|
Celibacy: Fidelity to one’s
priestly identity
Dominic Tang Yee-ming
Archbishop of Canton
I was fourteen years old when I told my mother
that I wished to be a priest. She sent me to Macau about 40 miles west of Hong
Kong (where I was born) to enter St Joseph’s seminary located there. Six years
later, I obtained my bishop’s permission to enter the Portuguese province of
the Society of Jesus. After the usual studies, I was ordained in Shanghai in
1941 and remained in that city ministering to the Cantonese-speaking Catholics
until I returned to Canton in 1946 and was assigned to Shekki, a city to the
North of Macau. On 1 October 1950, Pius XII nominated me as Apostolic
Administrator of the Canton Diocese.
These first years of priestly ministry were
difficult ones, for the Communists were already in power and the Catholic
faithful were undergoing intense pressures. My approach was pastoral and my
first care was to animate the clergy who had been disheartened by the
revolutionary changes that were then taking place in China — the Sino-Japanese
War and following upon this the Communist take-over of power. I initiated a
programme of intense pastoral activity with frequent sermons, retreats and other
devotional practices. I invited the clergy and Sisters to take part in this
ministry.
Relations with the political authorities
deteriorated owing to my refusal to countenance the Patriotic Association they
had set up to separate the Chinese Church from the Holy See. I myself was
subjected to six public denunciations and finally arrested and brought to jail
on 5 February 1958. For the following 22 years, I was kept isolated from all
family and friends. During seven years, I was kept in solitary confinement even
from my fellow prisoners. Prayer and the Spirit of the Lord sustained me
especially in those dark hours when at times I felt far from the Lord.
It is from this background that I have
reflected on the theme presented to me for comment: celibacy — the heart of a
priest’s identity and commitment. How do I view celibacy for the priest? I see
it as a response to a call from the Lord, to give oneself totally to him and to
the care of his people. A married man has obligations to his wife and family.
These are of prime importance and he cannot shirk them without serious detriment
to himself and his family. This is his responsibility before the Lord. For his
way of life — the married state — is his response to the call of the Lord.
If a priest were to be married, this commitment to family would take precedence
over his pastoral ministry. Since this is so, I ask, how can a priest, who is
called to dedicate himself totally to his people, marry? He would be immersed in
his own world, concerned and preoccupied about his wife and children, and would
be seriously torn between two polarities his family and the people to whom he
ministers.
A priest’s commitment is a response to a
call from the Lord. The Lord himself did not marry. He gave himself totally to
his people. It is in this way that the priest imitates the Lord. I realize that
there are those in the Church today who find this type of celibate commitment
difficult, some say even impossible. Perhaps we should learn a lesson from the
Chinese Communists. During the Cultural Revolution in China, many of the clergy
were forced into marriages. This was one way the Communists attacked the Church
and its ministers. They did not understand celibacy, belittled it and wanted to
do away with it. There were priests who got married. However, over the years,
the Communists have come to realize that Catholics will not accept these married
priests as their ministers. They strongly oppose having any Catholic priest who
is married to act as their spiritual leader. I do not believe that they are
passing personal judgement on these priests, but what they are saying, it seems
to me, is that they want celibate priests who can dedicate their whole lives to
the Lord and to his people. No other commitment will do. I witnessed many cases
of infidelity to celibacy in my long years of pastoral service. It is not to
make any judgement on the persons involved, but it is sad to say that most of
them did not remain faithful to their Christian life. Some wanted to convert but
they were hindered by their ‘wives’ and not a few even lost their faith in
the end. I cite two examples that are common knowledge in China. In Shanghai, a
married priest wanted to say Mass in the church. The Catholics would not permit
him to do this and took him off the altar. In Kunming, a bishop got married and
was going to say a public Mass. Local Catholics heard of this and publicly
advertised the fact. The bishop did not say Mass. This opposition coming from
the Catholic community has forced the Communist authorities to change their
policy. This is not easy for them to do. They have had to admit that only
unmarried priests can be ordained to serve these communities. They do this not
out of any admiration of the celibate state as such but to preserve harmony in
the communities.
Does this demand of Chinese Catholic
communities for celibate priests rest solely on traditional practices? This is
to say, do these communities wish to have celibate priests only because that was
what was done in the past and therefore should continue for the future? I
believe not. I believe that the reasons behind these Catholic communities
demanding celibate priests goes much deeper than mere tradition, although this
may be one of the factors involved. Celibacy for the kingdom of God has its own
value as the Lord himself states. St Paul counsels celibacy. One of its values
he sees is the freedom it gives to the person. Celibates enjoy their freedom as
a special gift by which they can fully dedicate themselves to the Lord and to
his work. This sets such persons apart. This does not mean that these people are
better than others who follow a different calling from the Lord. What it does
mean is that the celibate person is set apart for total service to the Christian
community. This is, I believe and as my experience teaches me, one of the chief
reasons why our Chinese Catholic communities demand celibacy for their spiritual
leaders. They want to have a person dedicated and determined to follow the Lord
completely and who will in turn lead them to know, love and follow him. They
themselves realize that they have many concerns and occupations. Owing to these
concerns, they may not always have clear insight into the ways of the Lord. They
trust their spiritual leaders who have completely dedicated themselves to the
Lord, to help them discover his ways in their lives.
Celibacy is not something completely foreign
to our Chinese culture. Buddhist monks and nuns do not marry. They are seeking
liberation from desire, a detachment from worldly pleasures that may impede them
from attaining Nirvana. In the eyes of the Buddhist faithful, monks and nuns are
expected to be faithful to their vows. They should not marry and if they do the
Buddhist faithful would prefer them to return to the world rather than continue
being a ‘married monk or nun’. I note this fact not because I wish to
identify the Buddhist motivation for celibacy with the Christian profession of
celibacy undertaken from the kingdom of God as proclaimed by Jesus in the Gospel.
I just wish to emphasize the value placed upon celibacy, and the expectations
even non-Catholics have for fidelity in living such vows. As in the case of
Catholic priests, the Communist authorities have been compelled to recognize
this fact and so they have ceased forcing Buddhist monks and nuns to marry.
I have personally witnessed many times over
the inner strength the Lord gives to a person facing the loss of freedom,
suffering and even death. Specifically, I wish to talk about those who have
vowed celibacy and who have persevered in their commitment. I am well aware that
not only celibate Christians have had to witness to Christ. The Annals of the
Chinese martyrs, once it is written, will be long with the names of the lay
persons, men and women, young and old, who along with priests and sisters have
had to endure suffering, imprisonment and even death for their commitment to the
Lord. I wish to point out that a celibate life, one that is lived in close union
with the Lord, does prepare one very well for the supreme sacrifice of one’s
life if this is the path that the Lord leads his faithful disciple to follow.
There was my secretary, Fr Anthony Ngan
Tak-Kang. Many called him a living saint. He would have smiled at this title and
be amazed that his very ordinary life would merit such acclamation. He would
refuse such praise and would continue to carry out his daily duties and live his
life in accord with the promise he had made to the Lord many years before. He
would see nothing heroic in this. However, when the moment of testing did arrive,
he showed more than ordinary courage and fortitude. His outstanding example is
but one among many that his brother priests from all over China have given and
who had to undergo the same crucible of suffering. In his relations with women,
Fr Ngan was always courteous and reserved. This did not prevent him from
performing his pastoral work for whoever requested it, men or women. No one ever
suggested that he was unfaithful in the smallest degree in his obligations to
priestly celibacy. This is one of the main reasons why he was so respected and
even venerated by all the Catholics who knew him.
He was a very good secretary. He understood my
mind well and was an excellent advisor especially helping me make the many hard
decisions during those difficult days when the Communists were applying more and
more pressure to the Church. On one occasion, we were trying to find the means
of paying the heavy taxes the authorities were imposing upon us. At the same
time, we had to support our clergy and the sisters. Some counselled the selling
of Church property and possessions. He simply said no; we could not dispose of
Church property in violation of canon law, even if this meant that we had to
live a poor life and suffer any privations. He wished that we walk with the poor
Christ and preserve Church property. Certainly the pride of possessions did not
motivate him. He just wanted to make sure that the Church had the means and
wherewithal to continue its mission in the future when more difficult days were
to come. A few months later we did lose all Church property. It was confiscated
by the so-called ‘Real Estate Management Committee’ — cadres of the
Communist government and members of the Patriotic Association comprised this
committee. In no way does this change the correctness of Fr Anthony’s advice
given at a time when good men and women were hard put to see beyond present
travails.
He was arrested on the same day as I was and,
like myself, was imprisoned without trial. He was sent to a labour camp in the
North of Guangdong province. All that he owned at the time were the few rags on
his back. He had always lived poorly and was constantly giving things away to
those poorer than himself. Coarse food, hard labour and illness — his legs
became infected and swollen so that he could not walk — caused his death. He
never once wavered in his commitment to the Lord and fidelity to the Church.
I could go on to mention other priests as well,
men such as my vicar general, Fr Andrew Chan Jik-san who took my place when I
was arrested. He was brought to Beijing and pressured to become a bishop in my
stead by joining the Patriotic Association under government control. He always
refused. Back in Canton he was arrested. Beaten and kept in a police station, he
was able to sneak out and crawled home on all fours. Some Christians took him in
and he died soon after.
There were many more such witnesses to the
faith in China. The words of the Letter to the Hebrews come to mind and they
encourage us who are left behind: «Let us persevere in running the face that
lies before us, while keeping our eyes fixed on Jesus» (12:1).
Just before I was released from prison, I
underwent a final examination. I was questioned on my attitude towards the
Vatican, I answered: «I am a Catholic and I cannot separate from the Pope.»
This angered the official. «After 22 years you are still the same stubborn old
man.» Ten days later he came back to me and said: «First of all, you are
honest. You have never used money given to the Church for your own personal
benefit, not even the money given to you by your mother. Second, you never
played around with women and, finally, you never have harmed the people.» These
were the three reasons given for my release. «Never playing around with women»
was the negative way that official used to attest to the fact that I had kept my
celibacy intact. Of course, this was a grace of the Lord. It was a grace even
manifest to an atheistic government that had no use for celibacy. Yet in
releasing me from prison and inducing this as one of the reasons, they were
forced to admit that something about celibacy was good. They could not say why,
but we Christians can, for it is Jesus who said: «Some have renounced marriage
for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. Whoever can accept this ought to accept
it» (Mt 19:12, New American Bible).
|