Why the Church no longer teaches the superiority of celibacy over marriage

  • Thread starter Thread starter Mboo
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
detachment is concerned with the joys of the world. In perfection God must be our only desire and our only joy, and anything that brings us closer to God must be loved as a means, not as an end.
I allow myself to rectify a little definition of the charity you have given.
"
to have charity is to love God above all things, for himself and to love one’s neighbour as oneself for the love of God"
Click to expand...
So it is when we love our neighbor for the reason of love we have for God that we love him for the love of charity.
Detachment consists in despising everything that does not lead us to know, to desire, to love and to serve God.
The natural love of the creature is not a sin, as long as it does not exceed the love we owe to God, but all sin begins with the love of the creature, so when there is no no need to love a creature of natural love, it is advisable to deprive oneself of it.
 
Mboo said:
…
So how can the Church suddenly no longer teach one of her truths of Faith (for the superiority of celibacy over marriage is a dogma of Faith)?
Click to expand...
Still the norm, Celibacy and Priesthood, Cardinal William Levada, November 21, 2011:
There is, to be sure, a “law of celibacy” both in the Latin Church and in the Eastern Churches. Today the practice of West and East has clear contours. In the West, canon law requires that only celibate men be called to Holy Orders, as the Encyclical of Pope Paul VI recalls (except in rare cases when there may be a dispensation from the impediment of marriage, such as the conversion of married Protestant ministers, and in the case of the permanent diaconate as restored by Vatican II). In the East, both celibate and married men are called to the Orders of priest and deacon. Bishops, on the other hand, must be celibate, and are called either from celibate diocesan or monastic clergy.
…
There are two such exceptions to the general “law of celibacy”in the Latin Church: first, the decision by the Council to permit the conferral of the Holy Order of diaconate on mature married men, and second, the admission to priestly ordination of married ministers of other Christian communities who desire to adhere to the fullness of Catholic faith and communion and to continue to exercise ministry. This teaching of Paul VI has taken on a new form in the Apostolic Constitution Anglicanorum coetibus with which Pope Benedict has provided a new structure for Anglicans to enter into full communion in Catholic faith, accompanied by their pastors, many of whom are married.
Click to expand...
http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/c...c_20111121_levada-celibacy-priesthood_en.html
 
Not so. Our Lord gave us the example of the Prodigal Son, who did what…he turned away from his father, he sinned, he did an examination of conscience, he moved back to the father in a deliberate action, and he confessed. And then Our Lord gave the power to forgive sins to His disciples who in turn…

tks.
 
See response below regarding how Our Lord gave us the Sacrament of Confession.
 
We fall, we can either begin again or not. We can use the Sacrament of Joy (Confession) to return fully not just with God, but also His Church, with those we’ve offended, and even…if you think about…interiorly.

This is the grand Reconciliation that goes on…even down to one’s interior faculties. The will, the intellect, the body.

At Confession…just as in the Prodigal Son…there is a great, multilevel reconciliation. Our intellect and our will have to reconcile (the criteria in the intellect are compared with the memory of one’s actions)…the intellect concludes that substantial or grave sinning occurred…the intellect informs the will…“we need to get to Confession”…the will consents (reconciliation occurs between the intellect and the will) and commands the body to get to confession. The body moves to get it done (reconciliation now extends to the body)…the person goes to confession and the intellect now needs to put words together (more intellectual cooperation occurs here…this is an act of the intellect) to form one’s Confession…and then the person enters the box and executes the plan…a great interior reconciliation has occurred.
 
Last edited:
I wish he Church would recall that teaching… it strikes me as a silly teaching. One that originated from a time when he idea of sex and sexual desire was considered sinful and that even within marriage sex was at least a venial sin… I wish we would just admit the mistake and move on
 
Ah, the proofs that in Heaven, we do not get married is that? Well, one do not prove what is obvious.
 
  • If the purpose of the marriage act is procreation in order to increase the children of God, or to allow his spouse to remain faithful then the sex is meritorious
  • If the finality is just the pleasure then it is at most a vanity, certain (StAugustin, St Thomas) say that it is a venial sin on the part of the one who can not contain himself.
  • The sexual practices against nature (sodomy, pill, condom etc) are mortal sins even in marriage.
  • If the blowjob is just a caress to promote a normal sexual act then it’s healthy. But if the purpose of the blowjob is to cause pollution then it is a mortal sin, even in marriage.
 
Mboo said:
One must make the difference between an intrinsic sacrifice, and an accidental sacrifice. If a married person makes great sacrifices for his family it would be accidental, that, it is not intrinsic to each marriage.
Click to expand...
You’re not married are you.
 
Not too sure what you mean, neophyte.

Catholic Catechism
http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p123a9p4.htm
#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
Click to expand...
There is celibate chastity and married chastity.
 
Mboo said:
If the purpose of the marriage act is procreation in order to increase the children of God, or to allow his spouse to remain faithful then the sex is meritorious
Click to expand...
Operative word being ‘if’… sex has two ends for procreation and the good of the couple. The Church teaching has developed past the binary medieval formula…
 
godisgood77 said:
Operative word being ‘if’… sex has two ends for procreation and the good of the couple. The Church teaching has developed past the binary medieval formula…
Click to expand...
Okay. But the problem is that the new pastoral did not develop what she means by “good of the couple”. And everyone then interprets as it suits, so some will see an authorization to enjoy sex as they want with the blessing of God because it is good. But if you want to remain faithful to the tradition, the good of the couple is fidelity and unity, so nothing has changed.
 
Mboo said:
Okay. But the problem is that the new pastoral did not develop what she means by “good of the couple”. And everyone then interprets as it suits, so some will see an authorization to enjoy sex as they want with the blessing of God because it is good. But if you want to remain faithful to the tradition, the good of the couple is fidelity and unity, so nothing has changed.
Click to expand...
What’s wrong with enjoying sex for the sake of it? No couple is going to conceive every time they have sex. Are you suggesing married couples only engage in sex when there’s a possibility of conception?
 
Mboo said:
Okay. But the problem is that the new pastoral did not develop what she means by “good of the couple”. And everyone then interprets as it suits, so some will see an authorization to enjoy sex as they want with the blessing of God because it is good. But if you want to remain faithful to the tradition, the good of the couple is fidelity and unity, so nothing has changed.
Click to expand...
I recommend Pope Pius XII’s encyclical Casti connubii… Prior to this encyclical, it was believed by some Catholics that the only licit reason for sexual intercourse was an attempt to create children. At the time, there was no official church position on any non-procreative purposes of intercourse.

Casti connubii does repeat that the conjugal act is intrinsically tied with procreation. However, it also acknowledges the unitive aspect of intercourse as licit for maybe the first time.

So you see, the teaching changed or developed to be more complete…
 
Mboo said:
But the problem is that the new pastoral did not develop what she means by “good of the couple”. And everyone then interprets as it suits, so some will see an authorization to enjoy sex as they want with the blessing of God because it is good
Click to expand...
Which is okay… because the good of the couple is not the same for all couples. We do not have to have rules and laws and norms for every possible situation, nor do we need to force everyone in to a narrow definition.
 
it is obvious, otherwise virginity and continence would not be superior to marriage. Pope JPII in his controversial teaching “theology of the body” has even admitted that continence is superior to the acts of marriage.
it is obvious, otherwise Joseph and Marie would have consummated their marriage! it’s the model couple no? why did they propose continence as a model even though they were married? Or did Joseph and Mary really do not like each other to the point where they could not join their bodies?
Finally there are couples of saints whose merit is to have accepted to live in continence despite the fact that they are married
These are the contradictions of the new “pastoral” that encourages people to go in the direction of sensual joys, and no longer encourages the search for the real joy that is the joy of contemplation, because joy of contemplation is incompatible with sensual joys
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top