Xavier's contention that Priestly celibacy is unBiblical

  • Thread starter Thread starter Church_Militant
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
40.png
jimmy:
Celibacy is not a thing of the present. It is an old tradition that goes back over 1500 years. Paul was also living in the end times.
Click to expand...
In the Latin Church yes, but ordaining married men to the priesthood is also a tradition that is over 2000 years old as the Eastern Churches, which includes the Byzantine Catholic Churches, has always done so.
 
That seems to be the error Xavier is falling into.

It is not a requirement for all priest to be unmarried as there are priest who are married. As a discipline (as others have stated) the majority of priests take a vow of celibacy as it is recommended in the Bible.

There are plenty of converts to Catholicism who are married previously as Peter and are now priests. They weren’t made to divorce their wives and renounce marriage just to become priests.

The Catholic Church has always regarded marriage as a beautiful thing, as a sacrament, as is holy orders. No one is forced to be a priest, that is why people have to discern if they are called or not.

The Church wasn’t invented after the Bible, therefore they are in harmony, not subject to ones personal view\interpretation.

Coming back to the Church for me it is all so clear now, but only by God’s Grace do I see it.
 
40.png
scylla:
That seems to be the error Xavier is falling into.

It is not a requirement for all priest to be unmarried as there are priest who are married. As a discipline (as others have stated) the majority of priests take a vow of celibacy as it is recommended in the Bible.

There are plenty of converts to Catholicism who are married previously as Peter and are now priests. They weren’t made to divorce their wives and renounce marriage just to become priests.

The Catholic Church has always regarded marriage as a beautiful thing, as a sacrament, as is holy orders. No one is forced to be a priest, that is why people have to discern if they are called or not.

The Church wasn’t invented after the Bible, therefore they are in harmony, not subject to ones personal view\interpretation.

Coming back to the Church for me it is all so clear now, but only by God’s Grace do I see it.
Click to expand...
Here you ignore the fact that this is not the tradition of the Eastern Churches.

There are married men that are ordained who have never been protestant. With the in Byzantine Catholic Churches and the Orthodox Churches.

In my opinion I do not see anything in the Bible that gives one way any sort of preference over the other.
 
40.png
ByzCath:
In the Latin Church yes, but ordaining married men to the priesthood is also a tradition that is over 2000 years old as the Eastern Churches, which includes the Byzantine Catholic Churches, has always done so.
Click to expand...
True, I was not thinking of the Eastern Church.
 
In Matt. xix,12 Jesus clearly congratulated those that “for the sake of the Kingdom of God” have held off from getting hitched.

Saint Paul: “I would that all men were even as myself, but every one hath his proper gift from God … But I say to the unmarried and to the widow, it is good for them it they so continue , even as I.”

I Cor., vii 7-8 & 32-35
“But I would have you to be without solicitude. He that is without a wife is solicitous for the things that belong to the Lord, how he may please God. But he that is with a wife, is solicitous for the things of the world, how he may please his wife: an he is divided. And the unmarried woman and the virgin thinketh on the things of this world how she may please her husband. And this I speak for your profit, not to cast a share upon you, but ofr that which is decent and which may give you power to attack upon the Lord without impediment.”

Historically, asceticism has been a part of the Essenes, a Jewish celibate monastic group which St. John the Baptist belonged, and some scholars have suggested Jesus and James were also members.

Also, please peruse:
catholiceducation.org/articles/apologetics/ap0121.html

There are accounts of ‘Priestly’ celibacy in the Bible.
 
Kevin Walker:
Historically, asceticism has been a part of the Essenes, a Jewish celibate monastic group which St. John the Baptist belonged, and some scholars have suggested Jesus and James were also members.
Click to expand...
Yes and all monastic orders (and religious orders) are celibate.
 
Kevin Walker:
Historically, asceticism has been a part of the Essenes, a Jewish celibate monastic group which St. John the Baptist belonged, and some scholars have suggested Jesus and James were also members.
Click to expand...
Seeing that you felt the need to repeat this piece of information in two threads, I am repeating a reply to you from the other thread.
40.png
HagiaSophia:
I must say in all honesty your post sounds as if this Essene connection is an established historical fact. There are many who feel it came frome the Gnostic version of things and many writers do not feel it is factual at all.
Click to expand...
This from Kevin is another attempt to make a discipline a dogma.
 
40.png
ByzCath:
This from Kevin is another attempt to make a discipline a dogma.
Click to expand...
The subject of priestly celibacy can hardly be called dogma when it is stated in the Bible (review post #25).
 
A dogma, if I am not mistaken, must be an unchanging Truth, true always and everywhere. Priestly celibacy is just a discipline.
 
40.png
Genesis315:
A dogma, if I am not mistaken, must be an unchanging Truth, true always and everywhere. Priestly celibacy is just a discipline.
Click to expand...
I thought dogma was an unproven belief or an unproven assertion. That Priestly celibacy goes back to biblical times has proof in the Bible.
 
Kevin Walker:
I thought dogma was an unproven belief or an unproven assertion. That Priestly celibacy goes back to biblical times has proof in the Bible.
Click to expand...
Maybe. the Church defines certain dogmas. They are things like Jesus is divine, Mary is the Mother of God, the bread and wine become the Body and Blood of Jesus during the Eucharist transubstanciation), etc. Priestly celibacy does not fall into this category. Celibacy was optional back in Biblical times and shortly after, even though many or most chose it anyway. That being said, even today there are married priests, even in the Latin church (Anglican minister converts who become priests). The fact that exceptions can be made shows it is disciplinary.
 
jimmy posted: ’ I think it is an error that the opposition to the celibacy fall into.’

thank you, jimmy. you took the words right out of my… mouth? fingers? anyway, you took them. that’s the point.

i’ve never heard ANYONE who supported the RCC discipline of celibacy fall into this error. i HAVE heard (and, i think AM hearing) those who oppose it fall into this error.

xavier - why are you trying to ‘prove’ that our discipline (i.e. not even a doctrine, let alone a dogma) is in error, when paul so clearly admonishes his readers to live celibately?

of all the church’s teachings, this one gains you the least by ‘refuting’ it.
 
Byz…Dave, you are right.
There is nothing wrong with married priests, it is just a discipline.

I was just trying to make a counterpoint to Xavier’s contention that Peter being married actually proved something.

I will stand by my assertion about the good in celibacy, that doesn’t mean marriage is bad though. It just means that in addition to marriage being good so is celibacy.

In this society, it becomes more and more evident that garish sexuality is what is encouraged and that anything like chastity and celibacy is something not normal (prudish).
 
40.png
jeffreedy789:
jimmy posted: ’ I think it is an error that the opposition to the celibacy fall into.’

thank you, jimmy. you took the words right out of my… mouth? fingers? anyway, you took them. that’s the point.

i’ve never heard ANYONE who supported the RCC discipline of celibacy fall into this error. i HAVE heard (and, i think AM hearing) those who oppose it fall into this error.

xavier - why are you trying to ‘prove’ that our discipline (i.e. not even a doctrine, let alone a dogma) is in error, when paul so clearly admonishes his readers to live celibately?

of all the church’s teachings, this one gains you the least by ‘refuting’ it.
Click to expand...
Listen to what im saying.
I have said this over and over, please listen to what Im saying.
Im not saying your discipline, doctrine, practice, rule, requirement is in error.
What Im saying is that those of you who say it is biblical are in error.
 
Xavier,
And you say it in the face of clear scriptures by Christ Himself to the contrary. It’s okay with me if you wanna believe that, but it sure shoots a planet sized hole in your crediblity with me when you say that you base your faith solely on the authority of the Bible.

I consider the matter a dead issue and so far as I’m concerned that’s it.
Pax vobiscum,
http://pages.prodigy.net/rogerlori1/emoticons/star021.gif

Matthew 19:10-12
"10 His disciples say unto him: If the case of a man with his wife be so, it is not expedient to marry.11 Who said to them: All men take not this word, but they to whom it is given. 12 For there are eunuchs, who were born so from their mother’s womb: and there are eunuchs, who were made so by men: and there are eunuchs, who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven. He that can take, let him take it. "

Ist Corinthians 7:6-9
“6 But I speak this by indulgence, not by commandment. 7 For I would that all men were even as myself: but every one hath his proper gift from God; one after this manner, and another after that. 8 But I say to the unmarried, and to the widows: It is good for them if they so continue, even as I. 9 But if they do not contain themselves, let them marry. For it is better to marry than to be burnt.”
 
40.png
Xavier:
Listen to what im saying.
I have said this over and over, please listen to what Im saying.
Im not saying your discipline, doctrine, practice, rule, requirement is in error.
What Im saying is that those of you who say it is biblical are in error.
Click to expand...
We are not saying it is biblical, but we are saying that it is not unbiblical. It fits with what is said in the bible even though it is not stated in the bible.
 
Married priests are biblical. Celibate priests are biblical. For various reasons, different Churches have decided to prefer one over the other over the years, but never to the dogmatic exclusion of the other. To claim that either is unBiblical seems a bit…out of touch, IMO.

We’re the Catholic Church, people, I think we can address Protestant arguments with a united front.
 
40.png
jimmy:
We are not saying it is biblical, but we are saying that it is not unbiblical. It fits with what is said in the bible even though it is not stated in the bible.
Click to expand...
No arguement.
 
Church Militant:
Xavier,
And you say it in the face of clear scriptures by Christ Himself to the contrary. It’s okay with me if you wanna believe that, but it sure shoots a planet sized hole in your crediblity with me when you say that you base your faith solely on the authority of the Bible.

I consider the matter a dead issue and so far as I’m concerned that’s it.
Pax vobiscum,
http://pages.prodigy.net/rogerlori1/emoticons/star021.gif

Matthew 19:10-12
"10 His disciples say unto him: If the case of a man with his wife be so, it is not expedient to marry.11 Who said to them: All men take not this word, but they to whom it is given. 12 For there are eunuchs, who were born so from their mother’s womb: and there are eunuchs, who were made so by men: and there are eunuchs, who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven. He that can take, let him take it. "

Ist Corinthians 7:6-9
“6 But I speak this by indulgence, not by commandment. 7 For I would that all men were even as myself: but every one hath his proper gift from God; one after this manner, and another after that. 8 But I say to the unmarried, and to the widows: It is good for them if they so continue, even as I. 9 But if they do not contain themselves, let them marry. For it is better to marry than to be burnt.”
Click to expand...
Come on now admit it, just admit it. Neither of these two verses are commandments.
You can do it , I know you can
 
Xavier: The Catholic Church never said they were commandments. We allow married priests. What’s your point?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top