Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uwm.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sdd.hp.com!ucsd!rutgers!aramis.rutgers.edu!athos.rutgers.edu!christian From: gilham@csl.sri.com (Fred Gilham) Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian Subject: Unmarried priesthood etc. Message-ID: Date: 5 Jun 90 03:17:04 GMT Sender: hedrick@athos.rutgers.edu Lines: 68 Approved: christian@aramis.rutgers.edu [Please post this for me] Brian Coughlin writes: ---------------------------------------- Celibacy, in the eyes of the Church, is a condition that fosters a deeper and more devoted life to God. That fact alone is enough to promote celibacy as a beneficial Christian force. NOTE: in this setting, it can be seen that the Church does NOT condemn non-celibacy... any more than the Church condemns the laity for not being of religious high status. I recall that St. Paul urged celibacy to ALL Christians, but even he made a point of saying that it was merely a recommendation... a piece of non-divine advice, if you will. "Should you marry, however, you will not be committing sin." (1 Corinthians 7:28) "The unmarried man is busy with the Lord's affairs, concerned with pleasing the Lord; but the married man is busy with this world's demands and occupied with pleasing his wife. This means he is divided." (1 Corinthians 7:32-33) ---------------------------------------- On the other hand, Paul, when describing the qualifications for a biship, said that he should be the ``husband of one wife.'' It seems to me that one reason that Roman Catholicism later mandated a celibate clergy was the strong influence of Greek thought, especially neo-platonism. This stream of thought emaphasized the spirit-matter distinction, and tended to equate the body with evil. One of the effects of this mandate was that the amorous proclivities of the clergy became a laughing stock in the middle ages, and bastard children of high clergy were taken for granted. To me, this whole situation illustrates the danger of enshrining an authoritative interpretation of what we think God is saying to us, whether he is saying it by the scriptures or by ``tradition.'' The effect of doing this is that errors get propagated because there is no easy mechanism to remove them. For me, there are two (not unrelated) issues here: epistemology and authority. In terms of the first, we are told in the bible to test all things, and to be skeptical (humble) of our own certainty ("He who says, `I know' does not yet know as he ought.'') In terms of the second, we are warned against those who ``Teach the commandments of men as doctrines of God'' and those who lord it over people. Christ turned lordship and hierarchy on its head. -- Fred Gilham gilham@csl.sri.com Are Saturday morning cartoons proof that adults hate kids? Answer: Yes. (From "Life in Hell") [Protestants certainly have the suspicion that celibacy in the RCC is based on a distrust and/or dislike of sex. However it's unclear to me that there's any evidence for this. In principle at least RC theology takes marriage more seriously than Protestant theology, making it a sacrament which means that it is a way in which God becomes present among us. A recent book by Elaine Pagels (unfortunately it's at home, so I don't have the exact title, but it's got the word "Sex" in it) argues that celibacy was part of the basic Christian lifestyle from the very beginning. I'm not sure quite what to make of her argument, but it is certainly not clear to me that the accusation of neo-Platonic influence is a fair one. --clh]