Perfection of Christian Life

  • Thread starter Thread starter bhlincoln
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
40.png
bhlincoln:
Another virtue; priests not marrying was practiced for centuries, the reformers and Protestants thereafter hardly observe this in most cases. Virginity among the clergy always practiced in the early Christian Church, now mostly discarded by Protestants.
BH
Look, I’m not a Protestant (but I play one on TV! Sorry, couldn’t help it), though I was raised one. You don’t know much about Protestantism, and if the above quote is any indication, you’re a little spotty on information about the early Church. Both our bishops and our priests could be married. Some, if not most, of the earliest Popes were married (one Pope was the son, in fact, of another pope, and I’m not talking the old decadent popes, I’m talking in the earliest ages of the Church).
 
I’ve seen some accusations here of those who live the monastic life as being self-absorbed in prayer and holiness. This is a gross misrepresentation of monasticism.

Today, those living the monastic life are actively involved in charity such as hospitals and schools. Throughout the history of Christianity, those living the monastic life have attempted to balance being “in the world but not of it.” Here is a Protestant site about monasticism which I think gives a balanced study. I’ve chosen excerpts that illustrate the contributions of monasticism to society as well as monasticism’s early origins:

sundayschoolcourses.com/monastic/monastic.htm

“For 700 years, medieval monasteries in Europe were the spiritual, agricultural, educational, legal, and administrative centers of the areas in which they were located. Following a daily routine of prayer, solitude, and physical labor, the monasteries provided a refuge from the cruel world that was Medieval Europe. In addition, it was the monks (and nuns) of these monasteries who kept alive the spark of knowledge in the West through their patient preservation and hand copying of ancient texts (both Christian and Classical).”

An obvious “early Christian” role-model for later monastic ascetics is to be found in the person of John the Baptist, who preached in the Judean desert, and wore clothes of “camel’s hair”:

As early as second century, there were small groups of Christians that renounced marriage and possessions, and lived in remote places. However, Christian monasticism as we know it today probably started in the deserts of Egypt in the late-3rd and 4th centuries. These early monks in Egypt are known as the “desert monks”, or “the ascetics”.

Medieval legend, at least, records that the first monastic settlement in the West was by Joseph of Arimathea in England at Glastonbury, in the first century (37 A.D. or 63 A.D., depending on the source).

A slight variation on the medieval model of monasticism was created by the Augustinian and Premonstatensian canons of the 11th and 12th century. The Augustinian (or Austin) Canons were founded in 1059, while the Premonstatensians Canons were found a century later in 1120 (receiving papal sanction in 1126), in Premontre, France. Both groups of canons followed the Rule of St. Augustine, which was based on a letter written to some monks a thousand years before by St. Augustine of Hippo.

Both orders lived in communities, but were much more likely to journey out and serve the people in the local communities as priests, manning hospitals, and the like. Most Augustinian houses were under the control of the local bishops.

The successful crusades of the late 11th/early 12th centuries spawned a curious new kind of monk – the warrior monk. Could monks dedicated to God also be fighting men? Two important groups, the Knight Templars and the Knights Hospitallers were exactly that.

The Knights Templar were founded in 1119 A.D., to protect pilgrim routes to the Holy Lands.

A similar group of warrior monks were formed in c. 1110, originally to man hospitals in the Holy Lands – The Knights of the Order of the Hospital of St. John of Jerusalem, or the Knights Hospitalers.

There were many similarities between the Domincans and the Francisicans – even though there was great rivalry between the two orders in the Middle Ages. Both were primarily devoted to the laity – healing the sick, “saving” the heretics, acting as missionaries. Both orders served as Inquisitors, during the darkest days of the Inquisition. Both orders were dedicated to the ideal of monastic poverty. And both Orders answered only to the Pope. Perhaps the main difference between the two was the great emphasis that the Dominicans put on the study of logic and theology – the better to combat the arguments of heretics! St. Francis, on the other hand, put little emphasis on “book learning”.
 
(Cont’d)

Celtic monasticism was also avidly evangelistic, sending out missionaries to Scotland, Northumbria, and parts of Europe. One of the most famous missionary journeys was that of St. Columba (c. 521-597), who established a monastery on the island of Iona, for the purpose of converting the Picts (Scotland). St. Columban (c. 543 – 615) led a missionary journey to Europe, and founded monasteries in France and Italy (!) Another famous missionary was Aidan, who founded a monastery at Lindisfarne in Northumbria, for the purpose of converting Northern England.

Celtic monasticism was also known for it’s emphasis on learning, and on preserving the great works of the past. The most famous book of Celtic monasticism is the intricately illuminated Book of Kells, a copy of the Gospels dating to the 8th or 9th century.

On Protestants and monasticism:

Perhaps the greatest contributor to the downfall of monasticism in the Middle Ages was the Protestant Reformation. Martin Luther, a former monk himself, wrote viciously against his former profession. And Henry VIII of England, in a short 4-year period, wiped out 800 monasteries.

The Philosophical issue

As earlier noted, a nagging question had dogged monasticism from its very beginning in the deserts of Egypt – if being a monk brought one closer to God (and closer to salvation), did that mean that monks were “better” than normal Christians? Were there two classes of Christians – one purer than the other?

Martin Luther strongly rejected the notion that monks were “holier” than normal Christians. And he added another reason for rejecting monasticism – he felt that it smacked of salvation by works.

“As monastic vows directly conflict with the first chief article, they must be absolutely abolished. For it is of them that Christ says, Matthew 24:5, 23 ff.: I am Christ, etc. For he who makes a vow to live as a monk believes that he will enter upon a mode of life holier than ordinary Christians lead, and wishes to earn heaven by his own works not only for himself, but also for others; this is to deny Christ. And they boast from their St. Thomas that a monastic vow is equal to Baptism. This is blasphemy (against God)”. (Martin Luther, 1537, The Smalcald Articles)

There are various estimates of the number of Western monastics in the world today. Mayeul de Dreuille in his book *From East to West: A History of Monasticism *estimates that there are 17,525 monks in the Roman Catholic Church today, and 25,820 nuns/sisters. Interestingly enough, the United States has been an especially fertile ground for modern day monastics – the Benedictines, for example, have 30 monasteries in the United States. So the monastic ideal has hardly disappeared. However, unlike in the Middle Ages when monasticism had a terrific impact on the legal, governmental, educational, and spiritual lives of the people in the areas in which monasteries were located (and on Europe itself), today monasteries and their inhabitants tend to be rather low key. Modern monasteries are often connected to schools or hospitals, and are often focused on charity as their main raison d’être.

In the 2,000-year-old history of the Christian Church, monasticism had a long reign as a key (perhaps the key) form of expressing Christianity in the West. From the 6th century, when the Rule of Benedict was written, until the 16th and 18th centuries, when the monasteries were suppressed in England and France (respectively), monasticism was considered to be the “highest” form of Christianity. While we as Protestants today may disagree with the idea of two kinds of Christians (and the idea of salvation by works), we cannot help but admire the ideals of monasticism when it was at its best – as practiced by such great leaders as Sts. Augustine, Benedict, Bernard, and Dunstan.

Source: sundayschoolcourses.com/monastic/monastic.htm
 
40.png
ahimsaman72:
The last instructions given to the disciples was, “Go ye into all the world”. That’s the mission of the protestant churches - not to live in monasteries and walk around being “holy”.

That’s the mission of the protestant churches
Jesus never gave a mission to Protestant “churches”. He gave the a mission to the church that he founded – the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.
I don’t know why it disappeared totally. You would have to consult someone with historical knowledge.
Protestantism is, at best, an incomplete form of Christianity. If the consecrated celibate life has disappeared among Protestant fundamentalists, that is a reflection of incompleteness Protestant fundamentalism.
I don’t advocate it either way.
But Jesus did advocate the consecrated celibate life – to whom this calling has been given by God. As one would expect, Paul also advocates this life for those that have the calling.
 
40.png
Matt16_18:
But Jesus did advocate the consecrated celibate life – to whom this calling has been given by God. As one would expect, Paul also advocates this life for those that have the calling.
And how many have that calling?

Is that calling greater, equal to, or lesser than the mission to evangelize the world - as Jesus commanded us to do before he ascended.

He told the apostles to do so and all Christians are to do the same. It isn’t just up to a “few good men” to evangelize the world.

Peace…
 
40.png
Matt16_18:
Jesus never gave a mission to Protestant “churches”. He gave the a mission to the church that he founded – the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.

Protestantism is, at best, an incomplete form of Christianity. If the consecrated celibate life has disappeared among Protestant fundamentalists, that is a reflection of incompleteness Protestant fundamentalism.

But Jesus did advocate the consecrated celibate life – to whom this calling has been given by God. As one would expect, Paul also advocates this life for those that have the calling.
Protestantism was a rebellion against the abuses of the Church. Luther and his contemporaries spoke at length about these and began a new era of Christian thinking. That thinking is encapsulated in the Large Catechism and Smalcald Articles. It is very compelling.

Jesus spoke little about the celibate life, very little. He spoke much more about evangelism and personal holiness lived out in every Christian’s everyday life, regardless. He was most angered by a hierarchy of corrupt priests who neither knew God nor holiness.

Paul spoke of it little as well as Christ, very little. The enormous weight of his writings were geared towards the sanctification of all Christians, regardless of position in life and race.

Peace…
 
40.png
ahimsaman72:
Protestantism was a rebellion against the abuses of the Church. Luther and his contemporaries spoke at length about these and began a new era of Christian thinking. That thinking is encapsulated in the Large Catechism and Smalcald Articles. It is very compelling.

Jesus spoke little about the celibate life, very little. He spoke much more about evangelism and personal holiness lived out in every Christian’s everyday life, regardless. He was most angered by a hierarchy of corrupt priests who neither knew God nor holiness.

Paul spoke of it little as well as Christ, very little. The enormous weight of his writings were geared towards the sanctification of all Christians, regardless of position in life and race.

Peace…
Christ talked very little about it, yet he was celibate himself. Despite the Da Vinci Code, there is no evidence in Scriptures to tell us otherwise. To be celibate is to imitate heaven here on earth. I see from your response you are bitter about the possibility of monks reaching a higher level of Christianity. I don’t understand why you would fault anyone who desires to follow Christ’s example of celibacy.
 
40.png
ahimsaman72:
Protestantism was a rebellion against the abuses of the Church. Luther and his contemporaries spoke at length about these and began a new era of Christian thinking. That thinking is encapsulated in the Large Catechism and Smalcald Articles. It is very compelling.

Jesus spoke little about the celibate life, very little. He spoke much more about evangelism and personal holiness lived out in every Christian’s everyday life, regardless. He was most angered by a hierarchy of corrupt priests who neither knew God nor holiness.

Paul spoke of it little as well as Christ, very little. The enormous weight of his writings were geared towards the sanctification of all Christians, regardless of position in life and race.

Peace…
for your own sake, perhaps you should search for the meaning and consequences of spiritual envy. Just a thought.
 
40.png
Eden:
Christ talked very little about it, yet he was celibate himself. Despite the Da Vinci Code, there is no evidence in Scriptures to tell us otherwise. To be celibate is to imitate heaven here on earth. I see from your response you are bitter about the possibility of monks reaching a higher level of Christianity. I don’t understand why you would fault anyone who desires to follow Christ’s example of celibacy.
Yet he was also the Son of God, sinless, Divine, the Messiah and the greatest person to walk the earth. Does that mean Christians are to be the Son of God, sinless, Divine and the Messiah? Faulty logic.

I’m not bitter at all about monks and their level of spirituality. I admire monks from Christianity and Buddhism very much. Their lives are to be commended. Having said that, it is not mandated that every Christian live this kind of life. And the erroneous conclusions that several have made here to that fact are missing the boat and burdening others with their high and mighty legalism.

If you will remember, apostles and bishops were married (according to the Scriptures). So, why the legalism?

Peace…
 
40.png
stillsearching:
for your own sake, perhaps you should search for the meaning and consequences of spiritual envy. Just a thought.
Read the Bible - just a thought. Apostles and Bishops were married. Peter was married. Instructions were given to Timothy regarding the marriage of bishops - husbands of one wife, etc.

The monastic life is to be commended for what it is. However, to exalt it above family life is wrong. It’s just simply wrong. There’s no monk who is holier than a simple married person raising children.

I applaud St. Francis (personally I like him) and persons such as Fr. Thomas Merton (the Trappist monk). The danger in elevating these men to a holier-than-thou status is stifling.

Peace…
 
40.png
KnightoftheRose:
How is retreating from the world perfection?
40.png
bhlincoln:
Have you read the lives of the Saints? Most of them refer to retreating from the world and practiced it first hand. You may want to read a little about them to understand fully…
BH
“Do not love the world or the things of the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world - sensual lust, enticement for the eyes and a pretentious life - is not from the Father but is from the world.”
1 John 2:15-16
 
40.png
ahimsaman72:
Read the Bible - just a thought. Apostles and Bishops were married. Peter was married. Instructions were given to Timothy regarding the marriage of bishops - husbands of one wife, etc.

The monastic life is to be commended for what it is. However, to exalt it above family life is wrong. It’s just simply wrong. There’s no monk who is holier than a simple married person raising children.

I applaud St. Francis (personally I like him) and persons such as Fr. Thomas Merton (the Trappist monk). The danger in elevating these men to a holier-than-thou status is stifling.

Peace…
I hear what you are saying but there is more to consider. Certainly Marriage and Holy Orders, sacraments in the Catholic Church, are viewed as paths to holiness. I think Paul felt, thought and taught that celibacy was “higher” than non-celibacy, though it is not clear that that is the path all are called to.
“Only, everyone should live as the Lord has assigned, just as God called each one.” 1Cor 7:17 Here contrasting marriage and non-marriage.But he also goes on to say
"So then, the one who marries his virgin does well; the one who does not marry her will do better…
“A wife is bound to her husband as long as he lives. But if her husband dies, she is free to be married to whomever she wishes, provided that it be in the Lord. She is MORE BLESSED, though, in my opinion, if she remains as she is, and I think that I too have the Spirit of God.”
I dunno. It’s hard for me to be impartial because I am married with children, but when I hear Christ say “Whoever wishes to come after me must deny himself…” I feel that NOT marrying is a form of self denial and that making that commitment for Christ’s sake, is a harder commitment to make. Like I said though, I dunno.

Phil
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top