ARTICLES
SEPTEMBER 2004 ARTICLES
Contents © 2004
by Jim Holman.
All rights reserved.
Hindus, Catholics, and the Twinge
Dialogue on Celibacy in the Archdiocese
BY CHARLES A. COULOMBE
Most of the audience were middle-aged to elderly religious professionals of both genders, though I could detect here and there a sprinkling of young, intense students. We had gathered in University Hall at Loyola Marymount University, Los Angeles, on April 24, for a talk, “Sacred Celibacy: A Hindu Catholic Dialogue.” The talk was sponsored sponsored by the Los Angeles archdiocese and Loyola Marymount.
Father Alexei Smith, pastor of St. Andrew’s Russian Catholic Church in El Segundo and chairman of the Los Angeles archdiocesan ecumenical office, opened the session. He pointed out that we were approaching the anniversary of the promulgation of Nostra Aetate, Vatican II’s declaration on non-Catholic religions. He quoted that document’s assertion that “...in Hinduism men explore the divine mystery and express it both in the limitless riches of myth and the accurately defined insights of philosophy. They seek release from the trials of the present life by ascetical practices, profound meditation and recourse to God in confidence and love.” Father went on to mention the document’s declaration regarding all non-Christian religions, that “the Catholic Church rejects nothing of what is true and holy in these religions. She has a high regard for the manner of life and conduct, the precepts and doctrines which, although differing in many ways from her own teaching, nevertheless often reflect a ray of that truth which enlightens all men.” (Unquoted, however, was the rest of that paragraph, which continues: “yet she proclaims and is in duty bound to proclaim without fail, Christ who is the way, the truth and the life (Jn. 1:6). In Him, in Whom God reconciled all things to Himself (2 Cor. 5:18-19), men find the fullness of their religious life.”)
Dr. Christopher Chapple, professor of theological studies and associate academic vice president of Loyola Marymount University Extension, introduced the speakers. The first was Sister Anne Field, a member of the Sisters of Social Service.
Sister Anne, a bright and sprightly elderly lady in blouse and slacks, is the author of Integrating the Shadow: A Contribution of Jungian Psychology to Feminist Theology. She mentioned that her academic specialty has been women’s spirituality and theology. Sister began by saying that she had been very impressed by a particular Hindu woman’s love for God; this woman was so filled with devotion that she found herself impelled to dance in her temple. Sister then declared that she would treat of women’s experience of celibacy in the Catholic tradition.
In the early Church, we were informed, “virgins were at the bottom of the pyramid.” Sister added that Mary’s virginity “simply meant that she was unmarried. Later on, the spiritual and genital qualities were added.” The Council of Trent made celibacy superior, but Vatican II declared that the two states of life were equal and that religious were to “engage the world.” This led to a great deal of strain in various religious communities, symbolized by the struggle over whether to retain habits, modify them, or do away with them entirely. This struggle in turn led to female religious orders going in two directions: those which dropped religious habits entirely grouping under the Leadership Conference of Women Religious, and those who retained them organizing under the Council of Major Superiors of Women Religious. Sister Anne implied that there was some lack of harmony between the two groups.
Sister explained that women celibates, through history, had had their roles defined for them by the cultures they lived in, inevitably male-dominated. One understood that this was not a good thing. “The Christ is the saving power of God made manifest — in both Eucharist and worshipers,” she affirmed, elaborating that “the Body of Christ is our suffering peoples.” Women religious are called upon to serve them. But this religious experience is “self-validating. You can’t tell me if it is good or bad,” nor could any other external source. No authority could judge this, because “you just know if it is right.” There seemed to be an undertone of anger in this assertion.
The next speaker was a jovial gentleman, His Holiness Hridayananda Das Goswami, an Acarya of the International Society for Krishna Consciousness of the Krishna Consciousness Movement (Hare Krishnas) and translator from Sanskrit into English of the Srimad Bhagavatan, Cantos 10-12, and the Mahabharata, Volume I. Also known as Howard Resnick, Ph.D., Goswami amusingly explained how he had become a Hindu while studying at the University of California, Berkeley, in 1969. Although he married a fellow believer shortly thereafter, “a splendid woman,” in 1973 he became a celibate and full-time teacher in the movement.
Larding his talk with passages in Sanskrit, Goswami showed how, for Hindus, celibacy is a tool in escaping the illusion of existence. It is of a piece with giving up meat, alcohol, violence, and indeed, personality itself. He went into great detail regarding the way in which this renunciation is a tool of bringing about reunion with the One.
Goswami’s followers provided vegetarian lunch for the break. While we ate, other Krishnas provided music, to which a young lady danced in time-honored Indian fashion. Since, however, all the performers were westerners, it did lend a slight Renaissance Faire touch to the proceedings.
Reconvening, we were introduced to Dr. Adrian Piper, artist and professor at Wellesley College, Massachusetts. A practicing yogi, and a celibate since her divorce in 1985, Dr. Piper is the author of “The Meaning of Brahmacharya (celibacy)” in the anthology, How We Live Our Yoga. In her talk, entitled “Brahmacharya, Vairagya, Kaivalya,” Dr. Piper described eloquently how, although raised as a Presbyterian in Philadelphia, she had practiced yoga since age 13. Realizing after her divorce that she was called to practice Brahmacharya, she explained that she had come to realize how much of our time is given up to pursuit of the orgasm, which she called the “twinge.” She listed how many things, ranging from amusing to ridiculous to harmful, we pursue in chasing the twinge, regardless of whatever harm we may cause to others or ourselves. Yet in realizing this, she had also come to realize how many other silly pursuits we follow seeking happiness, thus bringing her to an ever-greater ability to detach herself from the illusion of existence.
After a detailed explanation of the Hindu theology on these topics, Dr. Piper declared that people have to come to these realizations in their own time; and in any case, celibacy is not for everyone. It cannot be imposed; indeed, she could not see how young people, with their raging hormones, could be expected to live by it.
Father Smith having left, Dr. Chapple introduced the final speaker, Capuchin Father Michael Crosby, as an “expert on celibacy.” Crosby is also the author of many books, including Celibacy: Means of Control or Mandate of the Heart?, “Do You Love Me?:” Jesus Questions the Church, The Dysfunctional Church, and, by way of contrast, a life of Ven. Father Solanus Casey. Father Crosby traded a little light-hearted banter with Dr. Chapple, who averred that many of the problems celibates face are also felt by married people.
Entitling his talk, “A Catholic Approach to Celibacy,” Father Crosby began by saying, “as I listened to the Hindu speakers, I realized that we Catholics have a paucity of teaching about celibacy. We do not have a discipline of celibacy, a teaching of how to go about it, as the Hindus do. For us, as Sister Anne said, if Christ is not the core of our celibacy, it is something crazy. For us, it is not a discipline, but discipleship. All things were made through the one Christ, through the Word. In the Incarnation, everything is good, and potentially revelatory. Through creation we find the reign of God in the World.”
Having distinguished Catholic cosmology from Hindu, Father Crosby went on to meditate about the work of Christ. Father informed us that Jesus got into trouble for opposing the exclusivism of the Jewish priesthood and establishment of His day. These latter had erected a barrier between the sacred and the profane, which Christ came to destroy.
But shortly afterwards, Crosby said, celibates came to dominate the Church, destroying Christ’s inclusive spirit. “Constantinian” clerics began to rule the faithful, in emulation of the Jewish priesthood. The whole structure of the Church was based upon this terrible act. Luckily, Vatican II had come along and has begun to return the Church to Christ’s ideal.
But Father was very upset that under the current pope the Church was moving back to what Jesus opposed. He picked up the latest Los Angeles Times and read the headline, “Vatican Rules Out Liberalized Liturgy,” in reference to the Holy See’s latest documents on the liturgy and on correct translations from the Latin of the Mass. Becoming increasingly agitated, Father Crosby went on to say that this was the work of the male celibate clergy. He became furious in reflecting on the younger men entering the priesthood, who are intent upon restoring the old idea of the sacred. Although he was grateful that the bishops had forced the pope to “tone down” the document on the liturgy, it was not nearly enough for him.
“Celibacy is a system of power, of patriarchy,” Father intoned, regaining his composure. “So much of it is not holy, but a reaction to sin. The Roman Catholic Church has not had a history of holiness with celibacy. You have to be celibate to have power in the Church. This is threatened by Jesus; Jesus rejected this. We have to jettison this. The institutional expression of Catholicism is profane!”
Apparently somewhat calmed by his self-expression, Father Crosby went on to say that celibacy undermines the integrity of the Church and that the Church suffers without married men and women in the priesthood.
Does celibacy have any value, then? Father Crosby asserted that it does indeed. “Everyone must be in love with everyone else. Celibacy is intimacy, it is energy.” But there is no scriptural warrant for celibacy as it is currently practiced in the Church. The celibate must be obedient to the Head of the Church, “and he isn’t in Rome.” Holy is healthy, and only if one is an integrated personality can he be healthy. It is the job of the celibate to “critique Empire for the integrity of Creation.” Celibacy, in fact, is fasting, but it has to be self-directed: “being the pope’s man is co-dependency. Celibacy is the best way I can be who I am.”
I left soon after Crosby’s talk. Entertaining as the day had been, I wondered at its seeming lack of diversity, especially in light the Catholic-Hindu dialogue. On the one hand, although there was at least one Indian gentleman in the audience, the Hindu side could have been strengthened by the addition of born-Hindu speakers. Apart from the Vedanta Society and the Self-Realization Fellowship (both of which have many converts in their number), there are estimated to be in the county of Los Angeles 70,000 Hindus served by 35 Hindu centers. One of these, which might be resorted to for dialogue partners, is the Hindu Sanctuary in Calabasas. Built according to rigorous traditional specifications by the Hindu Temple Society of Southern California, it numbers 10,000 local Indian immigrants. The addition of some such groups to the dialogue would certainly have increased its breadth of view and authenticity on the Hindu side.
As regards the Catholics, the addition of priests and religious who are happy with both the Church and their own state in life might have added something to our side as well.
Above all, there was little diversity in terms of age. The four speakers were all more or less still living through the excitement of the ’60s. Enjoyable as that time certainly was for many, both older and younger voices might have added an immeasurable richness to the dialogue.