Dear Powerball:
I've read about the idea that clergy should be celebate. I'm still not clear on what you base this on. Can you explain?
Sure. The theological concept of a celibate clergy is based on the Church’s belief in the example of the celibacy of Christ himself.
After Jesus rejects divorce as accepted in the Law of Moses, his disciples say that "it is better not to marry" (Mt 19:10). Jesus then speaks about those incapable of marriage "because they were born so" or "made so by others" and also those who "have renounced marriage for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. Whoever can accept this ought to accept it" (Mt 19:12).
St. Paul—who writes to the Corinthians, "Be imitators of me, as I am of Christ" (1 Cor 11:1)—also writes, "Now to the unmarried and to widows I say: it is a good thing for them to remain as they are, as I do, but if they cannot exercise self-control they should marry, for it is better to marry than to be on fire" (1 Cor 7:8-9).
This call to celibacy does not diminish the importance of marriage. Matrimony, like Holy Orders, is a sacrament, one of the seven signs through which Christ’s abiding presence is active in his Church. In marriage, the spiritual and physical relationships between husband and wife become a holy symbol of Christ’s love for the Church (Eph 5:25-33).
12 comments:
On the whole a good answer, but...
After Jesus rejects divorce as accepted in the Law of Moses, his disciples say that "it is better not to marry" (Mt 19:10).
This is a completely wrong assessment of the situation. They came to the conclusion that RE-marriage was bad, not marriage. here's the passage, verses 9 thru 11:
9`And I say to you, that, whoever may put away his wife, if not for whoredom, and may marry another, doth commit adultery; and he who did marry her that hath been put away, doth commit adultery.'
10His disciples say to him, `If the case of the man with the woman is so, it is not good to marry.'
11And he said to them, `All do not receive this word, but those to whom it hath been given;
So they spoke of a specific case (that case being previously laid out) and Christ extends the 'hardness' of the situation to say that men are incapable of overcoming their own fleshly desires (and sexual sins as presented by St. Paul) EXCEPT this deliverance is given to them.
This leads to the concept that singleness is a spritual gift. If one has the gift to remain single and devoted to the Lord - then they ought to walk faithfully and succedd through Christ in it! For those of us who have not been given this gift - we ought to marry to avoid being consumed by our felshly lusts.
God ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS give a way of escape!
PS: I don't think celebacy is ever presented as a rule of law for Christians, regardless of thier role in the Church.
The disciples were not married either.
The disciples were not married either
I think you are mistaken. Peter had a mother-in-law.
Luke 4:38, Mark 1:30, Matthew 8:14.
Does scripture address the others as being unmarried?
The disciples were not married either.
Again NH beats me to it....
BUT - "I think you are mistaken. Peter had a mother-in-law."
I KNOW he is wrong, Peter HAD a mother-in-law.
Re. celebacy, read 1 Cor. 7: 32-33.
As far as general celebecy, I understand that. Verse 38 says to marry a woman is right, but to not marry is better.
I'm still curious as to where you heard / read that the disciples weren't married.
I think I read that Peter was the only disciple that was married, but I may be wrong on that.
Regarding celebacy read Mt. 19: 12
1 Cor. 7: 32,33
Mt. 19: 12 - to quote myself...
"This leads to the concept that singleness is a spritual gift. If one has the gift to remain single and devoted to the Lord - then they ought to walk faithfully and succedd through Christ in it! For those of us who have not been given this gift - we ought to marry to avoid being consumed by our felshly lusts.
God ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS give a way of escape!"
1 Cor. 7: 32,33 - gives the natural priorities of those who are not married versus those who are. This in no was is a commandment to remain single. The commandment come as a point of responsibility to the spiritual gift of celebacy. if you've been givent he gift, USE it, if not God's view still stands that "it is not good for the man to be alone. I will make him a helper suited to him."
These passages don't support what you (Anon) promote.
It is obvious through a short historical view of the RC preisthood, that not all preists are given the spiritual gift of celebacy. To hold them to it (as under law) produces the tragedies and sin we see.
It is of significant note that a Bishop HAD to be the husband of ONE WIFE. See Timothy and Titus for the instruction. Why is this not upheld today? God's truth doesn't contradict itself. To hold that those in ministry MUST be celebate militates against the instruction that a Bishop had to be married.
The passages regarding celebacy do support it, plus holding priests to that vow does not produce tragedies and sin, I can produce to you a whole list of ministers who were accused to sexual misconduct from around the country.
One reason for celebacy is that when someone goes into the religious life they devote their life to their church and people, seems that its hard enough doing one let alone being married, having a family and running a church.
Why is it that everyone responds to questions like this and no one responds to any other of the articles listed?
"The passages regarding celebacy do support it, plus holding priests to that vow does not produce tragedies and sin, I can produce to you a whole list of ministers who were accused to sexual misconduct from around the country."
Apples and oranges.
"One reason for celebacy is that when someone goes into the religious life they devote their life to their church and people, seems that its hard enough doing one let alone being married, having a family and running a church."
Nowhere in Scripture does it talk about celebacy to devote oneself to anyone but Christ. The instruction is ABSOLUTELY clear for Bishops - THEY MUST BE MARRIED. Why is this CLEAR instruction DISOBEYED, yet the UNCLEAR instruction put forth as LAW?
"Why is it that everyone responds to questions like this and no one responds to any other of the articles listed?"
At least in my case ... priorities my friend, priorities. It's not that I'm not interested; it's just that I see that there's no eternal value in it.
Post a Comment