More Marks of a Godly Mother and Priestly Problems

More Mother's Day Grades....

Earlier this week, we began our Mother's Day preparations by noting from the Proverbs 31 woman and Hannah's example in 1 Samuel, that a biblical, God-fearing and loving woman in that role, is valuable and trustworthy or loyal (Proverbs 31:10-11). She is wholly devoted to her God, husband, home and children. You may know a mom like that or unfortunately you may not.

Thinking about Sunday and studying Hannah and other biblical matriarchs, I find that their value and devotion is reflected by their parenting and the hunger for holiness in home and children. Christian researcher George Barna in his book on families, found three types of Parenting to illustrate that idea: Parenting by default, is what Barna termed "the path of least resistance." In this approach, parents do whatever comes naturally to the parent, as influenced by cultural norms and traditions. The objective is to keep everyone - parent, child, and others - as happy as possible. Being the buddy of our kids is paramount to this parenting style. Sound familiar to anyone? Trial-and-error parenting is a common alternative. This approach is based on the notion that every parent is an amateur at raising children, there are no absolute guidelines to follow, and that the best that parents can do is to experiment, observe outcomes, and improve based upon their successes and failures in child rearing.

Nice try mom, this is a plea to ignorance. Barna found that revolutionary parenting was the least common approach (which of course makes it the most biblical). Such nurturing requires the parent to take God’s words on life and family at face value, and to apply those words faithfully and consistently. That sounds like an "A" grade from God for the type of motherhood that Hannah seems to have displayed. How about we pray for a revival in revolutionary parenting? Finally, you put all that together and you find a biblical mother "to be praised" (Proverbs 12:4; 31:23, 28-31). It's like the teacher who asked a boy this question: "suppose your mother baked a pie and there were seven of you-your parents and five children. What part of the pie would you get"? "A sixth," replied the boy. "I'm afraid you don't know your fractions," said the teacher. 'Remember, there are seven of you.' "Yes, teacher, said the boy, "but you don't know my mother. Mother would say she didn't want any pie."

A Priestly Problem

In lieu of the Father Cutie scandal (not "cutey" I suppose), one might ask, what's worse, the sin of fornication or 'fall from grace' of a celebrity priest or a single, "burning" (1 Corinthians 7) clergyman, or the unbiblical, ridiculous and scandalous policy of an apostate religion, that forces celibacy on such men? According to the Sun-Sentinel report, "Archbishop John C. Favalora suspended Cutié from the pulpit at St. Francis de Sales Catholic Church on Tuesday," coming after a Mexican magazine published 25 photos of "Father Alberto," as he is called, in the throes of rapture more carnal than spiritual. Cutié wrote an e-mail apology, asking forgiveness from "those who may be hurt or saddened by my actions. ... The commitment that I made to serve God will remain intact."

The answer to the question posed above of course, is a both/and. While one cannot excuse nor defend the fornication of a minister or shepherd leading a flock, one must also go to the source and ask while Roman Catholic dogma demands celibacy from it's clergy when it's alleged founder of sorts- the apostle Peter as the first pope (a long, discredited notion), was as Al Bundy once was, "married with children." Celibacy had been a church practice since at least the third century, largely for ascetic and spiritual reasons (e.g. monks). But it wasn't until a century later that a certain Pope insisted on celibacy for priests and deacons. Even then, priests often married until the 11th century, until Gregory VII banned clerical marriage -- and it took another century for the practice to spread churchwide.

Why the change? "Show me the money." Historians note that the Roman church was losing too many assets (like land) and the opportunity to control such, by the inheritance of wives and families of deceased priests and the papacy couldn't have that. How convienent. Cutie once said of his celebrity, priestly status in a Hispanic magazine, "I'm not the priest for the regular Catholic crowd. I made that decision a long time ago. I'm the priest for the lost sheep. Which is why I do the media thing and the press thing and the book thing." Lost sheep? Perhaps the Vatican should begin looking for the lost sheep within it's very midst.