Celibacy as a requirement

[ALLFORHIM]

My “logic” is that Scripture says that the unmarried man serves the Lord and the married man serves his wife. The Church is clearly better off with those who serve the Lord in the clergy.

As I acknowledged, there are a small number of married priests in the Catholic Church. But once they separate from their current wives by becoming widowers or whatever, that’s it. They cannot remarry.

What I’d like to see answered is how come virtually no leaders in Protestantism give up everything…including wives…to serve the Lord. (I have an answer, but I’d get jumped on for being insensitive to Protestantism.)

I guess I dont see why a minister should give up his wife. There is no biblical basis for this.
God does not tell men to give up their wives to serve Him.

Yes Paul states it is better to remain unmarried and I dont have a problem with that. But, God made marriage why would he then tell a man to leave it?
If a man chooses to have both then Im sure God will bless him with the ablitiy to handle it. The ministers in my church do a fine job.

 

[Bob_Byrnes]

No, but they may need to work extra hard, since it is more difficult to fulfill two vocations at the same time.

But you said a married clergy IS second class. You continue to confuse me.

 

[ALLFORHIM]

My “logic” is that Scripture says that the unmarried man serves the Lord and the married man serves his wife. The Church is clearly better off with those who serve the Lord in the clergy.

 

[guanophore]

I guess I dont see why a minister should give up his wife. There is no biblical basis for this.
God does not tell men to give up their wives to serve Him.

Yes Paul states it is better to remain unmarried and I dont have a problem with that. But, God made marriage why would he then tell a man to leave it?
If a man chooses to have both then Im sure God will bless him with the ablitiy to handle it. The ministers in my church do a fine job.

This, then is the major difference. The individual is not the one who chooses priesthood. It is a vocation to which one must be called by God, and that calling must be confirmed by the Church. Persons discerning the call go through years of study and spiritual direction to confirm the call.

I trust that God does bless those married who are ministers, as he does Deacons in the Catholic church. But their first duty is, by defnition, to their family, and only after that to the flock of God.

Why–how do you know? Have you done research that says so?I dont see that in scripture–maybe I missed the part about not being able to be a married minister. Could you show me scripture that says being married makes you less able to also shepard a flock.
That is fine if that is what they choose. Trust me-if my hubby dies first or leaves me-I have no intention on getting remarried.

Perhaps in our independently minded America it is difficult to understand that everything is not about one’s own personal choice. Catholics have accepted the teachings of Jesus and Paul that an unmarried man does not have his attention divided, and can serve God with less distraction. It does not make a married man “less” somehow, it means he can focus on the ministry without being concerned about his own family.

But you said a married clergy IS second class. You continue to confuse me.

Actually, I never said that. If someone else posted that, they will have to back themselves up. I was butting in on the conversation.

 

[Trelow]

What it boils down to is the authority of the Church. Heh, everything boils down to the authority of the Church.

Either you accept the wisdom of the Lord’s most holy bride, or you usurp her ruling for your own.

 

[Randy_Carson]

SPH1;2184709:

Why–how do you know? Have you done research that says so?I dont see that in scripture–maybe I missed the part about not being able to be a married minister. Could you show me scripture that says being married makes you less able to also shepard a flock.

Sure.

“I would like you to be free from concern. An unmarried man is concerned about the Lord’s affairs—how he can please the Lord. 33But a married man is concerned about the affairs of this world—how he can please his wife— 34and his interests are divided. An unmarried woman or virgin is concerned about the Lord’s affairs: Her aim is to be devoted to the Lord in both body and spirit. But a married woman is concerned about the affairs of this world—how she can please her husband.”

Paul also says: “I wish that all men were as I am.”

That is fine if that is what they choose. Trust me-if my hubby dies first or leaves me-I have no intention on getting remarried.

May I politely inquire as to why you feel this way?

 

[ALLFORHIM]

ALLFORHIM;2184780:

Sure.

"I would like you to be free from concern. An unmarried man is concerned about the Lord’s affairs—how he can please the Lord. 33But a married man is concerned about the affairs of this world—how he can please his wife— 34and his interests are divided.

An unmarried woman or virgin is concerned about the Lord’s affairs: Her aim is to be devoted to the Lord in both body and spirit. But a married woman is concerned about the affairs of this world—how she can please her husband."

Paul also says: “I wish that all men were as I am.”

May I politely inquire as to why you feel this way?

Thank you for the scripture. Because marriage is such hard work–honestly I do not want to go through it again. Dont get me wrong-I have a good marriage and neither of us believe in divorce-but if something ever happened-Im just not interested in being married again. Been there done that I would be just fine serving the Lord-and that is it.

 

[Randy_Carson]

Randy Carson;2185810:

Thank you for the scripture. Because marriage is such hard work–honestly I do not want to go through it again. Dont get me wrong-I have a good marriage and neither of us believe in divorce-but if something ever happened-Im just not interested in being married again. Been there done that I would be just fine serving the Lord-and that is it.

You know, some think that Peter was a widower…and that the “wife” mentioned by Paul was actually a woman who attended to Peter’s needs just as there are nuns who run the domestic side of the papal household.

Interesting, eh?

 

[SPH1]

I guess I dont see why a minister should give up his wife. There is no biblical basis for this.
God does not tell men to give up their wives to serve Him.

Yes Paul states it is better to remain unmarried and I dont have a problem with that. But, God made marriage why would he then tell a man to leave it?
If a man chooses to have both then Im sure God will bless him with the ablitiy to handle it. The ministers in my church do a fine job.

Why is it that virtually no leaders in Protestantism forego getting married in the first place, to follow Christ and serve the Lord?

It isn’t just about currently married men leaving wives to serve Christ.

How come in Protestantism celibacy is looked upon as a kind of freak state? Not really respected or encouraged?

 

[Church_Militant]

I have a real problem with the arguments against priestly celibacy because of the passages that are involved.

Matthew 19:10-12
"10 His disciples say unto him: If the case of a man with his wife be so, it is not expedient to marry.11 Who said to them: All men take not this word, but they to whom it is given. 12 For there are eunuchs, who were born so from their mother’s womb: and there are eunuchs, who were made so by men: and there are eunuchs, who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven. He that can take, let him take it. "

1st Corinthians 7:6-9
“6 But I speak this by indulgence, not by commandment. 7 For I would that all men were even as myself: but every one hath his proper gift from God; one after this manner, and another after that. 8 But I say to the unmarried, and to the widows: It is good for them if they so continue, even as I. 9 But if they do not contain themselves, let them marry. For it is better to marry than to be burnt.”

We see the latter one quoted heavily, along with the following.

1st Timothy 4:1-3 “1 Now the Spirit manifestly saith, that in the last times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to spirits of error, and doctrines of devils, 2 Speaking lies in hypocrisy, and having their conscience seared, 3 Forbidding to marry, to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving by the faithful, and by them that have known the truth. 4 For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be rejected that is received with thanksgiving: 5 For it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer.”

Yet those same opponents seem to act like the first passage is not in the New Testament, instead of coming directly from the mouth of Our Lord Himself.

That settles the whole issue to me.

 

[SPH1]

But you said a married clergy IS second class. You continue to confuse me.

I’m the one who said that a married clergy is second class.

But you said:

A lot of interesting information but it does not address the current shortage of priests. Isn’t the availability of the Eucharist much more desirable than celibacy , or is adherance to some old tradition somehow necessary ? Celibacy , yes…but not mandatory. The faithful in the pews deserve better.

It is this attitude of referring to celibacy as “some old tradition” which helps discourage vocations. It makes it sound as if one would be a fool. By definition, this view neither values nor respects celibacy.

You refer above to a sister Chittister. Is she some dissident Nun? Why would you value her opinion over that of the Pope or Magisterium of the Church? Hey! If we don’t have to listen to the Pope and Bishops then we certaintly don’t have to listen to dissident priests and feminist nuns.

Availability of the Holy Eucharist is important, but not at the expense of inviting dissident views into the Church.

Besides, I believe that “availability of the Eucharist” is only a ploy employed by dissident factions. Advancing their agenda is the real goal.

Perhaps we’d have more vocations if everyone would come on board and support celibacy, instead of making it sound as if it’s a foolish, indefensible, hindering tradition that has no business in the Church.

 

[dylanschrader]

Yes Paul states it is better to remain unmarried and I dont have a problem with that. But, God made marriage why would he then tell a man to leave it?
If a man chooses to have both then Im sure God will bless him with the ablitiy to handle it. The ministers in my church do a fine job.

I’m sure your ministers do a fine job, but there’s really not a comparison because they’re not priests. The priesthood is not a set of functions that a man can assume for a time and then lay aside.

A man becomes a priest by a sacrament (a visible sign instituted by Christ and entrusted to the Church to give grace) called Holy Orders. A bishop, having the fullness of Holy Orders as passed down to him through an unbroken line of bishops from the apostles, lays his hands on the head of a man and invokes the Holy Spirit to make him a priest. The man then becomes a priest, not by way of assuming a new set of functions within the Church but by an ontological change, that is, a permanent change in his soul which configures him to Christ the Head.

It is thus fitting that priests be celibate so that they may live in a way which constantly reminds others of Heaven where “they neither marry nor are given in marriage.” A priest’s life is to preach the Gospel and to be the guardian of the sacraments. It is very fitting that the priest be committed to the whole Church as a spiritual father and shepherd, then, in a way which celibacy shows forth and brings about.

 

[paarsurrey]

You had me up until Jesus being married. NEVER HAPPENED:nope:

Hi
Jesus got married and had children for which kindly view the following:
tombofjesus.com/

Did Jesus die on the Cross? A BBC documentary
video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1669658378154953060&q
Thanks
I am an Ahmadi - a peaceful faith in Islam bridging gaps between the faiths/denominations/religions/agnostics

 

[Trelow]

Hi
Jesus got married and had children for which kindly view the following:
tombofjesus.com/

Did Jesus die on the Cross? A BBC documentary
video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1669658378154953060&q
Thanks
I am an Ahmadi - a peaceful faith in Islam bridging gaps between the faiths/denominations/religions/agnostics

You’re not being so very peaceful.

 

[guanophore]

A lot of interesting information but it does not address the current shortage of priests. Isn’t the availability of the Eucharist much more desirable than celibacy , or is adherance to some old tradition somehow necessary ? Celibacy , yes…but not mandatory. The faithful in the pews deserve better.

I don’t think the teaching of Jesus and the Apostles is “some old tradition”. They are sacred traditions. When we shift in thinking this way, we begin down the long dark path of error.

all i know is that the bible doesnt list it as a requirement, it is just a church trying to establish a pecking order and a hierarchy where God did not intend for one. Also i dont believe God has called a single priest to be that, seeing as the church of rome’s doctrine goes against his word.

Sir, your posts have clearly indicated that you have very little understanding what the church teaches, so there is no way you could determinine whether it is consistent with scripture. That bible you are thumping us over the head with is a Catholic book! If you have issues, then you should post them one at a time, instead of taking pot shots.

the church did. Not the roman church, nothing catholic had to do with it, so dont hide behind your church.

Did you think because you started to attack us we would go and hide? You do not recognize yet that there was no other church at the time the scriptures were written and canonized. The entire New Testatment is written by Catholics, and it was preserved and propogated by Catholics.

I love catholics to death, but they dont know the facts usually.

No need! Jesus already loved us unto death, and gave Himself for us. However, it is true that there are many Catholics that are lacking in facts.

They will say that the roman church established the bible, but they werent around until AD 500 if i recall right. If anyone really wants to challenge it i will find sources.

Now would be a good time! I think, if you study history, you will find most of your beliefs about catholicism are in error. The church did not split into Easterna and Western (Latin/Roman) until 1050, and by that time the canon had long been established.

the apostles knew what was Spirit-inspired, and they could make those decisions. ANYWAYS, bible was used somewhat around like 130AD i believe,(in a form) and that was way before the church.

I am sure when you study the history of the canon, all your dates will be revised!

all i know is that the bible doesnt list it as a requirement, it is just a church trying to establish a pecking order and a hierarchy where God did not intend for one. Also i dont believe God has called a single priest to be that, seeing as the church of rome’s doctrine goes against his word.

What on God’s green earth does celibacy have to do with pecking order?!?!

yes, i believe it is better to be single and more wholly devoted, but examine the scripture. “If they cannot exercise selfcontrol, then marry.”

Who wants a person in charge of the household of God that has no self control? If a man cannot control his own passions, he has no business serving at the altar of God.

Countless bishops and priests have been caught with mistresses, and some have even been found in the abomination of homosexual intercouse!

Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound even more?

how dare they say it makes them more holy, it would be better for them to be married and not commit this horrible sin than to attempt to be more focused on god, which they obviously fail.

This is erroneous reasoning, specops. It also reveals that you have little understanding about human sexuality. Heterosexual marriage has little impact on homosexual and pedophilic behaviors. A person that fails to focus upon God should be removed from service, until such time as he can do so, if ever.

 

[clmowry]

A peaceful faith in Islam bridging gaps by professing that what Islams is correct and what Christian’s teach is false.

Gotta love it.

Chuck

Hi
Jesus got married and had children for which kindly view the following:
tombofjesus.com/

Did Jesus die on the Cross? A BBC documentary
video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1669658378154953060&q
Thanks
I am an Ahmadi - a peaceful faith in Islam bridging gaps between the faiths/denominations/religions/agnostics

 

[Bob_Byrnes]

I’m the one who said that a married clergy is second class.

But you said:

You refer above to a sister Chittister. Is she some dissident Nun? Why would you value her opinion over that of the Pope or Magisterium of the Church? Hey! If we don’t have to listen to the Pope and Bishops then we certaintly don’t have to listen to dissident priests and feminist nuns.

Availability of the Holy Eucharist is important, but not at the expense of inviting dissident views into the Church.

Besides, I believe that “availability of the Eucharist” is only a ploy employed by dissident factions. Advancing their agenda is the real goal.

Perhaps we’d have more vocations if everyone would come on board and support celibacy, instead of making it sound as if it’s a foolish, indefensible, hindering tradition that has no business in the Church.

Is anyone who disagrees with the Pope or Bishops on non-infallible issues a dissident? Am I to blindly follow any statement of the Pope or the Bishops ? I think good healthy debate and disagreements should not necessarily be just rejected and thrown into the dissident file. Good dialogue should not always result in phrases like “dissident factions”,“feminist nuns” etc. If we can’t have healthy, civil disagreements without calling one another names then what’s the point of these forums ?

 

[Bob_Byrnes]

I don’t think the teaching of Jesus and the Apostles is “some old tradition”. They are sacred traditions. When we shift in thinking this way, we begin down the long dark path of error.
When did priestly celibacy become the teaching of Jesus ?

Sir, your posts have clearly indicated that you have very little understanding what the church teaches, so there is no way you could determinine whether it is consistent with scripture. That bible you are thumping us over the head with is a Catholic book! If you have issues, then you should post them one at a time, instead of taking pot shots.

Did you think because you started to attack us we would go and hide? You do not recognize yet that there was no other church at the time the scriptures were written and canonized. The entire New Testatment is written by Catholics, and it was preserved and propogated by Catholics.

No need! Jesus already loved us unto death, and gave Himself for us. However, it is true that there are many Catholics that are lacking in facts.

Now would be a good time! I think, if you study history, you will find most of your beliefs about catholicism are in error. The church did not split into Easterna and Western (Latin/Roman) until 1050, and by that time the canon had long been established.

I am sure when you study the history of the canon, all your dates will be revised!

What on God’s green earth does celibacy have to do with pecking order?!?!

Who wants a person in charge of the household of God that has no self control? If a man cannot control his own passions, he has no business serving at the altar of God.

Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound even more?

This is erroneous reasoning, specops. It also reveals that you have little understanding about human sexuality. Heterosexual marriage has little impact on homosexual and pedophilic behaviors. A person that fails to focus upon God should be removed from service, until such time as he can do so, if ever.

 

[FCEGM]

Hi
Jesus got married and had children for which kindly view the following:
tombofjesus.com/

Did Jesus die on the Cross? A BBC documentary
video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1669658378154953060&q

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=146645&highlight=Tomb+of+Jesus

 

[fix]

I don’t quite get your point. Are you saying Christ wanted celibate priests?

Obviously He does in most cases. The discipline is based in infallibility in that that discipline is not contrary to Christ’s will.

This is from the old CE:

From the disciplinary infallibility of the Church, correctly understood as an indirect consequence of her doctrinal infallibility, it follows that she cannot be rightly accused of introducing into her discipline anything opposed to the Divine law…

newadvent.org/cathen/05030a.htm

I am saying that there is no basis to claim the Church is acting in error in this issue. You may not like it, but that does not make the discipline an error.