Monday, December 07, 2009

Clerical Celibacy Rebuttal - Extremely Short Version - Option 2

Genesis 1:28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.

Genesis 9:7 And you, be ye fruitful, and multiply; bring forth abundantly in the earth, and multiply therein.

Psalm 127:3 Lo, children are an heritage of the LORD: and the fruit of the womb is his reward.

Titus 1:6 If any be blameless, the husband of one wife, having faithful children not accused of riot or unruly.

1 Timothy 3:4 One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity;

1 Timothy 3:12 Let the deacons be the husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well.

1 Timothy 5:10 Well reported of for good works; if she have brought up children, if she have lodged strangers, if she have washed the saints' feet, if she have relieved the afflicted, if she have diligently followed every good work.

1 Timothy 5:14 I will therefore that the younger women marry, bear children, guide the house, give none occasion to the adversary to speak reproachfully.

12 comments:

Sean and Stephanie said...

Matthew 19:11:12
Jesus replied, "Not everyone can accept this word, but only those to whom it has been given. 12 For some are eunuchs because they were born that way; others were made that way by men; and others have renounced marriagebecause of the kingdom of heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it."

1 Corinthians 7
Now for the matters you wrote about: It is good for a man not to marry.

1 Cor. 7:7
I wish that all men were as I am. But each man has his own gift from God; one has this gift, another has that.

TFan.

Holy Scripture says that celibacy is a gift from God and a unique vocation.

Paul even recommends celibacy for full-time ministers in the Church so that they are able to focus entirely upon God and building up His kingdom. He “who refrains from marriage will do better.” (1 Cor. 7:32-33, 38)

Turretinfan said...

S&S:

Those objections have been addressed in the comment box on the first part relating to marriage (link).

Furthermore, I'm not arguing that celibacy is an intrinsically bad thing. So, I'm not sure why you think that those verses that might seem to promote (or at least, permit) celibacy are somehow a rebuttal to what I'm saying, either in most post using marriage as a rebuttal, or this one using children as a rebuttal.

Sean and Stephanie said...

So what is your point?

That clergy should never be celibate? Whats the problem?

You do realize that priestly celibacy is the law of the latin rite and not dogmatic right?

Turretinfan said...

My point is the imposed celibacy is bad.

My point is not that all celibacy is bad. Nor even that ministers can never be celibate, though Paul's clearly stated expectation is that they will usually be married with children.

I am aware that the practice of Rome in forbidding marriage for its priests and bishops is not characterized by Rome as a dogma, but as a discipline. Rome's own characterization of the matter is not especially germane to this external critique.

Sean and Stephanie said...

TFan.

I know several priests. I've met dozens of them. The ones I know profess to have the spiritual gift of celibacy. They were not 'forced' to be celibate anymore than Paul was forced to be celibate.

The church does not 'impose it' rather she limits the priesthood to those with the gift.

John said...

Rebuttal to the rebuttal (Extremely short version:)

"today when the whole world is full of our race."- Chrysostom

"to the unmarried and to widows that it is good for them if they remain even as I." - Paul

Turretinfan said...

John:

As to the quotation from Paul, we dealt with marriage in the previous round.

As to Chrysostom, today proves that the world wasn't full then, just as 2000 years from now (if Christ tarries) will prove that the world isn't full now.

Turretinfan said...

S&S:

You wrote: "I know several priests. I've met dozens of them. The ones I know profess to have the spiritual gift of celibacy. They were not 'forced' to be celibate anymore than Paul was forced to be celibate."

Sure they were. They were required to take a vow of celibacy, something that (as far as we know) Paul was not required to take. They may well think that they have a gift of celibacy, but if they change their minds about that, they are stuck with their vow - a vow that was required as a condition for ordination.

S&S continued: "The church does not 'impose it' rather she limits the priesthood to those with the gift."

God does not so limit ordination to men who take a vow of celibacy. See the problem?

Sean and Stephanie said...

T-Fan.

It seems to me that you don't really believe that celibacy is a spiritual gift.

Why do you care whether the latin rite has an all celibate male clergy?

Would you be Catholic if it were otherwise?

Turretinfan said...

S&S:

It seems to me that you have a lot of preconceived ideas about what I believe. Celibacy can be a spiritual gift. There's no doubt about that.

Would I be a Roman Catholic if they followed Scripture on this point? That's not the only or largest place where the Roman Catholic church fails to follow Scripture. Nevertheless, given that Scripture makes having a wife and ruling his children well a qualification for an elder, it seems pretty obvious that the Roman Catholic church's policy (yes, in the Latin rite, which is the largest rite of Roman Catholicism) of requiring men to take a vow of celibacy before being ordained is contrary to the apostolic practice and expectation.

Why do I care if Rome follows Scripture? Interesting question, I suppose (the answer is: because I hope to help people see that the gospel of Christ is the gospel of Scripture, not of Rome), but the bigger question is: why don't you care about such things?

Or perhaps you do ...

But if so, you'd do better to interact with the actual arguments than to try to make things personal with the critic (my comments above, of course, are provided to help you see what you're doing, by turning your approach on you).

-TurretinFan

Sean and Stephanie said...

So you agree that celibacy is a spiritual gift. You just think that the gift can be lost?

I ask because you said, "They may well think that they have a gift of celibacy, but if they change their minds about that, they are stuck with their vow."

So, basically you don't think the law should be that the Catholic Church (and Orthodox for bishops) should only choose among celibate males just in case some change their minds about it?

That's not the only or largest place where the Roman Catholic church fails to follow Scripture.

You mean to say, "That's not the only or largest place where the Roman Catholic church fails to follow what I think scripture says."

In this thread you have been shown several scriptures explicitly in favor of a celibate clergy. Your only response is to link to another thread of yours as if its authoritative.

I didn't intend to 'get personal.' I think that asking why it is that you are asking the questions is a reasonable question.

Nevertheless, given that Scripture makes having a wife and ruling his children well a qualification for an elder

So I suppose that Paul wasn’t an elder???

And I take it that you believe that men who are married but have no children cannot be elders either?

Turretinfan said...

S&S:

"So you agree that celibacy is a spiritual gift. You just think that the gift can be lost? "

a) God can give the gift of celibacy for less than all of a person's life. The kind of vow of celibacy required by Rome binds the swearer for his entire life, but God has given no promise that he will make the gift of celibacy permanent.

b) More significantly, however, there are people who think that they have the gift of celibacy, who do not. Sometimes people think that because they are not attracted to adult women. Sometimes that's not a sign of a gift of celibacy.

"So, basically you don't think the law should be that the Catholic Church (and Orthodox for bishops) should only choose among celibate males just in case some change their minds about it?"

a) The gift of celibacy is not simply a question of someone making up their own mind about it.

b) I think imposing a restriction on the bishopric that is not an apostolic restriction is unwarranted. Imposing a restriction regarding marriage is especially unwarranted, both since "forbidding to marry" is forbidden in Scripture, because Scripture specifically anticipates that elders will be family men, and because wives and children are a good thing with which godly men generally should be rewarded, if God has not given them the gift of celibacy.

"You mean to say, "That's not the only or largest place where the Roman Catholic church fails to follow what I think scripture says.""

No, I meant what I wrote.

"In this thread you have been shown several scriptures explicitly in favor of a celibate clergy. Your only response is to link to another thread of yours as if its authoritative."

No, I link to another thread where the assumptions behind your citation of those verses is demonstrated to be false.

"I didn't intend to 'get personal.' I think that asking why it is that you are asking the questions is a reasonable question."

It's not a question that has anything to do with the merits of the argument, whether you personally feel it is reasonable or not.

"So I suppose that Paul wasn’t an elder???"

a) We're not told that Paul was never married, nor that he never had children. Why would you assume that?

b) How we understand those qualifications, however, is generally to emphasize that the elder may not be a polygamist. Whether or not that is the case, the fact that the qualification deals with the wife and children of the elder demonstrates that the qualifications anticipate that the elders will be married with children in the usual case.

c) And it was the usual case among the apostles, as Paul observes.

"And I take it that you believe that men who are married but have no children cannot be elders either?"

You take it incorrectly.

-TurretinFan