Celibacy

[Jazzy]

Priests could be allowed to have sex in future, Pope Francis has suggested as he said he was open to reviewing the practice of celibacy.

In an interview published in the Argentinian media last week, Francis said “There is no contradiction for a priest to marry. Celibacy in the Western Church is a temporary prescription.”

Continue reading

---

Do you think allowing priests to marry is a bad or good idea and why?

 

[Lamb]

I think they should be allowed to marry because the description in the bible even says about being a husband to a wife.

 

[tango]

I never understood the obsession with forced celibacy. I've never been a part of the Catholic church but I think ever single one of the pastors I've known has been married, and it hasn't caused them any issues.

 

[Lamb]

I never understood the obsession with forced celibacy. I've never been a part of the Catholic church but I think ever single one of the pastors I've known has been married, and it hasn't caused them any issues.

I never really got it either but maybe the intention was to focus solely on a relationship with God instead of someone else taking up his time and love? I dunno.

 

[heavenslight]

Until around 1000 AD the church allowed priests to marry. Celibacy was instituted because marriage was considered a distraction to complete service and dedication to a spiritual life. In the seventh chapter of First Corinthians St Paul gives some support for this, particularly in verses 32-35. Paul regards marriage as a distraction to a Godly life and that being single is preferred. However if a person burns with passion it should be permitted with the caveat that one marries a believer.

 

[Josiah]

Until around 1000 AD the church allowed priests to marry. Celibacy was instituted because marriage was considered a distraction to complete service and dedication to a spiritual life. In the seventh chapter of First Corinthians St Paul gives some support for this, particularly in verses 32-35. Paul regards marriage as a distraction to a Godly life and that being single is preferred. However if a person burns with passion it should be permitted with the caveat that one marries a believer.

This is correct.

From the RCC perspective, this is not doctrine and it's not necessarily permanent or universal... it is church policy (and not strictly so), that's all. It could be changed (very easily). And it already has exceptions.

It IS true that the RCC has a severe lack of priests... and SOME studies suggest that fewer boys are choosing this office because of the celibacy issue. And there are a few Catholics who are calling for a change - not generally for biblical or moral or personal reasons, but simply in hopes of increasing the number of priests in the Church.

BUT this policy is overwhemingly supported by the clergy and generally popular in the RCC. There is no grand cry for a change in the RCC, at least among active, "church-going" Catholics. And the shortage is being addressed otherwise, by the use of Deacons (who can marry and function much as priests) and by an increasing number of lay people (some professional and paid). Clergy are increasingly focused on Sacramental ministry while others are taking up other aspects of ministry... thus the "shortage" really isn't the problem that the stats would suggest.


Blessings on your Lenten season....


- Josiah (former Catholic, now Lutheran)


.

 

[Albion]

The reason that clerical celibacy was instituted in the Roman Church about 1000 years ago was not a high spiritual one. It was because of the "problem" of inheritances, of married priests passing their possessions and names along to spouses and children, which led to a variety of concerns.

This isn't denied by today's Roman Catholic Church, but in more recent times, the defense of clerical celibacy by the church has emphasized the idea that being unmarried makes the priest more focused on his vocation, that being unmarried is in the style of Jesus himself, and other such non-monetary issues.

 

[YESLORDIWILL]

In the seventh chapter of First Corinthians St Paul gives some support for this, particularly in verses 32-35. Paul regards marriage as a distraction to a Godly life and that being single is preferred.

In chapter nine Paul asks the Corinthians if he and Barnabas don't have the right to have a wife as the other apostles do. He mentions Peter (Cephas) specifically.

 

[Albion]

In chapter nine Paul asks the Corinthians if he and Barnabas don't have the right to have a wife as the other apostles do. He mentions Peter (Cephas) specifically.

Yes, but "right" isn't involved with this issue.

In Corinthians, the issue is not about an evangelist having a right to 'take a wife,' but to take his wife along on his journeys for the church.

An argument might be made for being allowed to have a wife in the first place, but there is no "right" to becoming a priest. That's something that's subject to the regulations and judgments of the institutional church. And there are others, too, such as having attained a minimum age.

 

[heavenslight]

In contrast many Protestant ministers believe God has guided them to their marriage partner. They believe that a strong Christian marriage partner supports and enhances their ministry and that family life provides personal happiness and satisfaction.

 

[Albion]

In contrast many Protestant ministers believe God has guided them to their marriage partner.

I'm sure they do. Many such ministers are pastors of independent congregations...or they may even have started their own churches. So, no problem there for them.

And as for other Protestant ministers, they belong to denominations that approve of married clergy as you noted, so that's no problem, either.

But if it's a church that has the alternate rule, such as the Roman Catholic Church, then that church is also entitled to its standard.

Still, many observers think that the RCC will drop its rule soon. The current Pope, as we know, has spoken favorably but unofficially about that happening.

 

[heavenslight]

I'm sure they do. Many such ministers are pastors of independent congregations...or they may even have started their own churches. So, no problem there for them.

And as for other Protestant ministers, they belong to denominations that approve of married clergy as you noted, so that's no problem, either.

But if it's a church that has the alternate rule, such as the Roman Catholic Church, then that church is also entitled to its standard.

Still, many observers think that the RCC will drop its rule soon. The current Pope, as we know, has spoken favorably but unofficially about that happening.

 

[heavenslight]

Albion and YESLORDIWILL let me state at the outset that I am not Roman Catholic but probably Charismatic Christian, if a label is helpful. I am however, irregardless of the label, interested in getting at the root of Christian theology and what I believe. It is difficult for me to get away from what Paul is saying in spite of current interpretations and differences among various Christian groups. Paul is clearly stating that singleness is preferable (possibly in most cases) if one wishes to live a fully devoted spiritual life but he is not adverse to marriage with another believer.

Peter as well as other apostles were married and Albion is correct in stating that in chapter 9 the issue is about taking wives along on missionary journeys not about whether one should marry. We know Peter was married from Matthew 8:14-15 when Jesus healed Peter's mother-in-law from a high fever. Peter may have married before he met Jesus.

 

[Albion]

Albion and YESLORDIWILL let me state at the outset that I am not Roman Catholic but probably Charismatic Christian, if a label is helpful. I am however, irregardless of the label, interested in getting at the root of Christian theology and what I believe. It is difficult for me to get away from what Paul is saying in spite of current interpretations and differences among various Christian groups. Paul is clearly stating that singleness is preferable (possibly in most cases) if one wishes to live a fully devoted spiritual life but he is not adverse to marriage with another believer.

Very well, but the issue here concerns a church/denomination having an administrative policy by which only unmarried men may be priests.

The only major denomination that does have this rule doesn't apply it to all parts of its jurisdiction anyway, but only to the Latin rite (out of the 20+ rites that the Catholic Church counts) and then there are also Catholic priests who converted from Anglican or Lutheran churches and were already married.

The point is that it's an administrative policy, not unlike a church requiring a seminary degree of candidates for ordination or them having attained a certain age. Should it instead be addressed as though it's a doctrinal matter??

 

[heavenslight]

Albion, I am interested in having an accurate understanding of Christian principles and doctrine. The practices of specific denominations, the Roman Catholic Church or the Orthodox Church do not interest me if they do not accurately reflect scripture.

 

[heavenslight]

The beliefs of a church can and often do reflect the values of the wider culture. Values vary between a cultures and over time within a culture. God's values and principles are enduring.

 

[tango]

Albion, I am interested in having an accurate understanding of Christian principles and doctrine. The practices of specific denominations, the Roman Catholic Church or the Orthodox Church do not interest me if they do not accurately reflect scripture.

This is all well and good but in the context of the thread title it's hard to avoid the specific requirements of the RCC. If they insisted that only people who had never worn a green hat in their entire life could be priests they would have the right to do it. It might be a stupid rule, it might be all but impossible to actually enforce, but it's for them to decide.

 

[Albion]

Albion, I am interested in having an accurate understanding of Christian principles and doctrine. The practices of specific denominations, the Roman Catholic Church or the Orthodox Church do not interest me if they do not accurately reflect scripture.

Fair enough, so far as your own interests are concerned, but the Original Post in this thread wasn't about the religious merits of being married or unmarried.

That post, which framed the subject for discussion, was specifically about Catholic priests being allowed by their church to marry...or not. And the Original Post also linked us to an article which also was very much focused on that same subject.

Anyway, I'll keep your wishes in mind. By the way, your comment here seemed interesting...

The practices of specific denominations, the Roman Catholic Church or the Orthodox Church do not interest me if they do not accurately reflect scripture.

...considering that those two churches take exactly opposite stances on the issue of clerical celibacy, so one of them probably has to "accurately reflect scripture."

 

[Faith]

I think it would be neat if they were free to marry, but it would take a little getting used to.

 

[heavenslight]

Fair enough, so far as your own interests are concerned, but the Original Post in this thread wasn't about the religious merits of being married or unmarried.

That post, which framed the subject for discussion, was specifically about Catholic priests being allowed by their church to marry...or not. And the Original Post also linked us to an article which also was very much focused on that same subject.

Anyway, I'll keep your wishes in mind. By the way, your comment here seemed interesting...


...considering that those two churches take exactly opposite stances on the issue of clerical celibacy, so one of them probably has to "accurately reflect scripture."

Rather then narrowly restricting discussion to the original topic I think it is important to examine the marriage issue from a Biblical perspective. However I don't believe I have anything more to say.