Protestants reject Paul's teaching on Married/Celibate Clergy in 1 Tim 3:2?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Catholic_Dude
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

Catholic_Dude

Guest
Many times I’ve seen Protestants bring up Paul’s statement that a pastor must be “the husband of one wife” as proof against a celibate priesthood, but here’s a link to an article that addresses this, and even shows how it is Protestants who contradict Paul’s teaching on this verse (1 Timothy 3:2). Do you think this is a valid apologetics rebuttal? 🤷

catholicnick.blogspot.com/2017/05/how-protestants-violate-pauls.html
 
Catholic_Dude said:
Many times I’ve seen Protestants bring up Paul’s statement that a pastor must be “the husband of one wife” as proof against a celibate priesthood, but here’s a link to an article that addresses this, and even shows how it is Protestants who contradict Paul’s teaching on this verse (1 Timothy 3:2). Do you think this is a valid apologetics rebuttal? 🤷

catholicnick.blogspot.com/2017/05/how-protestants-violate-pauls.html
Click to expand...
Neither celibate nor married priests are unbiblical.
 
Catholic_Dude said:
Many times I’ve seen Protestants bring up Paul’s statement that a pastor must be “the husband of one wife” as proof against a celibate priesthood, but here’s a link to an article that addresses this, and even shows how it is Protestants who contradict Paul’s teaching on this verse (1 Timothy 3:2). Do you think this is a valid apologetics rebuttal? 🤷

catholicnick.blogspot.com/2017/05/how-protestants-violate-pauls.html
Click to expand...
Celibate priest is a discipline. Nothing to attack there.
 
My experience is that Protestants don’t think there is anything wrong with a Priest, preacher, pastor, or elder being single. We also don’t deny that God calls some to be single so they can devote themselves more fully to devotion to Christ.

What we disagree with is making celibacy a requirement to hold those offices. That, IMHO, goes beyond what the Apostles taught.

just my .02 cents
 
Good responses so far, but I was looking more at whether Protestants are the ones actually violating 1 Timothy 3:2. Using the Protestant argument, Paul says those seeking to become Pastors would already have to be married and already have to have children before they are Pastors, though many enter seminary before marriage/children.
 
Catholic_Dude said:
Good responses so far, but I was looking more at whether Protestants are the ones actually violating 1 Timothy 3:2. Using the Protestant argument, Paul says those seeking to become Pastors would already have to be married and already have to have children before they are Pastors, though many enter seminary before marriage/children.
Click to expand...
If I’m not mistaken 1 Timothy 3:2 is referring to bishops, not priests is it not?

I mean here’s the New American Bible’s translation of that section.

2 Therefore, a bishop must be irreproachable, married only once, temperate, self-controlled, decent, hospitable, able to teach,

My own church’s standard translation the New Revised Standard Version has a similar understanding of that passage.

2 Now a bishop must be above reproach, married only once, temperate, sensible, respectable, hospitable, an apt teacher,
 
lanman87 said:
My experience is that Protestants don’t think there is anything wrong with a Priest, preacher, pastor, or elder being single. We also don’t deny that God calls some to be single so they can devote themselves more fully to devotion to Christ.

What we disagree with is making celibacy a requirement to hold those offices. That, IMHO, goes beyond what the Apostles taught.

just my .02 cents
Click to expand...
I agree, but since it is a discipline and not doctrine it shouldn’t be Church dividing. As a preacher’s kid, I may not agree with celibacy, but I certainly understand the reason for it. I saw how tough the balancing was for Dad ( though i wouldn’t trade my childhood for anything).
 
lanman87 said:
My experience is that Protestants don’t think there is anything wrong with a Priest, preacher, pastor, or elder being single. We also don’t deny that God calls some to be single so they can devote themselves more fully to devotion to Christ.

What we disagree with is making celibacy a requirement
Click to expand...
to hold those offices. That, IMHO, goes beyond what the Apostles taught.

just my .02 centsBut wait a minute…what about what Christ and St. Paul taught on this? Again, why are we Catholics almost the only ones who follow that as first choice instead of neglecting and even deriding it as so many a-Cs do? If Christ made it His own first preference then shouldn’t we if we say we are following the Bible?

I can’t even a name a single Protestant I have ever encountered who gives that a 2nd thought, IMO treating it as if it just doesn’t count or something.🤷

It’s clear that it’s scriptural and certainly seems to be Christ’s gold standard for following Him into the ministry, so I don’t get it.

Granted in 1st Corinthians 9:5 Paul speaks of married apostles,but he also is pretty adamant about his case for celibacy even as Christ Himself was.

Ultimately it’s all about discerning your vocation in life which is something we all are supposed to do, right?
 
Church_Militant said:
But wait a minute…what about what Christ and St. Paul taught on this? Again, why are we Catholics almost the only ones who follow that as first choice instead of neglecting and even deriding it as so many a-Cs do? If Christ made it His own first preference then shouldn’t we if we say we are following the Bible?

I can’t even a name a single Protestant I have ever encountered who gives that a 2nd thought, IMO treating it as if it just doesn’t count or something.🤷

It’s clear that it’s scriptural and certainly seems to be Christ’s gold standard for following Him into the ministry, so I don’t get it.

Granted in 1st Corinthians 9:5 Paul speaks of married apostles,but he also is pretty adamant about his case for celibacy even as Christ Himself was.

Ultimately it’s all about discerning your vocation in life which is something we all are supposed to do, right?
Click to expand...
I think if someones personal conviction is to remain single and serve the Kingdom then go for it. I just think requiring someone to remain celibate to hold the offices of bishop/elder/pastor was not taught by the apostles. I think Paul thought it was best to remain unmarried, but other apostles didn’t see it as a big deal. As others have posted, there is nothing wrong with a minister being unmarried and nothing wrong with a minister being married.
 
lanman87 said:
I think if someones personal conviction is to remain single and serve the Kingdom then go for it. I just think requiring someone to remain celibate to hold the offices of bishop/elder/pastor was not taught by the apostles. I think Paul thought it was best to remain unmarried, but other apostles didn’t see it as a big deal. As others have posted, there is nothing wrong with a minister being unmarried and nothing wrong with a minister being married.
Click to expand...
There’s a pretty strong tradition that the Apostles who began their ministry practiced continence with their wives.
 
James248 said:
There’s a pretty strong tradition that the Apostles who began their ministry practiced continence with their wives.
Click to expand...
Well, since the Timothy passage also talks about having children, it doesn’t appear it was a requirement for the elder/bishop in the early church.
 
lanman87 said:
Well, since the Timothy passage also talks about having children, it doesn’t appear it was a requirement for the elder/bishop in the early church.
Click to expand...
If a bishop had children prior to ordination, which is what was happening in the passage, then it has no bearing on whether continence was required or not. And from the Fathers, we get the impression that it was. We know from patristic tradition that Peter lived with his wife as a brother lives with his sister. We know Simon the Zealot, the groom at the wedding at Cana, did the same.
 
lanman87 said:
I think if someones personal conviction is to remain single and serve the Kingdom then go for it. I just think requiring someone to remain celibate to hold the offices of bishop/elder/pastor was not taught by the apostles. I think Paul thought it was best to remain unmarried, but other apostles didn’t see it as a big deal. As others have posted, there is nothing wrong with a minister being unmarried and nothing wrong with a minister being married.
Click to expand...
But then we Catholics get criticized for adhering to the scriptural mandate of both Christ and St. Paul with regard to celibacy for priests? Why are we the only ones who offer that scriptural option while nearly all n-Cs act like it’s impossible and that those passages from the New Testament have faded from the pages?

There’s a dichotomy here that shouldn’t be if one asserts to be a Bible Christian. I have never encountered a single n-C anywhere that mentioned, much less encouraged any kind of a celibate ministry.
 
James248 said:
If a bishop had children prior to ordination, which is what was happening in the passage, then it has no bearing on whether continence was required or not. And from the Fathers, we get the impression that it was. We know from patristic tradition that Peter lived with his wife as a brother lives with his sister. We know Simon the Zealot, the groom at the wedding at Cana, did the same.
Click to expand...
Could you offer some links to that traditional narrative?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top