You Don't Need to be Celibate to "Love God with an Undivided Heart"

[JamalChristophr]

I would say that you really don’t understand what St. Paul is saying. I would hope that you believe what he is saying since it is the bible.

Are you married?? I think if you were, you would understand more easily what Paul is sayiing. I am not, so I will let one of our married CAF members answer this question for you.

 

[Lucy107]

Wait a second. You need to complete your thought because your meaning isn’t clear.

The poster after me put it very eloquently.

I also believe that some people are called to marriage and others to celibacy. That doesn’t make my proposition a moot point. My proposition is that you don’t need to be celibate to love God with an undivided heart. Both a married person and a celibate person can do it.

I suspect you’re leaving an unsaid here …

The problem is that some people are called to marriage but **force ****themselves **to take vows of celibacy because they think it is the only way to love God with an undivided heart. They end up falling in love time and time again, but **convince ****themselves **that these romantic feelings are temptations from an evil spirit that wants to set them off track. In the end they become depressed and leave the seminary or the religious life.

This clarifies things then a bit. This “forcing oneself” and “convincing oneself” are examples of such people believing it is entirely up to them whether to marry or be celibate; they don’t think of these things as being matters of calling.
IOW, they either don’t know the doctrine, don’t care about it, or they know it but are misapplying it.

All I’m saying is that the best way to love God is to love the people around you. So loving your spouse does not take away from the love you owe to God. It fulfills the love you owe to God.

A couple of people here have insisted that loving God in the celibate state is superior to loving God as a married person. One person explained that loving God in the celibate state mimics the way we will love him in heaven because heavenly beings are celibate.

The thought is interesting but it also needs to be completed. Why is it that celibacy produces a higher quality of love? Appealing to the authority of the way things are in heaven is not a real explanation.

Anyway, marriage also mimics the way we will love God in heaven. A wife is united to her husband the way the saints are united to God in heaven. And by loving your spouse, you are also loving Jesus in your spouse. The more you love your spouse, the more you love God in your spouse. Loving God means loving the people around you. That’s all there is to it.

It seems like you have an agenda.

 

[Lucy107]

Thanks but all you did was rely on the authority of scripture and various churchmen. What I’m looking for is an explanation of why they are correct in the first place – if they even are correct!

Why are you Catholic?

 

[simpleas]

We have married Catholic priests in the church, so one does not need to remain celibate to love God with an undivided heart.

To me a person who wants to serve people in the name of God may wish to remain celibate to dedicate themself 100% in that area. People in relationships and marriage can also dedicate themselves to serving people.

God came to serve, we in turn can serve each other in Love, celibate or not.

 

[DavidGonzalez]

Why are you Catholic?

If a non-Christian approached you and asked for a defense of your faith, and all you did was rely on the authority of the Bible, how convinced would they be? Why should they believe what the Bible says in the first place?

All I’m trying to do is get us to think about why the Church teaches what it teaches, and I would appreciate it if people stopped quoting scripture as if that settles the thread. We have a reasonable faith. There are reasons why the Church teaches what it teaches that go beyond “St Paul said so.”

Look, sometimes you have to rely on nothing more than scripture and sacred tradition because that’s all we have. For example, the only reason we have to believe in the Resurrection of the Lord is that scared tradition and scripture say that it happened. And that’s fine.

But when we have good reason to believe that a certain teaching is not quite right and that it’s hurting people to boot, then maybe it’s time we re-evaluated things. If you continue to cling to these things even when they’re wrong or when they’re hurting people you end up harming the authority of the very scriptures and the very sacred tradition you’re trying to respect. Imagine how much damage was done to the authority of scripture when people tried to use it to justify slavery.

Why am I Catholic? I’m Catholic because I care enough about the Church that I won’t close my eyes to its faults and allow her to fall into partial ruin.

As for my agenda, yes I do believe that mandatory celibacy for all priests is harming the Church. But this is a topic for another thread. Right now I’m simply trying to point out what should be an obvious point to everyone: that you don’t need to be celibate to love God with an undivided heart because loving your spouse does not take away from the love you owe to God.

Instead of answering this point directly, people are appealing to the authority of scripture and accusing me of not being Catholic. Is it so hard to answer this point?

 

[JamalChristophr]

Right now I’m simply trying to point out what should be an obvious point to everyone: that you don’t need to be celibate to love God with an undivided heart because loving your spouse does not take away from the love you owe to God.

But which is it?? Are you legitimately asking a question, or just stating what you see as a fact. If you are stating it as a fact, then you contradict scripture. Wow!

However, I would like to hear some married Catholics honestly stand up for this teaching of St. Paul. I do believe it is correct, but both St. Paul and myself were/are not married. I’d like to hear someone that is married speak out on this…

 

[Bookcat]

However, I would like to hear some married Catholics honestly stand up for this teaching of St. Paul. I do believe it is correct, but both St. Paul and myself were/are not married. I’d like to hear someone that is married speak out on this…

See my posts above…I am married

 

[CommonWeal]

To the OP,

Don’t forget that virginity/celibacy is objectively superior to the married state. Nobody will be married in heaven. Marriage is a necessary relationship only in this life.

 

[JamalChristophr]

Thanks, Bookcat, but I can’t help but think Paul is getting at a bit more.

I know that a single person, theoretically, can have no other object of their affection if they choose that, but a married person needs to give their attention and their affection to pleasing their spouse and supplying for their needs as best they are able. As a single person, I see this from the outside looking in. They in some ways are in a different world from me.

I’m not good at articulating it, but I think they have a lot more to deal with that puts them in “this world” to some degree by their very calling. The duties of their state in life necessitate this, and for them to act otherwise would be displeasing to God, but the consecrated virgin breaks the Alabaster jar of her life and her heart and gives EVERYTHING to God, not holding back.

 

[DavidGonzalez]

To the OP,

Don’t forget that virginity/celibacy is objectively superior to the married state. Nobody will be married in heaven. Marriage is a necessary relationship only in this life.

I’ve responded to this idea in another post. I don’t have time to repeat my responses.

 

[DavidGonzalez]

But which is it?? Are you legitimately asking a question, or just stating what you see as a fact. If you are stating it as a fact, then you contradict scripture. Wow!

Look I don’t have time to respond to things I’ve already addressed but I’ll make an exception because several people are asking…

I don’t necessarily disagree with St Paul on this. It’s a question of how you interpret him. It seems to me that he’s saying that a married person owes a certain amount of time and energy to his family and can’t afford to give his undivided attention to the work of the Church. I think this idea is sound.

I don’t think St Paul is saying that a married person can’t love God as well as a celibate person can. That would be a completely different idea. And if he did mean that, then he’d be wrong because loving your spouse doesn’t take away from the love you owe to God but actually adds to it.

This is my position on the St Paul thing.

 

[10gr8kids]

But which is it?? Are you legitimately asking a question, or just stating what you see as a fact. If you are stating it as a fact, then you contradict scripture. Wow!

However, I would like to hear some married Catholics honestly stand up for this teaching of St. Paul. I do believe it is correct, but both St. Paul and myself were/are not married. I’d like to hear someone that is married speak out on this…

I’m married, if my husband wanted another wife, I wouldn’t think… Oh boy, more love to go around!! No, I would be thinking now my husband has someone else to think about and try to keep happy!

This probably isn’t the best analogy, but I’d say most of us could see the “divided heart” in this. I definitely think the strongest argument is the Bible and the Church, because I believe they have authority. If someone doesn’t believe they have authority then it is hard to convince them that their personal opinions could be wrong.

 

[CommonWeal]

I’ve responded to this idea in another post. I don’t have time to repeat my responses.

But you apparently have time to spew non-Catholic nonsense. You claim to be Catholic and posted a question/comment in a Catholic forum, so expect your fellow Catholics to respond with scripture and tradition. But I suspect you have a hidden agenda. Remind me again, what is the point of this thread?

Look, this is not hard, but you’re making it hard for no good reason. The phrase “divided heart” should be understood as loving both one’s spouse and God. Reasonable enough for you? No scripture cited here. Obviously, if I truly love my spouse then I am also loving God. Nobody doubts that. But a man’s very real responsibilities to his wife and family (i.e., the domestic church) clearly outweigh and prohibit other endeavors done for others. For example, I can’t devote all my time to a street ministry to evangelize homeless youths! In fact, were I to do so I would be committing the sin of sloth and shirking my moral duties to my family. Accordingly, as a married man, I am actually morally prohibited (i.e., divided) from performing other charitable works. I cannot shirk my domestic duties and claim that I am morally justified because “I am doing God’s work.” It doesn’t work that way.

Make sense? I’m sure it doesn’t.

 

[CommonWeal]

I don’t think St Paul is saying that a married person can’t love God as well as a celibate person can. That would be a completely different idea. And if he did mean that, then he’d be wrong because loving your spouse doesn’t take away from the love you owe to God but actually adds to it.

This is my position on the St Paul thing.

Oh jeez, come on. There are about a thousand or so recognized Catholic saints who were married.

 

[Lucy107]

If a non-Christian approached you and asked for a defense of your faith, and all you did was rely on the authority of the Bible, how convinced would they be? Why should they believe what the Bible says in the first place?

As I am not a member of any particular religion, the above questions don’t apply to me.

All I’m trying to do is get us to think about why the Church teaches what it teaches, and I would appreciate it if people stopped quoting scripture as if that settles the thread. We have a reasonable faith. **There are reasons why the Church teaches what it teaches that go beyond “St Paul said so.” **

And you know what those reasons are?
Would you like to elaborate on them?

But when we have good reason to believe that a certain teaching is not quite right and that it’s hurting people to boot, then maybe it’s time we re-evaluated things.

The teachings on the value of virginity are not hurting anyone.

Although they may be “hurting” some people’s pride or preconceived notions …

Why am I Catholic? I’m Catholic because I care enough about the Church that I won’t close my eyes to its faults and allow her to fall into partial ruin.

I thought people are Catholic because they have received the sacraments as given by the Catholic Church and are members of the Catholic Church.

As for my agenda, yes I do believe that mandatory celibacy for all priests is harming the Church.

I don’t think so.
Mandatory celibacy of priests is one of the things that attracts me to Catholicism.
One of the main reasons I distanced myself from Protestantisms was that I was too unease about their priests being married.

But this is a topic for another thread. Right now I’m simply trying to point out what should be an obvious point to everyone: that you don’t need to be celibate to love God with an undivided heart because loving your spouse does not take away from the love you owe to God.

I think “loving one’s spouse” does take away from loving God. Because God and one’s spouse are two persons, not one. So one has to choose between one and the other.

people are appealing to the authority of scripture

Which in the context of this forum is not a fallacious appeal to authority.

and accusing me of not being Catholic.

Well, if you propose non-Catholic ideas, then what does that make you …

 

[DavidGonzalez]

I’m married, if my husband wanted another wife, I wouldn’t think… Oh boy, more love to go around!! No, I would be thinking now my husband has someone else to think about and try to keep happy!

This probably isn’t the best analogy, but I’d say most of us could see the “divided heart” in this. I definitely think the strongest argument is the Bible and the Church, because I believe they have authority. If someone doesn’t believe they have authority then it is hard to convince them that their personal opinions could be wrong.

It’s a useful analogy, but keep in mind that God is love. Therefore, he’s not going to get jealous of you for loving people. The more you love your spouse, the more you love love, which is the same as loving God.

As for the rest of your comment, let’s see if we can find the reason for why the Church teaches what it teaches.

 

[DavidGonzalez]

Oh jeez, come on. There are about a thousand or so recognized Catholic saints who were married.

I don’t get your point.

 

[DavidGonzalez]

But you apparently have time to spew non-Catholic nonsense. You claim to be Catholic and posted a question/comment in a Catholic forum, so expect your fellow Catholics to respond with scripture and tradition. But I suspect you have a hidden agenda. Remind me again, what is the point of this thread?

Look, this is not hard, but you’re making it hard for no good reason. The phrase “divided heart” should be understood as loving both one’s spouse and God. Reasonable enough for you? No scripture cited here. Obviously, if I truly love my spouse then I am also loving God. Nobody doubts that. But a man’s very real responsibilities to his wife and family (i.e., the domestic church) clearly outweigh and prohibit other endeavors done for others. For example, I can’t devote all my time to a street ministry to evangelize homeless youths! In fact, were I to do so I would be committing the sin of sloth and shirking my moral duties to my family. Accordingly, as a married man, I am actually morally prohibited (i.e., divided) from performing other charitable works. I cannot shirk my domestic duties and claim that I am morally justified because “I am doing God’s work.” It doesn’t work that way.

Make sense? I’m sure it doesn’t.

You’ve just repeated what I’ve been saying since the beginning. You actually agree with me believe it or not. Don’t you get it that there are people on this thread who are saying that you can’t love your spouse and God at the same time with an undivided heart? Why aren’t you supporting me? I’ve acknowledged that a married man has less time to devote to the work of the Church. But this is a separate issue. The second issue is about the freedom to serve. The first is about loving God with an undivided heart.

Why are you so hostile?

 

[Bookcat]

The Catechism teaches that celibacy is a sign that priests [and religious] have consecrated themselves with undivided hearts to the Lord and to the affairs of the Lord (1579).

But what about this idea of loving God with an undivided heart?

It does not say that one needs to be celibate to love God with an undivided heart.

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.” Called to consecrate themselves with undivided heart to the Lord and to “the affairs of the Lord,” they give themselves entirely to God and to men…

scborromeo.org/ccc/p2s2c3a6.htm#1579

For all Christians (all persons!):

2133 “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul and with all your strength” (Deut 6:5).

 

[10gr8kids]

It’s a useful analogy, but keep in mind that God is love. Therefore, he’s not going to get jealous of you for loving people. The more you love your spouse, the more you love love, which is the same as loving God.

As for the rest of your comment, let’s see if we can find the reason for why the Church teaches what it teaches.

Scriptures and the Church are inspired by the Holy Spirit, this is where it comes from. How is it that you know God is love?..from scripture. Also, don’t forget thy God is a jealous God. Deuteronomy 6:15 My husband is not Catholic, there are many things I’d be doing differently if I had his full support. Am I not dividing my heart between my husband and God?
But if you won’t submit to the authority of the Bible and the Church, this might not mean much to you. Once again, though, I’d ask where do you get your knowledge of God if not from the Bible and the Church.