Church report raises celibacy issue

  • Thread starter Thread starter _Abyssinia
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Tomdstone said:
So you do not agree with the inspired Holy Word of God: “But if they can’t control themselves, they should go ahead and marry. It’s better to marry than to burn with lust.” 1 Corinthians 7:9
Click to expand...
I read that to say that if you cannot control lust you should marry. How do you read it? Did Paul marry? If not, why not? Because he was a sexual misfit?
 
Celibacy is bad (not for eastern religions, of course) because we need more people in sham marriages or needlessly fornicating so the west can die faster than it already is.
 
This makes no sense to me. Priestly celibacy might be an influence on why some priests may on occasion commit the sin of fornication.

There is a big difference between breaking a vow of celibacy and abusing children. Or breaking a vow of celibacy and abusing young teenagers.

It is insulting not just to priests but to every person who has at some point in their life not had sex for extended periods. Are those of us who are single suddenly about to start abusing kids or young teenagers just because we’re not having sex? No, and if anyone said so they’d be called the idiot they are. Not having sex doesn’t make one an abuser. Priest or otherwise.
 
CatholicSheila said:
This makes no sense to me. Priestly celibacy might be an influence on why some priests may on occasion commit the sin of fornication.

There is a big difference between breaking a vow of celibacy and abusing children. Or breaking a vow of celibacy and abusing young teenagers.

It is insulting not just to priests but to every person who has at some point in their life not had sex for extended periods. Are those of us who are single suddenly about to start abusing kids or young teenagers just because we’re not having sex? No, and if anyone said so they’d be called the idiot they are. Not having sex doesn’t make one an abuser. Priest or otherwise.
Click to expand...
Why was Corinthians 7:9 written?
 
Tomdstone said:
Why was Corinthians 7:9 written?
Click to expand...
I’ve already acknowledge that priestly celibacy would play a part in why some priests commit the sin of fornication.

The sin of fornication is very different from the sin of rape, or any sort of sexual abuse against any minor.

Unless you are saying that St Paul was referring to people burning with lust for children?

I always assume that it referred to lusting after other adults.
 
CatholicSheila said:
I’ve already acknowledge that priestly celibacy would play a part in why some priests commit the sin of fornication.

The sin of fornication is very different from the sin of rape, or any sort of sexual abuse against any minor.

Unless you are saying that St Paul was referring to people burning with lust for children?

I always assume that it referred to lusting after other adults.
Click to expand...
It is referring to lusting after other adults; it has nothing to do with children.
7 Now for the matters you wrote about: “It is good for a man not to have sexual relations with a woman.” 2 But since sexual immorality is occurring, each man should have sexual relations with his own wife, and each woman with her own husband. 3 The husband should fulfill his marital duty to his wife, and likewise the wife to her husband. 4 The wife does not have authority over her own body but yields it to her husband. In the same way, the husband does not have authority over his own body but yields it to his wife. 5 Do not deprive each other except perhaps by mutual consent and for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer. Then come together again so that Satan will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control. 6 I say this as a concession, not as a command. 7 I wish that all of you were as I am. But each of you has your own gift from God; one has this gift, another has that.
Click to expand...
8 Now to the unmarried[a] and the widows I say: It is good for them to stay unmarried, as I do. 9 But if they cannot control themselves, they should marry, for it is better to marry than to burn with passion.
Click to expand...
10 To the married I give this command (not I, but the Lord): A wife must not separate from her husband. 11 But if she does, she must remain unmarried or else be reconciled to her husband. And a husband must not divorce his wife.
Click to expand...
If you do not possess the gift of self-control in celibacy, you should marry. If you possess the gift, you should not (according to Paul) - not the best argument for the supremacy of marriage I would think. Paul sees marriage as a necessary, acceptable way of life for most people - but if you can avoid it, do. For some reason, the celibate life is preferred; it seems to be a long tradition, my guess is, with roots in Judaism? (But can’t rabbis marry?) I don’t have a lot of knowledge on this. You see this commitment to chastity, for example, in the Desert Fathers also. It is a long-standing tradition. You essentially marry Christ or the Church; you give yourself to religious life and cease fornication. Another helpful example here for me anyway is Kierkegaard. (who would be a saint by now except for that he was a Protestant ;))

It seems like we almost have chastity-phobia these days, seeing a pedophile or homosexual in every dark corner. Sexual deviancy and chastity are not the same thing. And they are practiced by very different kinds of people, I assure you. Let’s not throw out the baby with the bath water. This is in essence saying that our lust or sin controls us; it’s won.
 
FollowChrist34 said:
It seems like we almost have chastity-phobia these days.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the laugh! I completely agree with you. You can lead a perfectly fulfilled life without sex, people. And that truth doesn’t have to mean sex is inherently wrong. I don’t understand all the suspicion over celibacy. Self-control used to be something to be praised, didn’t it?
 
TCEL said:
Thanks for the laugh! I completely agree with you. You can lead a perfectly fulfilled life without sex, people. And that truth doesn’t have to mean sex is inherently wrong. I don’t understand all the suspicion over celibacy. Self-control used to be something to be praised, didn’t it?
Click to expand...
😃 You know what else - this is probably not the best thing to say - but I know married couples who are not even sexually active anymore (separate bedrooms; he snores). I love it. Trust me, they are celibate too! 🙂
 
FollowChrist34 said:
😃 You know what else - this is probably not the best thing to say - but I know married couples who are not even sexually active anymore (separate bedrooms; he snores). I love it. Trust me, they are celibate too! 🙂
Click to expand...
Separate bedrooms does not always indicate celibacy.
 
Tomdstone said:
So you do not agree with the inspired Holy Word of God: “But if they can’t control themselves, they should go ahead and marry. It’s better to marry than to burn with lust.” 1 Corinthians 7:9
Click to expand...
I would say that such sentiments are an extremely poor commentary on the sacrament of marriage. It appears to presuppose that the only reason a man marries is to have morally legal sex.
 
Lion_IRC said:
No. I mean you CANNOT be celibate and engage in sex acts.
By definition, having sex means you are not celibate.
Click to expand...
Incorrect. Clerical celibacy is a prohibition on marriage, not on sexual contact. The former is illegal (usually results in defrocking), the latter is “merely” a sin, and carries no canonical sanction.

See canon 277.1 and 1087.
 
weller2 said:
Paul was a travelling preacher, and such lifestyle is simply incompatible with family life.
Click to expand...
Paul was celibate before he became Paul and a Christian. I am aware his lifestyle would not be conducive to having a family; my question was that this gives an implication that he did not have the vocation of celibacy - which is a separate and distinct vocation from the one of priesthood.

I see him as having a calling, a vocation to celibacy. Tombstone said he was celibate because he could control himself.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top