Court calls celibacy "cruel" as Sydney priest is sentenced [CNAU]

Feb 24, '10 5:00 pm
A judge has condemned the vow of chastity required of the Catholic priesthood as “cruel” and “archaic” in sentencing a Sydney priest to jail for internet grooming.


Hmm, celibacy “imposed” and “cruel”. There’s no better way to show ignorance than from the bench. I guess during his career, the good judge never encountered a non-celibate pervert. Go figure.


Am I missing something here - aren’t vows voluntary?

The priest IMHO broke the laws…not because of his vows :shrug:

This judge is making statements above his pay grade as my brother says ].

“I’m not a Catholic,” Sydney District Court judge Allan Hughes was quoted as saying. “I do not regard (that) celibacy (should be) imposed on people. That is because it is a suppression of human instinct. It must be agonising. I don’t know why they (the church) don’t change their rules. It is archaic. It’s cruel, cruel.”

Not really. One can not be ordained a priest without promises of celibacy, chastity, and obedience. Priests in communities of religious life might also take them as vows. A bishop can dispense from promises, but only the pope (or a Patriarch of an Eastern Catholic Church) can dispense from vows.

In any case, a cleric (Bishop, Priest, Deacon) may not validly marry after ordination without papal indulgence. Those married before ordination are validly married.

The point is that nobody is forced to be a priest or religious and thus taking vows of celibacy. It’s a personal choice, but I’m sure you knew that.

The judge in the article is making the old and stale argument that celibacy causes sexual deviancy. Talk about backwards.

As above, technically no.

But the deciding to become a priest part, that’s completely voluntary.

“I’m not a Catholic,” Sydney District Court judge Allan Hughes was quoted as saying. “I do not regard (that) celibacy (should be) imposed on people. That is because it is a suppression of human instinct. It must be agonising. I don’t know why they (the church) don’t change their rules. It is archaic. It’s cruel, cruel.”

Well, Heaven forbid anybody ever suppress an instinct. The world would be so much better if everyone acted on every primitive impulse that crossed his mind.

Was this man forced to be a priest? Was he unaware of the requirements going in?

If you suspect can’t keep a vow, don’t make it.

An Australian judge commented that Catholic priestly vow of celibacy is “cruel” and “archaic” as he jailed a priest today for an Internet sex


The judge is pretty clueless. The priest was having sex with a minor, a 13 year-old girl. He not only engaged in internet sex but also met with her in a car. The priest is a pedophile. This activity had more to do with control than with having sex. If a hetrosexual married man was caught in the same act with a minor, would the judge have concluded that the marriage vows are cruel?

There are those that do think the marriage vows are “cruel” because they limit a person to one sexual partner. Or take issue with the idea that a partner must give up having sex with another when their mates become ill etc. Yet, there are many who keep their vows and live without sex. The story of Christopher Reeves and his wife, Dana, comes to mind.

We might also consider those we know who, when they’re widowed or divorced, focus their attention on the children they must raise. Sure they miss the companionship and the warmth of a partner but for many they chose to ignore those urges in order to provide a secure environment for themselves and their children. Just like priests, there are many married folk who live without sex and accept it.

I agree. The judge has made an extremely foolish comment, which is completely ignorant of what celebacy is. A way to union with Christ, as it forsakes other romantic relationships for the sake of the kingdom. No man is forced into celebacy, he freely makes that choice himself.

Its peculiar but when a married man commits adultery or paedophilia, the man himself is blamed for this evil.The marriage is not blamed (although one could (wrongly) say that marriage deprived him of sexual fufilment, so he had to resort to paedophilia) However, when a Catholic priest does it, it is the fault of the Church, of her disciplines, of the Pope…etc etc.

Just a tone deaf judge that can’t seem to distinguish between where the law ends and opinion begins.


Your brother is President Obama!? :whackadoo::smiley:

Heavens no :smiley:

Mr Obama hmmmmm borrowed that statement from the military

How sickening. One should have the common decency to know that you shouldn’t make judgments about a person’s religion from the bench! This judge should be forced to resign. :mad:

WE can be sure this will not be the only time a judge makes such a statement. Attacks on the faith and the Church grow stronger all the time…one day this sort of thing will reach the shores of the United States as well and not terribly long from now.

Perhaps the background of this judge should be investigated?

You are right. Before long, it will happen in the United States. And attacks on the Church do continue to get stronger. It is totally true that anti-Catholicism is the last acceptable prejudice. It is sickening. But what can we do? Jesus predicted that such times will come.

(Matthew 24:3 NAB-A) As he was sitting on the Mount of Olives, the disciples approached him privately and said, Tell us, when will this happen, and what sign will there be of your coming, and of the end of the age?
(Matthew 24:4 NAB-A) Jesus said to them in reply, See that no one deceives you.
(Matthew 24:5 NAB-A) For many will come in my name, saying, ‘I am the Messiah,’ and they will deceive many.
(Matthew 24:6 NAB-A) You will hear of wars and reports of wars; see that you are not alarmed, for these things must happen, but it will not yet be the end.
(Matthew 24:7 NAB-A) Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom; there will be famines and earthquakes from place to place.
(Matthew 24:8 NAB-A) All these are the beginning of the labor pains.
(Matthew 24:9 NAB-A) Then they will hand you over to persecution, and they will kill you. You will be hated by all nations because of my name.
(Matthew 24:10 NAB-A) And then many will be led into sin; they will betray and hate one another.
(Matthew 24:11 NAB-A) Many false prophets will arise and deceive many;
(Matthew 24:12 NAB-A) and because of the increase of evildoing, the love of many will grow cold.
(Matthew 24:13 NAB-A) But the one who perseveres to the end will be saved.
(Matthew 24:14 NAB-A) And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached throughout the world as a witness to all nations, and then the end will come.

Relevant portions in bold by me.

I agree. He does need to be investigated and then he needs to be fired or forced to resign or whatever.

Yes, the judge should be investigated but the emphasis should be on his total lack of understanding re. pedophilia. He should not be on the bench anymore than some of our US judges who have made insane rulings re. pedophiles. Look at Vermont. It refused to enact Megan’s Law in that state.

The judge would have made the same pronouncement, if the “priest” had raped an adult woman. Many men, such as men in the military, live for years without sex. If they engaged in similiar behavior, would he have blamed it on their life style?

yes, but what does he know about the Kingdom of God?. probably nothing. his comments should be taking back. just think if we say anything about another religion and what anybody else. when the Pope said something about the muslins being cruel the whole world came down on the Pope like a brick. but anybody can say anything about the CC and get away with it.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit