This piece was overly dense/detailed, and too much of squeamish Piper and not enough of the purity of Jesus, who by the way had numerous female friends.
And the very celibate apostle Paul STAYED the night at the homes of single women on his travels, who offered him much in the way of hospitality if I am not mistaken. Regardless even if not, the above treatise(?) reveals the weakness inherent in Evangelical reliance on personal opinion— due to lack of a cohesive worldview that the Catholic Church is better equipped to articulate.
... A cohesive ‘theology of the body’ and a sacramental grasp of the spiritual institution of marriage...The glory and burdens of celibacy, the virtue of modesty in women, the chivalry of men, etc...— such beautiful, simple, yet profound truths and values could be communicated with so much less.
It just feels intrusive and violating when a pastor gets THIS involved in EVERY little detail of a Christian’s life! Piper is consulted like some guru on on just about every topic. What color curtains should Christians have etc...( I’m being facetious...and I don’t like his judgmental comments on Trump either.) But isn’t Protestantism about Biblical literacy and letting the Holy Spirit be your guide? Why is the Pastor chiming in so much?
And I say this as someone who frequently attends Evangelical studies and functions.
Another weakness of Evangelical culture unfortunately is a puritanical relationship to sex (and anything related to the senses including Art hence why there’s so little of it in that world) and yet a totally anti-spiritual/modernist approach to contraception...and other bioethical matters that bears little distinction from the greater pagan world. Bad combination.
There is a way of being chaste and not suffocated.
In your comment here, you have made a couple of good points, but this is not one of them. In this sataement you have taken some liberties with the interpretation of Paul's life that the Holy Scriptures do not warrant nor give you the freedom to express. What I see here is libelous to Paul's character. He traveled almost always in the company of other men, particularly when he went to Philippi, a Roman colony, and was invited with Silas to lodge at the home of Lydia, whose regenerated household members included two women Euodias and Syntyche, as well as Synzygus another male. This would not have been allowed to degenerate into a condemning compromising hostel, when Paul had at least two of his fellow evangelizers, Silas and Luke, with him:
Acts 16:15 (AV)
"And when she was baptized, and her household, she besought us, saying, If ye1 have judged me to be faithful to the Lord, come2 into my house, and abide there. And she constrained us3."There may have been other members of the traveling company, but if so, the number is inconclusive.
Notes:
1. "ye" is plural, meaning that she is appealing for all those in Paul's company to evaluate and confirm her motivation regarding having been reborn in Christ
2. The invitation to stay at her residence is therefore addressed to the whole company, "ye" plural, of the missionary band
3. "us" is shown to consist at least of Paul, Silas, and Luke (who included himself in this passage, being the writer of true fact (though generally self-abnegating), who had joined Paul's company at Troas, but stayed behind at Philippi for a time to help organize and finish the planting of the new assembly of Christians, indoctrinating the believers and appointing elders for the guidance of the church)
If you can find a case where my criticism of you is undeniably faulty, I would be glad if you can point that out, sticking to the Holy New Testament as your inspired reference.
If not, you need to make an apology to Paul, Silas, and Luke if and when you meet them, considering that your comment compromises their holiness in carrying themselves before the watching world.
You might also want to reconsider your approach to evaluating the writer of this article (who was only involved as a counselor because the girl is not accepting her Mom's advice, but seems to be trying to wangle support out of a church authority, a wise man that she thinks in her immaturity that she can dupe); and of the Evangelical (non-Catholic?) culture, me being one of them, having lived a physically celibate life now for over 35 years (I do not believe in remarriage adultery, however my sleep-life tends to wander a bit), with 3 evangelically faith-demonstrating children, 19 grandchildren (10 in one non-contraceptive-limited family, all home-schooled, each with a living, shining testimony), and one great-grandchild, soon to be 1 year old.
Ponder on that for a while before you reply or start condemning some other parties not sharing your Catheology.