Fides_et_Ratio Posted October 28, 2005 Share Posted October 28, 2005 [b]< Begin DISCLAIMER!!!!!! > (NOTE: I realize that this is entirely MY misunderstanding of the topic at hand, and also that I DO fully submit to the authority and declarations of the Church... I also have a friend who is on her way to becoming a religious sister and I do not look down upon her or anyone else.). </ end DISCLAIMER!!!!!!!!! >[/b] In a weird mixture of John Paul II's (/the Great's!) "Theology of the Body" and C.S. Lewis' "The Great Divorce" I have formed the opinion that it seemingly sets non-ordained (i.e., nuns, brothers, consecrated virgins) celibates in an odd/contradictory position. It is hard for me to see how they fit into the Church. Let me explain... The ultimate vocation of every person is to love. Married life, the priesthood... are different expressions of (/ways of living out that) love. What kind of love? Total, faithful, and fruitful. Both the married life and the priesthood reflect this... In marriage, man and woman come together for procreation (which is not merely having children...). The fruitfulness of their love is expressed in a concrete reality (the form of the child that comes to be through their union). The priesthood is also total, faithful, and fruitful-- in a concrete manner. The priest becomes "father" in and through his celebration of the Sacraments (which are concrete realities themselves only able to be offered by the power of the Holy Spirit through the instrument of the Church's priests). The priest's fruitful love is in the celebration of the Sacraments which give grace. Grace is the concrete reality of the Sacraments. Grace is real, not symbolic. But what is the concrete reality expressed in the love of a non-ordained celibate? They have no physical children, and are not concretely spiritually tied to anyone. We call them "sister" and "brother"... they are the true parent of none. Thus, their love is seemingly not concretely fruitful. Perhaps of some help, a conversation with a friend of mine: ME: I was talking to the ex-priest presenting the TOTB material after his presentation today ME: lol Friend: fun ME: yeah, I asked him my non-ordained celibates question and he was like, 'where do you go to school again?' ME: lol Friend: lol Friend: did you say ODU? ME : yes, but explained that I had transferred, and that the question was really irrelevant to my classes Friend : lol ME : he tried to explain to me that the priesthood and celibacy are not necessarily linked (and I was thinking.. of course HE would say that) Friend: lol Friend : well it's true ME : I know, but I explained that I was asking in a more "concrete reality" sort of manner Friend: even if it is a little ironic coming from him ME : (you're telling me!) Friend : lol ME : lol ME : so then I had to explain the whole "concrete reality" thing and he was like, "where are you getting this?" ME : and so I explained my take on TOTB and CS Lewis' "The Great Divorce" ME: and blah blah blah.. and he was like, "wow". ME : and said he would have to think about it some more Friend : "wow little girl, that's the most screwed up thing i've ever heard" Friend : lol ME : LOL.. probably Friend: did you ever see charlie and the choclate factory? ME: but it's not screwed up! ME : yeah ME: the new one is scary! Friend : the new one is what i'm talkin about Friend : it's great Friend: that's what i was thinkin of with wow little girl Friend : but anyway Friend: did he happen to mention that your take on ToB is not JP2's take on it? lol ME : lol, he said he doesn't think JPII interpret's things as "seriously" as I do ME : and that JPII doesn't distinguish between ordained and non-ordained ME: because celibacy isn't distinct to the priesthood ME: or rather, "specific" to merely the priesthood Friend: well, JP2 acknowledges that celibacy isn't necessarily tied to priesthood Friend: but he still thinks it's a good thing Friend: (if it's what you're called to) whether you're a priest or not ME : I know, but I don't see how celibacy outside the priesthood can fulfill the fruitful aspect of love (concretely) Friend: the sacrifice itself is very concrete ME : fruitful how? Friend: in that it strengthens the love one has for God Friend: that happens if you're living your vocation lol ME : that's not concrete ME : children are concrete. Sacraments are concrete. what you're saying has no material aspect Friend : the sacrifice made is concrete ME: but it's not concretely fruitful Friend : lol ME : outside of the priesthood Friend : what are the concrete fruits of any sacrifice? ME : it's a selfish love Friend : no it isn't, it's directed towards God Friend: and if this is true then celibacy doesn't make sense for priests Friend: it's not in virtue of their celibacy that they're able to confect the sacraments ME: yes it does... Jesus wasn't married ME: priests act in persona Christi ME: they are a further symbol of the bridegroom in that way Friend : most of the first priests were married Friend: did Jesus just not know what he was doing? ME: and they left their wives Friend: no they didn't ME: you never hear about them Friend: you hear about peter's wife in the gospel ME: they travel all over Friend: there's nothing saying peter's wife didn't go with him to antioch or rome ME: and there's nothing that says she did ME : nothing about them having children either Friend : lol Friend : then in your book they were living in a bad marriage ME : peter had a better calling Friend : so why do you have to be a priest to imitate Christ in his celibacy? ME : maybe his wife was a bad Jew ME: lol ME: celibacy is a fuller expression of the imitation of Christ Friend: sure Friend: no one really disagrees with that Friend: only priests are allowed to imitate christ though? ME: as the bridegroom? yes Friend: that's not the question Friend: as a celibate Friend: how was jesus conrcruitful? Friend: concretely fruitful lol ME: lol, nice shorthand ME : Jesus was concretely fruitful on the Cross ME: the "consummation" so to speak ME: the Church pours forth from His side.. Friend : uhh Friend: that was selfish ME : no it wasn't! Friend: lol Friend: just as selfish as the nun who sacrifices herself through celibacy ME : He died FOR the Church Friend: celibacy is a form of martyrdom ME : bull Friend : it is Friend: what, do you think it's a joy and a pleasure? people just like doing it? ME : no, it's a GIFT Friend: so is the cross ME : no one can be celibate of their own accord ME : celibacy is a gift from God, not the person themselves Friend: no one can accept red martyrdom of their own accord ME: I don't think God would call someone to a fruitless love Friend : it isn't fruitless though Friend : anymore than martyrdom is ME : celibacy is not martyrdom Friend : it's a form of martyrdom Friend: like any other sacrifice made for God ME: perhaps only suicide when practiced by those not ordained... lol ME : celibates give nothing to the Church ME: non-ordained celibates ME : (NOC) ME : priests do. parents do. but not NOCs ME: thus, NOCs have a fruitless love. nothing comes from it because it is selfish Friend : they give prayer to the Church Friend: and they are able to devote themselves to the Church in a way that married couples cannot ME: not any different from parents or priests Friend : whether that be through service or through prayer and study Friend : no parent can give as much time as a celibate can Friend : the parent has to take care of his or her children first ME : that's what priests and seminarians are for (deacons too) Friend: why? Friend: why would a celibate priest be a better nurse than a celibate nun? Friend: or a better teacher? Friend: or a better contemplative? ME: because that's their job as priest ME: Christ was all those things to a T Friend : lol Friend : i know priests who would make horrible nurses ME : priests are better imitators than NOCs Friend: or horrible teachers ME: because they smell of elderberries as priests ME : lol Friend : and i also know priests who would be good at either but are busy enough with other duties Friend : no they don't ME: because we need more priests Friend : nah Friend: there'll always be parish duties ME : well then stop complaining about them being so busy Friend: to keep plenty of priests busy ME : well good, idle priests would fall into sin Friend: but if a woman feels called by God to renounce marriage and devote herself to serving the poor Friend: that's not a concrete love? ME: no Friend : why? ME: it's just sentimental Friend: lol Friend: then so was Jesus ME: 'oh how cute' ME : no He wasn't. Friend: by your standards he was ME : Jesus was "ordained" ME : how so? Friend: so are those women ME : those women are not ordained Friend : not in the sacramental sense of holy orders, but they are called by God to what they do ME : so you say Friend : lol Friend: Jesus would've been better as a married man by your reasoning ME : no He wouldn't have ME : Jesus is a priest Friend : cause the immolation on the cross was really just sentimentality ME : THE priest Friend : Jesus was really being selfish there ME : no it wasn't. it had CONCRETE fruit Friend: what's that? ME : the Church! Friend : he could've instituted the Church without dying on the cross ME : we already went through that Friend : and ME: He gives His life for the Church AS the Bridegroom Friend: the same is true for any christian sacrifice ME: no it's not Friend : why not? ME: only Christ and priests are the Bridegroom ME: so I guess Jesus is married, in a sense Friend: only Christ is THE Bridgegroom Friend: so are those women ME: LOL ME : no they aren't Friend: they are to Jesus ME: women can't be bridegrooms Friend: if a celibate woman devotes her life to the Church Friend: i didn't say they could lol ME : yes you did Friend : if a celibate woman devotes her life to the Church how is she not building it up Friend : no, you misunderstood me Friend : i said that priests are not THE Bridegroom Friend : and that women are also married if Jesus is ME: they aren't any different from the rest of the laity ME: they have no function ME: they are USELESS Friend: lol ME: lol ME : the priest offers THE Sacrifice of Christ ME: AS bridegroom ME: that's a heck of a lot more concrete than Suzy Q teaching poor kids ME: whoop-di-do ME: lol ME: anyone can teach poor kids ME: infertile couples ME : old couples ME : specially suited couples ME : priests ME : deacons, seminarians ME : not of age to be married ME : it's not as though if there were no NOCs, the Church would fall apart ME : the Church would fall apart without priests and marriages Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Socrates Posted October 28, 2005 Share Posted October 28, 2005 (edited) You seem to have a very narrow understanding of love and God's grace. Love is not limited to sex and administering sacraments. Monks, nuns, etc. are spiritually tied to thier communities, and spend their lives in prayer and service to the Church and to others. They are hardly (if doing their duties correctly) living lives of selfishness! I have a friend who is a cloistered nun who absolutely radiates love, in a true, supernatural sense. Your post seems to ignore the importance of prayer and the spiritual. Do you regard a life of prayer and service as somehow unimportant in the Church because you do not see it as "concrete"?? Good religous are models of love, and I have also seen "family men" who are quite self-centered. Honestly, I find your conversation confusing. Really, what's your beef with celibates? Read 1 Corinthians 12, about the different gifts and the mystical body of Christ. Edited October 28, 2005 by Socrates Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Myles Domini Posted October 28, 2005 Share Posted October 28, 2005 I'd follow Socrates in questioning your interpretation. Especially on the nature of the Sacraments which work by virtue of the one performing them: Jesus and not based upon the personal merits of the priest. Peter, for instance, did have a wife and there are traditions about her being martyred too. There have always been married priests in the Catholic Church and there still are today in the Eastern particular churches e.g. the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church and amongst those clergy who have converted from the ecclesial communions of the Western schism e.g. former Anglicans. As your friend said celibacy is a better imitation of Christ but it is not intrinsic to the priesthood as the Easterners have maintained consistently since apostolic times. Indeed, at least in the Orthodox churches, because of this to be a Bishop one must be made archimadrite 'arch abbot' because they view the celibate monastic life as the perfect form of living. Moreover, please beware of calling the celibate life one of 'fruitless love'. La Santa Madre Teresa de Avila had many children indeed even St Francis de Sales calls her 'La Madre' in the 'Introduction to the Devout Life' and he never met her. Her reform made the Spanish church smell of sanctity and the austerity of her nuns and friars led by St John of the Cross and Padre Gratian many were converted to truth. Indeed, look at the patron of the missions one of her daughters St Therese of Liseux. She never left her convent once she entered but yet the Church saw fit to make her patron of missions because she bolstered them by her prayers and penances. By calling those who answer celibate vocations outside the priesthood, which is not by its nature intristically celibate orientated, selfish you're not doing God a great deal of justice. St Francis of Assisi was never more than a deacon and he never assented to being ordained without a fight either but long before that time he was converting people en masse. St Benedict of Nursia the patriarch of Western monasticism wrote the rule that gave Western Europe the monasteries that preserved classical culture in its copying houses and gave the Barbarians their evangelists but he himself was never ordained even to the diaconate. God works how He decides and executes His will as He wishes. Be careful in making statements that God wouldn't call people to a 'fruitless love' particularly when only a few lines prior you called such callings a 'gift', which they are both to the individual and the mystical body who benefit from their sufferings (Col 1:24). You are entitled to your view but at the moment, in my opinion, your view is not in line with the mind of the Church. Imagine a married couple arent able to concieve children because of natural evil, would that make their marriage fruitless? The concreteness of a vocation is measured not by the physical but the invisible, by the grace merited by doing good united to Christ through being a member of his mystical body. Towards that end there are many vocations to which God calls people to (if you get a chance read what Benedict XVI wrote about the new ecclessial movements when he was just humble Cardinal Ratzinger). Please keep that in mind and encourage your friends vocation. The Church could do with a few more St Mary Margaret Alacourt's in our day and age to remind the world of the Divine Mercy that flows from Christ's Sacred Heart as Jesus called St Faustina to do not a century ago. Moreover, if He has such a role planned for your friend and your words discourage her in following it Jesus may have a bone to pick with you in the not too distant future. God love you Myles Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fides_et_Ratio Posted October 28, 2005 Author Share Posted October 28, 2005 [quote name='Socrates' date='Oct 27 2005, 11:26 PM']You seem to have a very narrow understanding of love and God's grace. Love is not limited to sex and administering sacraments. Monks, nuns, etc. are spiritually tied to thier communities, and spend their lives in prayer and service to the Church and to others. They are hardly (if doing their duties correctly) living lives of selfishness! I have a friend who is a cloistered nun who absolutely radiates love, in a true, supernatural sense.[/quote] I'm not saying "selfish" as a personal attack, or even a personal remark. "selfish" was an adjective to describe the expression of love. YES, the love of non-ordained celibates may be all wonderful and great, but it has no concrete expression... they cannot have physical children, and they cannot offer The Sacrifice. Both of which, without, the Church would cease to be. The Church would continue without non-ordained celibates. [quote]Your post seems to ignore the importance of prayer and the spiritual. Do you regard a life of prayer and service as somehow unimportant in the Church because you do not see it as "concrete"??[/quote] Priests and married couples still pray. If we want to say that prayer is a service to the Church for non-ordained celibates, it's not a service specific to them. It can be had elsewhere. Quantity isn't important. Quality is, and we can't say that the prayers of priests and married couples are somehow "less". [quote]Good religous are models of love, and I have also seen "family men" who are quite self-centered.[/quote] We can't go that route... I know many religious sisters who are more like secular celibates than religious women. Good priests are models of love, good families are models of love. We can see models of love (even celibate love through the celibate priesthood of the Roman rite) elsewhere, so this is neither specific to non-ordained celibates. [quote]Honestly, I find your conversation confusing. Really, what's your beef with celibates? Read 1 Corinthians 12, about the different gifts and the mystical body of Christ. [right][snapback]772547[/snapback][/right] [/quote] Wait, wait.... It's not beef with celibacy. It's beef with non-ordained celibacy. Big difference. I'm just trying to figure out what is specific to non-ordained celibates that cannot be had in any form in the priesthood, or in the married life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fides_et_Ratio Posted October 28, 2005 Author Share Posted October 28, 2005 I have to go to class... I will come back to reply to Myles' post as well. Thanks for replying though. Don't forget to read my big DISCLAIMER in the original post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Era Might Posted October 28, 2005 Share Posted October 28, 2005 (edited) I'm not going to get involved in the discussion, as I went over it in depth a few months ago, and don't really want to do so again. But, I'll just address the idea that a you must be actively "united" to a family or community to carry out the universal vocation to charity. The eremitic vocation is a rich tradition in the Church. Hermits are stripped of all contact, in an earthly sense. But they do not thereby relinquish any obligation to the Church and the world. Just the opposite, as Pope Pius XII explains: [quote]That which one could call the spirituality of the desert is a profound movement of the Spirit which will never cease as long as there are voices to listen to the voice of the Spirit. It is not fear nor the desire to repent nor simply prudence which populates the solitude of the monasteries. It is the love of God. That there be, in the middle of the big modern cities, in the richer countries, just like on the plains of the Ganges or the forests of Africa, souls capable to be content, all their lives, with adoration and praise, [b]who consecrate themselves freely as the guarantors of humanity before the Creator[/b], protectors and advocates of their brothers and sisters before the Father of the Heavens, what a victory for the Almighty, what glory for the Saviour![/quote] The celibate, whether monastic or lay, is a "guarantor of humanity before the creator". They are the unseen intercessors, who plead on behalf of their brethren. If that is not a charity-filled vocation, to offer yourself in prayer, I don't know what is. [quote]I'm just trying to figure out what is specific to non-ordained celibates that cannot be had in any form in the priesthood, or in the married life. [/quote] The Priesthood is a vocation, a specific vocation. Not all men are called to it, including monks. The distinction, rather, is between monastic life and the active priesthood. One is, as explained above, ordered toward an eschatological self-giving. The other is ordered toward a temporal self-giving. Edited October 28, 2005 by Era Might Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Socrates Posted October 29, 2005 Share Posted October 29, 2005 (edited) [quote name='Fides_et_Ratio' date='Oct 28 2005, 05:54 AM']I'm not saying "selfish" as a personal attack, or even a personal remark. "selfish" was an adjective to describe the expression of love. YES, the love of non-ordained celibates may be all wonderful and great, but it has no concrete expression... they cannot have physical children, and they cannot offer The Sacrifice. Both of which, without, the Church would cease to be. The Church would continue without non-ordained celibates. Priests and married couples still pray. If we want to say that prayer is a service to the Church for non-ordained celibates, it's not a service specific to them. It can be had elsewhere. Quantity isn't important. Quality is, and we can't say that the prayers of priests and married couples are somehow "less". We can't go that route... I know many religious sisters who are more like secular celibates than religious women. Good priests are models of love, good families are models of love. We can see models of love (even celibate love through the celibate priesthood of the Roman rite) elsewhere, so this is neither specific to non-ordained celibates. Wait, wait.... It's not beef with celibacy. It's beef with non-ordained celibacy. Big difference. I'm just trying to figure out what is specific to non-ordained celibates that cannot be had in any form in the priesthood, or in the married life. [right][snapback]772705[/snapback][/right] [/quote] I have read your disclaimers, and I know you do not intend your posts to be an insult or attack against anybody, but still I think what you are saying is contrary to the wisdom of the Church and shows a lack of appreciation and understanding of prayer and the contemplative life in the Church. While it is true that married people and priests can pray and be holy, it is also true that the contemplative life, such as that lived by cloistered monks and nuns, offers an opportunity to completely devoted to prayer and God. In fact, it has been traditionaly teaching that a life of contemplation is actually a [b]higher[/b] calling than a life of active service in the world. However, active service, as lived by religious sisters, etc., is also a holy calling. Think of Blessed Mother Theresa and the Sisters of Charity and all the good they acomplished out of love for Christ and neighbor. Celibacy simply helps one focus more perfectly and entirely on a life of prayer and service. This is not to say that married people cannot be prayerful and holy - the celibate religious life simply allows one to stay focused on God and prayer in a way most people "living in the world" normally cannot. I am hardly an expert in this area, but if you doubt the spiritual advantages or value of the celibate religious life, simply study the lives of the countless celibate religious saints. Living in a materialistic society, it is easy to discredit that which does not get physical tangible "concrete" results, and thus a life of contemplative prayer may look worthless from a worldly perspective. However, spiritual people have spoken of the great need for contemplative prayer - for people to devote their entire lives and being to praying for the sake of the rest of the world. I heard someone say that he thought the lack of such prayer in the Church was part of what is responsible for many of the problems in the Church today. And using the example of bad or worldly religious is not a solid argument. Unfortunately there are many bad religious, who do not properly live their vocation, just as there are bad priests, and bad married people. This should not be a reason to disparage any of these vocations. We may not be able to understand this, but we should trust the wisdom of the Church, and many centuries of holy tradition. And lest you start pitting one vocation against another again, it would be wise to humbly and prayerfully read the words of St. Paul I cited. There are many members but one Body. There are many different vocations and paths to holiness, as the Church has recognized since the beginning. Edited October 29, 2005 by Socrates Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmjtina Posted October 29, 2005 Share Posted October 29, 2005 [quote]I'm just trying to figure out what is specific to non-ordained celibates that cannot be had in any form in the priesthood, or in the married life. [/quote] have you read about the saints lives? You know, those doctors of the Church who were "non-ordained"? "The Sacrifice"? I think your definition is quite different from the one I understand that those saints and many of the "un-ordained" have made. JP2's theology of the Body is ONE Of his works. Have you read his others to get the grand idea that JP2 truly has on sacrifice and love? You called Blessed Mother Teresa just "sentimental" and being selfish? If your talking about just "modern" nuns of today, then I think your argument is weak. Devoting a life to prayer and service and sacrifice is the most fruitful that is concrete. If your going to call all "non-ordained" people USELESS, then lets be blunt, you just put ALOT of holy ppl into that category. That's like saying Mother Teresa never had a place in the Church and she never had any "concrete" reality of being "fruitful". You have no idea how many priests have told me that without the prayers of the cloistered nuns, they would fail at being a priest. There is fruit in the "non-ordained" celibate life. It is our priests and the Church and everything "concrete" that we have now. I agree with Socrates. You do have a lack of appreciation and understanding of prayer and the contemplative life in the Church. Read up on it. It may balance out your views. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fides_et_Ratio Posted October 29, 2005 Author Share Posted October 29, 2005 NOTE: "The Sacrifice" refers to Christ's crucifixion. Priest... offers Eucharist. ONLY a priest can do this. Married people... offer procreation (which is more than just merely begetting children).... only married people can do this. Non-ordained celibates.... what do they offer that ONLY they can offer? As I said while discussing with my friend (which, perhaps that conversation wasn't the best to post as some things were said in jest in reference to previous "inside jokes"... so don't take some of the more offensive statements seriously): The Church would cease to exist without priests and married people. If there were no priests, no one could offer the saving Sacrifice, if there were no married people, there would be no new members of the Church. JMJTina... I have also read JPII's "Love and Responsibily", and numerous encyclicals, exhortations, letters, etc. Is there something specific of his I should refer to? Socrates: [quote]While it is true that married people and priests can pray and be holy, it is also true that the contemplative life, such as that lived by cloistered monks and nuns, offers an opportunity to completely devoted to prayer and God. In fact, it has been traditionaly teaching that a life of contemplation is actually a higher calling than a life of active service in the world. However, active service, as lived by religious sisters, etc., is also a holy calling. Think of Blessed Mother Theresa and the Sisters of Charity and all the good they acomplished out of love for Christ and neighbor.[/quote] I do not dispute that a life of contemplation is a higher calling. Priests can be contemplatives. Not all priests have to be parish priests. I don't see why being "unordained" aids the contemplative? And I know this next part makes me sound like some backwards feminist.. but 1 Timothy 2:15 always sticks out in my mind. It's the natural function of a woman to give birth. And when Christ Himself speaks of the single life, He refers to eunuchs--which are men, not women. (ALSO NOTE: the problem with singleness does not extend to those who are "not of age") Furthermore, I don't deny that nuns, and brothers do a great good for the Church through their prayer and sacrifice.... it's just that.... there's nothing really specific to non-ordained celibacy. It seems like whatever they "offer" can be had elsewhere (i.e., prayer and sacrifice is done also in the priesthood and in marriage)-- and if one argues that they do it to a more significant extent, I would say again that not all priests are parish priests. Yes, Blessed Mother Teresa did great good for the Church (and the world). She was truly a blessing. I am not saying anything against her personally, nor degrading her actions. I have friends who are missionaries in Africa. Are they "less" missionary than a nun because they are married? Yes, they have other things to worry about, but so does the Mother Superior. Secondly, I have not said anything against prayer. Prayer is very real and concrete. But prayer is not specific to non-ordained celibacy. Priests pray, married people pray, children pray.. etc. I want to know what is specific to non-ordained celibacy. [quote]We may not be able to understand this, but we should trust the wisdom of the Church, and many centuries of holy tradition. And lest you start pitting one vocation against another again, it would be wise to humbly and prayerfully read the words of St. Paul I cited. There are many members but one Body. There are many different vocations and paths to holiness, as the Church has recognized since the beginning.[/quote] I am not pitting vocations against each other... it's impossible, both the priesthood and married life are acceptable vocations AS IS a vocation to consecrated virginity because the Church has recognized them as such. Just because we had a disagreement about a "vocation" to the single life (which is different, I would say even from non-ordained celibacy in that most nuns, brothers, etc. are consecrated in their choice to remain celibate)... this is different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philothea Posted October 29, 2005 Share Posted October 29, 2005 (edited) [quote name='Fides_et_Ratio' date='Oct 29 2005, 01:44 PM']Priest... offers Eucharist. ONLY a priest can do this. Married people... offer procreation (which is more than just merely begetting children).... only married people can do this. Non-ordained celibates.... what do they offer that ONLY they can offer? [right][snapback]773543[/snapback][/right] [/quote] A complete commitment of self to God alone. God wants some people to belong to Him in that way. God is not generally very practical. I suppose technically a man could be ordained, then go live as a hermit, but I think that would be a misuse of his ordination. Similarly, people could get married then ignore their families and do nothing but pray. Non-ordained celibates are the only people for whom a complete, undivided commitment to God is proper. Edited October 29, 2005 by philothea Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Socrates Posted October 29, 2005 Share Posted October 29, 2005 (edited) [quote name='Fides_et_Ratio' date='Oct 29 2005, 01:44 PM']NOTE: "The Sacrifice" refers to Christ's crucifixion. Priest... offers Eucharist. ONLY a priest can do this. Married people... offer procreation (which is more than just merely begetting children).... only married people can do this. Non-ordained celibates.... what do they offer that ONLY they can offer? As I said while discussing with my friend (which, perhaps that conversation wasn't the best to post as some things were said in jest in reference to previous "inside jokes"... so don't take some of the more offensive statements seriously): The Church would cease to exist without priests and married people. If there were no priests, no one could offer the saving Sacrifice, if there were no married people, there would be no new members of the Church. JMJTina... I have also read JPII's "Love and Responsibily", and numerous encyclicals, exhortations, letters, etc. Is there something specific of his I should refer to? Socrates: I do not dispute that a life of contemplation is a higher calling. Priests can be contemplatives. Not all priests have to be parish priests. I don't see why being "unordained" aids the contemplative? And I know this next part makes me sound like some backwards feminist.. but 1 Timothy 2:15 always sticks out in my mind. It's the natural function of a woman to give birth. And when Christ Himself speaks of the single life, He refers to eunuchs--which are men, not women. (ALSO NOTE: the problem with singleness does not extend to those who are "not of age") Furthermore, I don't deny that nuns, and brothers do a great good for the Church through their prayer and sacrifice.... it's just that.... there's nothing really specific to non-ordained celibacy. It seems like whatever they "offer" can be had elsewhere (i.e., prayer and sacrifice is done also in the priesthood and in marriage)-- and if one argues that they do it to a more significant extent, I would say again that not all priests are parish priests. Yes, Blessed Mother Teresa did great good for the Church (and the world). She was truly a blessing. I am not saying anything against her personally, nor degrading her actions. I have friends who are missionaries in Africa. Are they "less" missionary than a nun because they are married? Yes, they have other things to worry about, but so does the Mother Superior. Secondly, I have not said anything against prayer. Prayer is very real and concrete. But prayer is not specific to non-ordained celibacy. Priests pray, married people pray, children pray.. etc. I want to know what is specific to non-ordained celibacy. I am not pitting vocations against each other... it's impossible, both the priesthood and married life are acceptable vocations AS IS a vocation to consecrated virginity because the Church has recognized them as such. Just because we had a disagreement about a "vocation" to the single life (which is different, I would say even from non-ordained celibacy in that most nuns, brothers, etc. are consecrated in their choice to remain celibate)... this is different. [right][snapback]773543[/snapback][/right] [/quote] [quote] . . . God created all the parts of the body on purpose. If all the parts were the same, how could it be a body? As it is, the parts are many, but the body is one.. The eye cannot say to the hand, "I do not need you," nor can the head say to the feet, "I do not need you." (1 Cor 12:18-21)[/quote] I seriously think you are trying too hard to find something wrong with non-ordained celibacy. Your motivation for this I do not know, but I think you would be best to just humbly submit to the Church's wisdom which is infinitely greater than your own. Nowhere does the Church say that every vocation must have something to it totally "unique" to itself that can not be found in the others in any way. As, Myles has pointed out, celibacy is not intrinsic to the priesthood. In the Eastern Rite, in which married men may be priests, would you ask, "What can non-ordained married men offer that only they can offer?" Would you think all Eastern Rite men should become priests because non-ordained married men can "do nothing that married priests cannot do"? The priesthood is a high calling and a privilege. It is not a right. Yes, there are contempletive priests, but not every contemplative religious is called to be a priest. Not all football players can be quarterback. And obviously, women cannot be priests, celibate or not. Like a protestant, you're using your own private interpretation of Timothy to argue for your own opinion against the ancient tradition of the Church. There have always been concecrated (female) virgins in the Church. Celibacy is not a male-only vocation. Your "anti-feminist" critique that "it's the natural function of a woman to give birth" could be used just as easily against male celibacy (in or out of the priesthood). One could just as well argue that it's the natural function of a man to beget children! (Don't forget, men have reproductive systems, too! ) As I've said, married people can pray and give service, just not to the same extent that those in the religous life are. Some people are called to prayer and service "full time." You will never know in this life how much good has been done, or how many souls have been saved by the prayers of contemplative religious! Others are called to marry and raise children. This should in no way pit one vocation against the other. One body, but many members. Read 1 Corinthians again. Your main problem seems that you want to set up your own criteria for the Church should be like, then have issues when the Church does not conform to your own criteria. Never a wise path. Edited October 29, 2005 by Socrates Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laudate_Dominum Posted October 29, 2005 Share Posted October 29, 2005 I haven't read the thread, just the beginning of your first post, so I apologize if this is dumb but... The Theology of the Body contains a good elucidation of the meaning of celibacy for the sake of the kingdom, I would start there. Also Familiaris Consortio, Pius XII's encyclical on holy virginity, etc.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maria Posted October 29, 2005 Share Posted October 29, 2005 I did this in my catechism class last year. God is love: free, total, faithful and life-giving love. We are made in the image of God, and our vocation is to more clearly reflect that love, more fully share in that love, more truly be witnesses of that love in the world. There are two main ways of doing this. One is through the married life: through the love the two show each other, they are to be witnesses of God's love for the Church and the Church's love for God. The second is through celibacy for the kingdom. In that case, the direct object of love is God and His Church. Whereas a married couple reflects the love of Christ and the Church, consecrated celibates direct all their being towards the heavenly marriage. Both are necessary, for the one reminds the other of what it gives witness. Those who marry show the fruifulness of God's love most concretely through their offspring, but it is not limited to that. Just as priests by virtue of their ordination and ministry share in the fatherhood of God, celibates participate in the motherhood of the Church herself, as she bears her Saviour into the world. Celibates for the kingdom are torch-bearers of holiness in the world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmjtina Posted October 29, 2005 Share Posted October 29, 2005 The Church, the Gospels, all counsel those to take the vow of poverty, chastity and obedience and recognizes the examplary value in practicing these vows. They are recommendations that Jesus makes to those who wish to keep the commandments perfectly. Not all are obligated to practice the counsels whereas everyone without exception must keep the commandments. By practicing the evangelical counsels one gives up the principal goods of mankind: the right to found a family (chastity); the right to dispose freely of ones goods (poverty); and the right to dispose freely of one's person (obidence). These three counsels are also directly opposed to the root causes of sin as described by the first letter of John, "sensual lust, enticement for the eyes, and a pretentious life." The Church esteems both virginity undertaken for the sake of the kingdom and matrimony. These two support each other. [quote]1620 Both the sacrament of Matrimony and virginity for the Kingdom of God come from the Lord himself. It is he who gives them meaning and grants them the grace which is indispensable for living them out in conformity with his will.[117] Esteem of virginity for the sake of the kingdom[118] and the Christian understanding of marriage are inseparable, and they reinforce each other: Whoever denigrates marriage also diminishes the glory of virginity. Whoever praises it makes virginity more admirable and resplendent. What appears good only in comparison with evil would not be truly good. The most excellent good is something even better than what is admitted to be good.[119] [/quote] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fides_et_Ratio Posted October 30, 2005 Author Share Posted October 30, 2005 [quote name='Laudate_Dominum' date='Oct 29 2005, 07:39 PM']I haven't read the thread, just the beginning of your first post, so I apologize if this is dumb but... The Theology of the Body contains a good elucidation of the meaning of celibacy for the sake of the kingdom, I would start there. Also Familiaris Consortio, Pius XII's encyclical on holy virginity, etc.. [right][snapback]773651[/snapback][/right] [/quote] I'll have to check out the encyclical... thanks for the reference. NOTE: to everyone else. As mentioned in my disclaimer.... I DO fully believe and submit myself to the authority of the Church. I am simply trying to gain a better understanding for my own clarification an edification. My "extreme" views to the other side are a reflection of my putting this topic in the debate table. Otherwise, dUSt would have to remove the "Church Faithful" tag from my name. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now