Time for married priests? Readers think so

Published 12:00 am Wednesday, July 28, 2010

By David Vitrano

L’Observateur

LAPLACE – Although locally it remains a major force, in recent years the Catholic Church has seen a major decline nationally. It’s numbers both in terms of followers and those entering the priesthood have dropped considerably.

Nonetheless, the Church seems unwilling to bend to popular opinion regarding a number of matters. As such, last week L’Observateur asked visitors to its website to decide which, if any, of its stances the church should relax in an effort to bring people back into the fold.

Over 40 percent chose perhaps one of the most widely debated matters in the church, whether priests should be allowed to marry. The root of priestly celibacy has been speculated upon for years, but the Vatican has thus far not yielded to those who say changing this would draw more toward the priesthood.

Drawing the next highest percentage of voters was a matter that has garnered more media attention than any other issue dealing with the Catholic Church in recent years — that of priests who have committed crimes. Over 30 percent of voters said the Church should come down harder on priests convicted of crimes.

Allowing the ordination of women, an act the Church recently declared a sin on par with pedophilia, was chosen by just 10 percent of voters, the same amount that said the church should not take any action.

Finally, only a few voters said they thought the church should relax its stance on certain matters of doctrine such as birth control.

A full breakdown of results follows:

• 42 percent of respondents chose “It should allow priests to marry.”

• 10 percent of respondents chose “It should allow women to be ordained.”

• 32 percent of respondents chose “It should come down harder on those priests who are convicted of crimes.”

• 6 percent of respondents chose “It should relax its views on certain matters (e.g. birth control).”

• 10 percent of respondents chose “None of the above/it should take no action.”