A few days ago, Maureen Dowd wrote a surprisingly good column on love and marriage, featuring advice given by a priest. Feministing, predictably, automatically discounted this advice because it came from a priest, who apparently knows nothing on the subject of marriage and love because he’s celibate. Mature:
Dowd has stooped to a new low. Paraphrasing a priest on advice on what to look for in a husband. I guess I can see on some level, since marriage is frequently a religious thing, but in general, this gets a no. And by the way, apparently we should be looking for man-robots that have never experienced any trauma or disruption in their life.
A priest typically knows a lot about love, considering they’re pretty knowledgeable about He who gives us the greatest love of all. But we shouldn’t listen to his relationship advice, no matter how good it may be, because he’s celibate. Samhita admits it’s good advice, but we shouldn’t listen because they’ve supposedly don’t have any “relationship experience”.
News flash, Samhita: many priests had lives before entering the priesthood. Some have been married and are widowed. Many had girlfriends. I’ve heard of priests who led awful, horrible lives filled with drug usage and promiscuity before they reformed themselves and found their calling. Even those who joined the priesthood at a young age, like a priest in my church, usually have had some very difficult experiences. The priest I mention at my church was actually an Army chaplain during WWII, something he says was very hard for him to recover from.
Being a priest does not make you a mindless robot with no experience in anything whatsoever. It makes me wonder if this Samhita has ever even met a priest. It’s sad that the priesthood is looked down upon so often in our country, when these are men called to a lifestyle of selfless service. But I guess when you’re a feminist, thinking of one other than yourself just doesn’t come naturally.