Celibacy and Adam

  • Thread starter Thread starter PRmerger
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Nita said:
The parts I cited from “Fundamentals…” can be accessed on line. Scroll about 1/3 of the way down. Will be nice when/if they get the whole book online.
catecheticsonline.com/Fundamentals-BookTwo-PartOne-II.php

Here is the home page. www.catecheticsonline.com/Fundamentals.php

Where the “Click here” is underlined, that portion is available online. However, when you click on the “Click here”, an error message will pop up. Just backspace/delete the last four letters (html) of the web address and type in instead php.
Click to expand...
Nita,

Funny your citation of Fundamentals. No sooner had I finished my post last night than I went to my room and spotted the book on my shelf and thought, “Hm! This should provide some useful information on the topic…” 🙂 I didn’t get very far, though, before falling alseep. This morning, I wake up to your post.

As I mentioned before, it’s terribly difficult sometimes to describe supernatural realities with great precision precisely because human words are of this world and supernatural realities are not.

This said, I would like to take a few more steps forward and question some things.

From Fundamentals:
Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma:
The Council of Trent, in opposition to Pelagianism and to modern Rationalism, teaches: primUl11 hominem Adam … sanctitatem et iustitiam, in qua constitutus fuerat, amisisse. (If anyone will not confess that when the first man Adam had transgressed the mandate of God in paradise he did not immediately lose the sanctity and justice in which he had been constituted
A.S.) D 788; c£ D 192.

Against Baius and the Jansenist Quesnel, the Church asserted the supernatural character of the gifts given to man in the primitive state. D 1021 to 1026, 1385. C£ D 1516.
Click to expand...
In every language there are at least a handful of words that have multiple meanings, or multiple levels of meaning. Based on the weight of the evidence I’ve seen thus far, I have to suggest (and may be wrong) that the “sanctifying” grace spoken of here is only that - grace which makes holy. This is not (in my persistent - aka stubborn 😉 estimation) the same thing as the “sanctifying grace” that Jesus won for us. That or it is the same thing, but in a…wow, how to say this…“unmatured” form.

I found the following quote most interesting. It speaks to your final paragraph in which you suggested that the elevation to the state of grace happened at the moment of or shortly after man’s creation:
Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma:
As regards the time of man’s elevation to the state of grace, most theologians, including St. Thomas and his school, are of the opinion that the first men were created in the state of sanctifying grace, **Petrus Lombardus and tl1e Franciscan school, on the other hand, teach that the first human beings on their creation received ouly the preternatural gifts of integrity, and were required to prepare themselves with the help of actual grace for the reception of sanctifying grace. **The Council of Trent has deliberately left the question undecided (whence constitutus, not creatus: D 788). St. Thomas’ teaching is that of the Fathers. Cf. D 192: St. John Damascene, De fide orth. IT 12. S. tl1. 195, I.
Click to expand...
The bolded portion is where I stand at the moment. (Good to know that apparently I stand in good company. 🙂 ) At the end of the quotation it says that “St. Thomas’ teaching is that of the Fathers”, but then it only specifies St. John Damascene, which makes me wonder multiple things, not the least of which is if Damascene is the only Father to have ever spoken specifically on this.

Plenty more could be said, but, like I said before, this is an issue not really worth “quarreling” about, or going to great pains to “defend” one’s position on (in public anyway - it’s a fascinating issue and one worth spending time on in my estimation, just not in the form of an “advanced” public debate). As previously mentioned, Divine Revelation on this is a little bit vague and probably for a good reason. Thus, I leave off here and await your reply.

Peace be with you,

SK
 
Joan_M said:
Because if Adam was “THE celibate male” how would there have been any more human beings in this world? God designed us to need each other and for procreation to need a male and a female.

I do not understand how this question arises.
Click to expand...
I think PR’s question is essentially this:

How does Adam’s “need” for a spouse not violate the nature of man’s perfect communion with God? In other words, in Heaven, Jesus tells us we will not marry or be given in marriage essentially because God will be our “all in all”. Our connection with the Lord there will completely “satisfy” us and not allow for a third party “union”. If life in the garden was also “perfect”, where do Adam and Eve have room individually for an intimate marital relationship with each other?

Does that help clarify?

SK
 
Joan_M said:
I do not understand how this question arises.
Click to expand...
I apologize for not articulating it better.

We were made for union with God. The marital act points to/is an icon/anticipates this communion.

If Adam was already fully in communion with God, there was no need for more. Why would he need Eve? God could have populated the world in the same manner as he created Adam–from the dirt.

So where does celibacy fit into this picture? If Adam, created as all humans were meant to be, needed a woman, why don’t priests?

The fact that they need to be able to give themselves fully to their parish is a minor answer, but does not address Pope JPII’s description of the priesthood/celibacy as anticipating the full union with God.
 
SilentKnight said:
I think PR’s question is essentially this:

How does Adam’s “need” for a spouse not violate the nature of man’s perfect communion with God? In other words, in Heaven, Jesus tells us we will not marry or be given in marriage essentially because God will be our “all in all”. Our connection with the Lord there will completely “satisfy” us and not allow for a third party “union”. If life in the garden was also “perfect”, where do Adam and Eve have room individually for an intimate marital relationship with each other?

Does that help clarify?

SK
Click to expand...
SK, you articulated it better than I did!
 
no one has yet touched on why Eve was necessary. Eve was NECESSARY. God creates Adam and then adam begins to realize something is wrong but does not know what. Then he realizes what that something is. He is created like God in something called “original solitude”. That just means the state God existed in before there was a creation when God was alone. However God in original solitude was also a communion of persons. The God creates all the animals and shows each of them to Adam. He does this so Adam can learn that he cannot be a communion of persons with any of those things. He NEEDS his Eve. Flesh of his flesh and blood of his blood to be a communion of persons. That is why he needs Eve. So he can be like God.
 
down_under said:
no one has yet touched on why Eve was necessary. Eve was NECESSARY. God creates Adam and then adam begins to realize something is wrong but does not know what. Then he realizes what that something is. He is created like God in something called “original solitude”. That just means the state God existed in before there was a creation when God was alone. However God in original solitude was also a communion of persons. The God creates all the animals and shows each of them to Adam. He does this so Adam can learn that he cannot be a communion of persons with any of those things. He NEEDS his Eve. Flesh of his flesh and blood of his blood to be a communion of persons. That is why he needs Eve. So he can be like God.
Click to expand...
Yes! This points out my question regarding celibacy even better! Adam NEEDS Eve to be a communion of persons. Why then don’t priests need flesh to be a communion of persons as well??
 
down_under said:
no one has yet touched on why Eve was necessary. Eve was NECESSARY.
Click to expand...
A very interesting post, DU.

Just for fun…😃 …Was she?
God creates Adam and then adam begins to realize something is wrong but does not know what. Then he realizes what that something is. He is created like God in something called “original solitude”. That just means the state God existed in before there was a creation when God was alone. However God in original solitude was also a communion of persons. The God creates all the animals and shows each of them to Adam. He does this so Adam can learn that he cannot be a communion of persons with any of those things. He NEEDS his Eve. Flesh of his flesh and blood of his blood to be a communion of persons. That is why he needs Eve. So he can be like God.
Click to expand...
I would concur with the notion that being in a marital relationship with Eve is part of what makes Adam “like” God. And yet, what of priests and religious then, whose spouse is the Lord?

😉

SK
 
PRmerger said:
Yes! This points out my question regarding celibacy even better! Adam NEEDS Eve to be a communion of persons. Why then don’t priests need flesh to be a communion of persons as well??
Click to expand...
*SK shoves his little brother into the closet and locks the door so he can’t come out and keep repeating his older brother’s words. * LOL!

😃

SK
 
🙂

Just teasing you about us saying more or less the same exact thing in multiple back to back posts. That’s all.

:whistle:

SK
 
Adam was not like man that we know him today. He did not have the masculine qualities we see in Jesus. It was only when God created Eve that these masculine attributes become relevant. In other words if Adam was alone why would he have the masculine “member”, if there are no women around.

Eve is by far the greatest gift to man kind, for God created Eve for humanity to know Love. Before this God the father loves man the son in a father child relationship, one way and not very fruitful.

Man cannot Love alone, meaning he cannot “will the good of another” if no one was around to receive that Love. Women are made to receive Love, just as man is made to give that Love.

God basically split all of His greatness into two, male and female. Giver and receiver. Love (God is Love) is what makes us ONE.

We are made in his image because in marriage we become whole again. With our whole and complete Love (in God’s image) we become creators and bare fruit. With fruit the cycle continues for humanity to receive and give Love.

Interesting that this topic came up, I was thinking and writing about this all morning.

Most of this is the Encyclical “Dues Cartas Est”

God’s Faithful servant
John A. H.
 
John_AH said:
Adam was not like man that we know him today. He did not have the masculine qualities we see in Jesus. It was only when God created Eve that these masculine attributes become relevant. In other words if Adam was alone why would he have the masculine “member”, if there are no women around.

Eve is by far the greatest gift to man kind, for God created Eve for humanity to know Love. Before this God the father loves man the son in a father child relationship, one way and not very fruitful.

Man cannot Love alone, meaning he cannot “will the good of another” if no one was around to receive that Love. Women are made to receive Love, just as man is made to give that Love.

God basically split all of His greatness into two, male and female. Giver and receiver. Love (God is Love) is what makes us ONE.

We are made in his image because in marriage we become whole again. With our whole and complete Love (in God’s image) we become creators and bare fruit. With fruit the cycle continues for humanity to receive and give Love.

Interesting that this topic came up, I was thinking and writing about this all morning.

Most of this is the Encyclical “Dues Cartas Est”

God’s Faithful servant
John A. H.
Click to expand...
Ok, so where does celibacy fall into this? If marriage makes us whole, why do priests foresake marriage?
 
PRmerger said:
Ok, so where does celibacy fall into this? If marriage makes us whole, why do priests foresake marriage?
Click to expand...
Because God calls them to this unique role.

edit:
He is asked to give up a “good” (marriage) for a “better” (spiritual fatherhood of those he will lead).
 
A preist’s bride is the church. He is made whole by his gift of self to her. It is not a congical union but it still bares fruit.

God’s Faithful servant,
John A. H.
 
PRmerger said:
Ok, so where does celibacy fall into this? If marriage makes us whole, why do priests foresake marriage?
Click to expand...
Because Jesus surely gives it (celibacy) respect and honor.
*** He answered, “Not all can accept [this] word, but only those to whom that is granted.****** Some are incapable of marriage because they were born so; some, because they were made so by others; some, because they have renounced marriage for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. Whoever can accept this ought to accept it.***”
Click to expand...
 
Thanks for everyone’s responses. I understand that celibacy was given by Christ, thus bestowing upon it respect and honor. And I get that the priest’s bride is the Church.

What I don’t get is the argument proposed by the Theology of the Body regarding celibacy “as a living witness to the union that awaits us in heaven.” Christopher West addresses this on his website: “In short, those who choose celibacy are “skipping” the sacrament in anticipation of the real thing”.

Adam already had “the real thing”. Yet he needed Eve. Why? If God’s plan from all eternity was to “marry” us, and it seems Adam was united to God, he was already fulfilled.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top