Celibate in marriage

  • Thread starter Thread starter Belt_Feed
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
B

Belt_Feed

Guest
Can anyone please tell me where in church law this is stated or is this just a personal concept of Gantley. I am referring to the part about having to separate before receiving the sacraments. I read this on ewtn.com and felt he was wrong and want to try to get the truth for this person who is trying to do the right thing Thanks.

celibate in marriage
Question from mary on 8/2/2010: 

thank you for your response to my question REMARRIAGE. all the circumstances were not give. we consummated the marriage one time and have lived as brother and sister since. this will not change. am i still unable to receive the sacraments?
Answer by Rev. Mark J. Gantley, JCL on 8/15/2010:
The practice of a married couple living as so-called “brother-sister” is only intended as a possibility in limited circumstances, such as due to the presence of minor children in the home.
If you are living in an invalid marriage, then you need to separate, not merely live as brother- sister. Then you will be free to go to confession and receive Holy Communion.
Celibacy is the state of not being married. It does not mean not being sexually active.
Below
 
See number 84 from here. In part:

However, the Church reaffirms her practice, which is based upon Sacred Scripture, of not admitting to Eucharistic Communion divorced persons who have remarried. They are unable to be admitted thereto from the fact that their state and condition of life objectively contradict that union of love between Christ and the Church which is signified and effected by the Eucharist. Besides this, there is another special pastoral reason: if these people were admitted to the Eucharist, the faithful would be led into error and confusion regarding the Church’s teaching about the indissolubility of marriage.

Reconciliation in the sacrament of Penance which would open the way to the Eucharist, can only be granted to those who, repenting of having broken the sign of the Covenant and of fidelity to Christ, are sincerely ready to undertake a way of life that is no longer in contradiction to the indissolubility of marriage. This means, in practice, that when, for serious reasons, such as for example the children’s upbringing, a man and a woman cannot satisfy the obligation to separate, they “take on themselves the duty to live in complete continence, that is, by abstinence from the acts proper to married couples.”(180)
 
Belt_Feed said:
Can anyone please tell me where in church law this is stated or is this just a personal concept of Gantley.
Click to expand...
you are putting words in Father’s mouth. there is no such thing as married celibacy or vice versa. the definition of celibate is unmarried. You mean to ask what is the teaching on continence for two people in an invalid marriage who have not yet been able to regularize their situation, and the priest’s answer is correct and aimed at that couple for their circumstances, as all such answers should be.
 
ewtn.com/vexperts/showmessage.asp?Pgnu=1&Pg=Forum9&recnu=15&number=597291

Here is the link to the actual post in question. I see that the answer is appropriate for an invalid marriage. I cannot find the OP’s question since any couple living in an invalid marriage would not be able to receive the sacraments. This has nothing to do with whether or not they are having sex. And on a closing note, it would be most respectful to refer to the priest as ***Father ***Gantley.
 
I forgot to include these definitions

elibate
a person who abstains from sexual relations.
2.
a person who remains unmarried, esp. for religious reasons.
–adjective
3.
observing or pertaining to sexual abstention or a religious vow not to marry.
4.
not married.
Use celibate in a Sentence
 
Thanks JL that is what I needed. “Serious reason “is subjective and can be defined by the person in the situation, child upbringing is used only as an example. Serious reasons could be: if we separate one of us would end up living at the Salvation Army or the house would be foreclosed on and we would both be living at the Salvation Army and so on. Therefore I conclude that Gantley is wrong in telling her she is unable to receive the sacraments and that he should not be giving such advice without knowing the entire situation. If anyone else wants to reply please include an exact Catholic Definition Of Serious Reason.Thanks.
 
Belt_Feed said:
Thanks JL that is what I needed. “Serious reason “is subjective and can be defined by the person in the situation, child upbringing is used only as an example. Serious reasons could be: if we separate one of us would end up living at the Salvation Army or the house would be foreclosed on and we would both be living at the Salvation Army and so on. Therefore I conclude that Gantley is wrong in telling her she is unable to receive the sacraments and that he should not be giving such advice without knowing the entire situation. If anyone else wants to reply please include an exact Catholic Definition Of Serious Reason.Thanks.
Click to expand...
Belt Feed, you missed the whole point of the EWTN post. Are you not aware that in the first post “remarriage” that the marriage is invalid? Father Gantley was addressing the fact that those in an invalid marriage cannot live together as brother and sister but need to separate. That is because they are living a lie. Either they are validly married in which case they should be sexually active to whatever degree or they need to realize that there is no marriage. They cannot be going around as a married couple assuming that just remaining chaste makes them suitable for reception of the sacraments. Father Gantley is indeed correct and you seem to want to “prove” him wrong. Well, first off, your disrepect in how you address a priest shows that you have a motive but unfortunately without substance… teachccd
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top