lives for sex.