LDS Church Under Fire Again by Gay and Lesbian Groups . . .

[Pahoran]

What I saw as illogical, it stuck out to my mind.

So anyone who uses common phrases in anything other than their philosophical/theological meaning is being “illogical.” Got it.

No more than your pavlovian repsonse to anyone who has had the audacity to leave Mormonism.

You are mistaken, madam. I defend the Church of Jesus Christ against gratuitous and spiteful attacks.

So care to address what I wrote?

I didn’t think so.

In fact I did address it, when I pointed out that your one-note symphony about polygamy was a straw man and deliberate misrepresentation.

It’s also a derail of this thread, and I have no intention of chasing every red herring you drag across the path.

Regards,
Pahoran

 

[Pahoran]

So says the Mormon about Catholic teaching and practice.

Because, of course, Catholics never have anything to say about Latter-day Saint teaching and practice.

“Catholic thinkers”. Pretty funny stuff.

You can mock, but I’m reliably informed that there are, in fact, Catholic thinkers.

Regards,
Pahoran

 

[RebeccaJ]

So anyone who uses common phrases in anything other than their philosophical/theological meaning is being “illogical.” Got it.

You are mistaken, madam. I defend the Church of Jesus Christ against gratuitous and spiteful attacks.

In fact I did address it, when I pointed out that your one-note symphony about polygamy was a straw man and deliberate misrepresentation.

It’s also a derail of this thread, and I have no intention of chasing every red herring you drag across the path.

Regards,
Pahoran

I see you don’t want to discuss natural law, which has everything to do with this thread.

Natural law does not equal gravity! But that’s ok, I can see you don’t have any idea what the problem is with Packer’s statement in this regard. Doesn’t matter, really. His words aren’t for Catholics, they are for the true blue Mormon.

So, is Evergreen still around?

 

[RebeccaJ]

Because, of course, Catholics never have anything to say about Latter-day Saint teaching and practice.

You can mock, but I’m reliably informed that there are, in fact, Catholic thinkers.

Regards,
Pahoran

None that would use the word chastity as you have.

 

[zaffiroborant]

None that would use the word chastity as you have.

Or celibate for that matter.

 

[Pahoran]

None that would use the word chastity as you have.

How do you imagine that I have used the word “chastity?”

Regards,
Pahoran

 

[Pahoran]

Or celibate for that matter.

I was agreeing with Rebecca that “Celibacy means a renunciation of marriage.” Do you have a rational disagreement with that, or do you, like Rebecca, simply see a post by an LDS poster and reflexively disagree?

Regards,
Pahoran

 

[Pahoran]

I see you don’t want to discuss natural law, which has everything to do with this thread.

In your opinion. Nobody brought it up before you did.

Natural law does not equal gravity! But that’s ok, I can see you don’t have any idea what the problem is with Packer’s statement in this regard. Doesn’t matter, really. His words aren’t for Catholics, they are for the true blue Mormon.

IOW, he was not discussing Catholic theology in technical terms. Or indeed, in any terms at all.

In the which, you are right.

So in fact there is no problem at all, is there?

So, is Evergreen still around?

AFAIK.

Regards,
Pahoran

 

[zaffiroborant]

I was agreeing with Rebecca that “Celibacy means a renunciation of marriage.” Do you have a rational disagreement with that, or do you, like Rebecca, simply see a post by an LDS poster and reflexively disagree?

Regards,
Pahoran

Looking back and looking it up I’m disagreeing with both of you. Celibate is defined as both unmarried and abstaining from sexual relations.
Chaste is defined as 1. Morally pure in thought or conduct; decent and modest.
2.
a. Not having experienced sexual intercourse; virginal.
b. Abstaining from unlawful sexual intercourse.
c. Abstaining from all sexual intercourse; celibate.
3. Pure or simple in design or style; austere.

So I’m just being generally disagreeable.

 

[zerinus]

LJ, both Catholics and Mormons came under fire for their joint opposition to gay marriage in California–though Mormons got the brunt of the criticism, I think.

True; but the Catholic Church came out in defense of the Mormons, and they used their considerable influence to blunt the force of that attack. Like it or not, the Catholic Church still has much bigger clout in the world than the LDS Church does; and in the aftermath of the Prop 8 campaign they exercised their considerable influence to shield the LDS Church from the brunt of that criticism. That says a lot about the Catholic Church. It also says a lot about the Mormon ignorance of the Catholic Church in the past.

 

[zerinus]

Oh, okay. HRC apparently didn’t get that part. Thank you for clarifying Elder Packer’s statement.

I don’t think that the HRC would “get that part” even if somebody explained it to them.

 

[LongJourney]

So, in sum, according to Catholic thought, celibacy/chastity is a higher calling, and those who choose it should be respected.

According to Mormon thought, those who do not marry are inferior/have something wrong with them. This will never change, because it is based on essential doctrine. And the community speculates why. Is there any wonder why there is a problem?

 

[flyonthewall]

So, in sum, according to Catholic thought, celibacy/chastity is a higher calling, and those who choose it should be respected.

According to Mormon thought, those who do not marry are inferior/have something wrong with them. This will never change, because it is based on essential doctrine. And the community speculates why. Is there any wonder why there is a problem?

It is also based off of scripture: “Nevertheless neither is the man without the woman, neither the woman without the man, in the Lord.”
I am not sure how foresaking marriage fits into the above scripture, but it seems that they would not be “in the Lord”.
I am sure you have an explaination. I am curious to hear it.

 

[LongJourney]

I am too busy to look up all the NT scriptures that respect those who choose to not marry. I am sure someone else will.

 

[dianaiad]

Yes celibacy is a calling and as such is a good and honorable first choice, your and your church’s opinion of, and beliefs about it don’t change that.

Well, my (and my church’s) believes about that don’t change YOUR beliefs about that. This is quite true.

 

[LongJourney]

Matthew 19
*10 The disciples said to him, “If this is the situation between a husband and wife, it is better not to marry.”
*11 Jesus replied, “Not everyone can accept this word, but only those to whom it has been given. 12 For some are eunuchs because they were born that way; others were made that way by men; and others have renounced marriage because of the kingdom of heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it.”

I Corinthians 7
*1Now for the matters you wrote about: It is good for a man not to marry. 2But since there is so much immorality, each man should have his own wife, and each woman her own husband. 3The husband should fulfill his marital duty to his wife, and likewise the wife to her husband. 4The wife’s body does not belong to her alone but also to her husband. In the same way, the husband’s body does not belong to him alone but also to his wife. 5Do not deprive each other except 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. I say this as a concession, not as a command. 7I wish that all men were as I am. But each man has his own gift from God; one has this gift, another has that.
*8 Now to the unmarried and the widows I say: It is good for them to stay unmarried, as I am. 9 But if they cannot control themselves, they should marry, for it is better to marry than to burn with passion…

25 Now about virgins: I have no command from the Lord, but I give a judgment as one who by the Lord’s mercy is trustworthy. 26 Because of the present crisis, I think that it is good for you to remain as you are. 27 Are you married? Do not seek a divorce. Are you unmarried? Do not look for a wife. 28 But if you do marry, you have not sinned; and if a virgin marries, she has not sinned. But those who marry will face many troubles in this life, and I want to spare you this…

*32 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. 33 But a married man is concerned about the affairs of this world—how he can please his wife— 34 and 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. 35 I am saying this for your own good, not to restrict you, but that you may live in a right way in undivided devotion to the Lord.
*36 If anyone thinks he is acting improperly toward the virgin he is engaged to, and if she is getting along in years and he feels he ought to marry, he should do as he wants. He is not sinning. They should get married. 37 But the man who has settled the matter in his own mind, who is under no compulsion but has control over his own will, and who has made up his mind not to marry the virgin—this man also does the right thing. 38 So then, he who marries the virgin does right, but he who does not marry her does even better.
*39 A woman is bound to her husband as long as he lives. But if her husband dies, she is free to marry anyone she wishes, but he must belong to the Lord. 40In my judgment, she is happier if she stays as she is—and I think that I too have the Spirit of God.

New International Version. biblegateway.com/versions/New-International-Version-NIV-Bible/

I am sure there are more, this was just based on a search of the word “marry”

 

[LongJourney]

From the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

915
Christ proposes the evangelical counsels, in their great variety, to every disciple. The perfection of charity, to which all the faithful are called, entails for those who freely follow the call to consecrated life the obligation of practicing chastity in celibacy for the sake of the Kingdom, poverty and obedience. It is the profession of these counsels, within a permanent state of life recognized by the Church, that characterizes the life consecrated to God.454

916
The state of consecrated life is thus one way of experiencing a “more intimate” consecration, rooted in Baptism and dedicated totally to God.455 In the consecrated life, Christ’s faithful, moved by the Holy Spirit, propose to follow Christ more nearly, to give themselves to God who is loved above all and, pursuing the perfection of charity in the service of the Kingdom, to signify and proclaim in the Church the glory of the world to come.456

2349
"People should cultivate [chastity] in the way that is suited to their state of life. Some profess virginity or consecrated celibacy which enables them to give themselves to God alone with an undivided heart in a remarkable manner. Others live in the way prescribed for all by the moral law, whether they are married or single."136 Married people are called to live conjugal chastity; others practice chastity in continence:

    There are three forms of the virtue of chastity: the first is that of spouses, the second that of widows, and the third that of virgins. We do not praise any one of them to the exclusion of the others. . . . This is what makes for the richness of the discipline of the Church.137

1579
All the ordained ministers of the Latin Church, with the exception of permanent deacons, are normally chosen from among men of faith who live a celibate life and who intend to remain celibate "for the sake of the kingdom of heaven."70 Called to consecrate themselves with undivided heart to the Lord and to "the affairs of the Lord,"71 they give themselves entirely to God and to men. Celibacy is a sign of this new life to the service of which the Church’s minister is consecrated; accepted with a joyous heart celibacy radiantly proclaims the Reign of God.72

1599
In the Latin Church the sacrament of Holy Orders for the presbyterate is normally conferred only on candidates who are ready to embrace celibacy freely and who publicly manifest their intention of staying celibate for the love of God’s kingdom and the service of men.

1658
We must also remember the great number of single persons who, because of the particular circumstances in which they have to live—often not of their choosing—are especially close to Jesus’ heart and therefore deserve the special affection and active solicitude of the Church, especially of pastors. Many remain without a human family, often due to conditions of poverty. Some live their situation in the spirit of the Beatitudes, serving God and neighbor in exemplary fashion. The doors of homes, the “domestic churches,” and of the great family which is the Church must be open to all of them. "No one is without a family in this world: the Church is a home and family for everyone, especially those who ‘labor and are heavy laden.’"172

Any questions?

 

[GaryTaylor]

this is the first time I have ever been described as a ‘liberal’ Mormon…and I am now a tad bit confused.

I certainly don’t see how Zerenius or I contradicted each other in any way.

LJ, the foundation of our belief involves the family. Man and wife together, sealed to their ancestors and their children. Family is *everything. * “Celibacy” is never just a 'different calling."

it is expected of all those who are not married, period.

We do not believe that a deliberate choice to eschew marriage in order to live a celebate life is a good one. Ever. it is always, ALWAYS, simply the expected way to live if marriage is not possible, for whatever reason.

I get the impression that Catholics (and others) consider a life of celibacy to be an honorable thing; above and beyond the call of ordinary living. Someone who chooses to be celibate is considered to have given up something–or made some special sacrifice or effort that makes him or her special in the eyes of God and the church. Celibacy as a calling, as you have put it.

but it’s not a calling, any more than refraining from bashing people over the head on one’s daily walk is a calling. It is an expectation for all of us. We are EXPECTED to be chaste–and that means celibacy outside marriage bonds. It is a basic expectation.

…and it is always a second choice. Marriage is always the first one. There are, however, many reasons that one might not get a chance to marry here–including simply that one doesn’t meet someone who is 'right." Or…one could be homosexual and realize that it would be incredibly unfair to a spouse. (Though very, very, VERY few homosexuals are so far on the homosexual end of the spectrum that they cannot desire/fall in love with someone of the opposite sex.) OR…any number of other reasons. then, of course, one is expected to be celibate.

Not because being celibate is a good first choice.

…but because it is expected of those who cannot marry. Period.

Diana, I like the way you put this. Sounds great.

 

[GaryTaylor]

From the Catechism of the Catholic Church:
Any questions?

No, your interest clarified.

 

[SonCatcher]

Some liberal Catholic thinkers have argued that it is better to have chaste priests than celibate ones. So far, their arguments have had little impact.

That’s a rather cheap shot. Thankfully, this didn’t become another thread on clerical celibacy. It has already meandered enough.