Becoming A Eunuch

  • Thread starter Thread starter Danyel
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
D

Danyel

Guest
This is a 100% serious question.

Where can a person go to find out more on becoming a eunuch and/or where to get this procedure done?

I thought the RCC might have faced this question more times than other churches, so I ask.

Thanks
 
You need to seek out a confessor and spiritual director (if you are Catholic)

This is immoral behavior. Put it out of your mind immediately. In fact, seek professional help from a qualified doctor or therapist. Self-mutilation is powerful like a drug, and cannot be overcome by sheer force of your own will.
 
Elizium23 said:
You need to seek out a confessor and spiritual director (if you are Catholic)

This is immoral behavior. Put it out of your mind immediately. In fact, seek professional help from a qualified doctor or therapist. Self-mutilation is powerful like a drug, and cannot be overcome by sheer force of your own will.
Click to expand...
This answer should be the end of this thread.
 
Danyel said:
This is a 100% serious question.

Where can a person go to find out more on becoming a eunuch and/or where to get this procedure done?

I thought the RCC might have faced this question more times than other churches, so I ask.

Thanks
Click to expand...
**Self mutilation is not the answer. If you can extinguish the fire of passion inside of you without being a Eunuch, then you can prove yourself. If you really want to do something, have a LONG discussion about this with a Spiritual Director who is a Catholic Priest, and investigate the possibility of a Vow of chastity. Thats means your sexuality is consecrated and wholly reserved to JESUS. Thats far better than being mutilated!! **
 
aemcpa said:
This answer should be the end of this thread…

**You need to seek out a confessor and spiritual director (if you are Catholic)

This is immoral behavior. Put it out of your mind immediately. In fact, seek professional help from a qualified doctor or therapist. Self-mutilation is powerful like a drug, and cannot be overcome by sheer force of your own will.**
Click to expand...
I second both of these.
 
Your ignorance - all of you - of the Word of God is stunning: Jesus said it, Himself,

"8He said to them, “Because of your hardness of heart Moses allowed you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so. 9And I say to you: whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery.”a

10The disciples said to him, “If such is the case of a man with his wife, it is better not to marry.” 11But he said to them, “Not everyone can receive this saying, but only those to whom it is given. 12For there are eunuchs who have been so from birth, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by men, and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. Let the one who is able to receive this receive it.””

Origen (an Early Church Father), castrated himself.
If all these priests, who supposedly have a lifetime vow of celibacy, would have castrated themselves, they wouldn’t have been fondling little boys - their sex drives would’ve been gone.
 
Irrespectively, I think I’ve found a better solution: I can get chemical castration which can be reversed (in case there are unwanted side-effects, apart from the desirable side-effects of losing the sex drive) by simply discontinuing the pills.
 
Whoa!!

Jesus is talking about celibacy, a kind of making oneself an effective eunuch.

Dude, please look into the Church’s teaching on this. Don’t interpret Scripture on your own. This is why we Catholics enjoy the Magisterium of the Church, so we don’t end up sending our body parts to the chopping block. :eek:
 
Thanks all. I’m done with the thread. Mods can lock if it they please.
 
I really hope the moderators will remove this disturbing thread, and that the priests will contact the OP privately. I’m afraid that if the thread is left on CAF, that teenaged boys will get wrong ideas. So many teenaged boys struggle with growing up and their sexuality, and I can see why they are susceptible to extreme ideas about how to gain mastery over their hormones.
 
Based on the last line of post #7, my guess would be that the OP is more likely a troll than a self-mutilator.

Mutilation is clearly forbidden by the Church as immoral.

FWIW, Eusebius’ report regarding Origen is doubted by many historians, especially on the basis that it conflicts with Origen’s interpretation of Matthew 19.
 
aspirant said:
Based on the last line of post #7, my guess would be that the OP is more likely a troll than a self-mutilator.

Mutilation is clearly forbidden by the Church as immoral.

FWIW, Eusebius’ report regarding Origen is doubted by many historians, especially on the basis that it conflicts with Origen’s interpretation of Matthew 19.
Click to expand...
I agree with all of this. Especially the likelihood of a troll in our midst and the doubtful account of Origen castrating himself.
 
  1. I assure you that I am not a troll - however, whether Origen castrated himself or not, his deeds are not my standard; I was just mentioning him because he may serve as an example of the fulfillment of the Scripture. In Matthew 19, Jesus offered three types of eunuchs:
    a. those born eunuchs
    b. those who are made eunuchs by others
    c. those who make themselves eunuchs
Question: What would be the commonality among these three?

a. birth “defect”
b. forced castration
c. (we may logically conclude) voluntary castration - removal of the parts in order to be akin to “a” and “b”

Answer: None have [the parts in question] in “working order”.
  1. You say “the church teaches x, y and z about Matthew 19 and ‘self-mutilation’”: I am not of the RCC tradition so we will simply (respectfully) disagree.
Good day
 
Danyel said:
  1. I assure you that I am not a troll - however, whether Origen castrated himself or not, his deeds are not my standard; I was just mentioning him because he may serve as an example of the fulfillment of the Scripture. In Matthew 19, Jesus offered three types of eunuchs:
    a. those born eunuchs
    b. those who are made eunuchs by others
    c. those who make themselves eunuchs
Question: What would be the commonality among these three?

a. birth “defect”
b. forced castration
c. (we may logically conclude) voluntary castration - removal of the parts in order to be akin to “a” and “b”

Answer: None have [the parts in question] in “working order”.
  1. You say “the church teaches x, y and z about Matthew 19 and ‘self-mutilation’”: I am not of the RCC tradition so we will simply (respectfully) disagree.
Good day
Click to expand...
Neither the Church nor any serious Biblical scholar thinks for a moment that Jesus meant literally that some men are called to self-mutilation. He is speaking of voluntary celibacy.
 
aemcpa said:
Neither the Church nor any serious Biblical scholar thinks for a moment that Jesus meant literally that some men are called to self-mutilation. He is speaking of voluntary celibacy.
Click to expand...
So, this will be my last comment concerning the particulars (I cannot waste my time trying to convince people): I already addressed that when I said that the three people Jesus mentioned had one thing in common (their parts are not in working order). Jesus also said tear your eye out and cut your hand off - this is no different. What was the reason given? Better to enter Heaven missing a part than to enter the fire of hell with your body intact.

Considering that most “people” end up being thrown into the fire, and that I fall under that category by being a “person” - I should understand that my chances of entering the Kingdom of God are not very good, and that my chances must be “helped along” by any means possible: this is so serious a situation that even if a physical member continually frustrates my walk or mind, it should (taking the facts of the matter into consideration) be CUT OFF. If you think that is extreme, you don’t know what the fire of hell means.

Believe as you wish; I will take Jesus seriously.
 
Danyel said:
So, this will be my last comment concerning the particulars (I cannot waste my time trying to convince people): I already addressed that when I said that the three people Jesus mentioned had one thing in common (their parts are not in working order). Jesus also said tear your eye out and cut your hand off - this is no different. What was the reason given? Better to enter Heaven missing a part than to enter the fire of hell with your body intact.

Believe as you wish.
Click to expand...
That is my point. That is NOT a commonality among the three groups. He is referring to people whose bodies are intact and in working order but who choose to renounce the legitimate use of the sexual faculty. This is the unanimous witness of the Church and of scholars.
 
When Christ said “if your eye causes you to sin, pluck it out” He was not being literal. He was using an extreme to illustrate the seriousness of sin. Origen, while brilliant, was a heretic because he believed in universal reconciliation and all kinds of other things. I hope his beliefs were in good faith and not a temptation from the Enemy, but nevertheless… he was a heretic.

If you were really any kind of Biblical or antiquities scholar you would understand the context in which Christ was speaking. Self-mutilation and human sacrifice were absolutely forbidden in Judaism. Castration falls within that realm. You can’t use the actions of perhaps overly zealous early fathers (at best) to justify this kind of action. Christ may have swept aside things like Jewish dietary laws by saying the only things that defile come from within, but He would never advocate for actual self-mutilation.

If that were the case, why would Paul plead with all to those he wrote that they must treat their bodies as temples of the Holy Spirit?

Jesus was illustrating the seriousness of sin by using scenarios which would have been shocking and scandalous to the Jewish community. It was to wake people up as to how sin can damage and cripple the soul.
 
Danyel said:
So, this will be my last comment concerning the particulars (I cannot waste my time trying to convince people): I already addressed that when I said that the three people Jesus mentioned had one thing in common (their parts are not in working order). Jesus also said tear your eye out and cut your hand off - this is no different. What was the reason given? Better to enter Heaven missing a part than to enter the fire of hell with your body intact.

Considering that most “people” end up being thrown into the fire, and that I fall under that category by being a “person” - I should understand that my chances of entering the Kingdom of God are not very good, and that my chances must be “helped along” by any means possible: this is so serious a situation that even if a physical member continually frustrates my walk or mind, it should (taking the facts of the matter into consideration) be CUT OFF. If you think that is extreme, you don’t know what the fire of hell means.

Believe as you wish; I will take Jesus seriously.
Click to expand...
So your salvations matters more because of action you are thinking of taking rather than what Jesus has already done? Wow, so you’re going to get yourself to Heaven, that is rich!

So Jesus literally wants me to pluck my eys out if I look lustfully on a woman? Let me ask you, will your brain still be able to think lustful thoughs after you castrate yourself, by mutilation of chemicals? If so, you should consider ripping your brain out of your head, because of Jesus’ teachings on adultery, murder, etc. He was speaking of grave sin commited in our minds, not only with our hands eyes and genitals.

Let us know when you are ready to go ALL the way to avoid sin, not just the easy parts; get rid of every part of you that God the Father made inferior to your own ideas. :cool:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top