The Problem of the Pastor’s Dog
GUEST COLUMN
An owner treats his dog like family. Both live together in a bond of great intimacy and affection.
Priestly dog ownership raises a trifling but ticklish question: Should a pastor house his dog in the rectory? Moral theologian Francis J. Connell, C.SS.R., replies with an equivocal “yes and no.”
Neither divine law nor the general law of the Church forbids a priest from owning a domesticated carnivorous canine. The propriety of using the rectory as a dog house is, however, an arguable point.
Bishops rarely lay down rules regarding a priest’s in-house pets. On this topic, Canon Law is silent. Holy Writ mentions the dog over 40 times, but mostly in terms of contempt and aversion — e.g., “As a dog returns to his vomit, so a fool returns to his folly” (Prov. 26:11) and “Do not give dogs what is holy” (Mt. 7:16).
You May Also Enjoy
What signs of distinction do Christians give? The signs must say not only, “We’re not one of you,” but “Come and see.” We’re not so good at those signs.
Having banished one strange tongue — Latin — the Catholic Church witnessed an odd phenomenon in the 1960s: an outbreak of “unknown tongues” or glossolalia.
If only a Catholic could run as a Catholic and be elected as a Catholic (and not deny his Catholicism as John Kennedy did in 1960), then Al Smith might stand redeemed.