Posted on 12/08/2005 12:49:33 AM PST by HarleyD
You cannot point to infidelity of priests (if that is what you mean by "fruit of celibate priesthood") to malign the institution of priesthood any more than you can point to infidelity of men to malign the institution of marriage.
The commandment was given to Adam, he gave the commandment to Eve. She disobeyed them both.
That's a well-stated defense.
However, the true and beneficial nature of marriage was conceived by God for man and woman beginning with Adam and Eve in order to create the faithful. It is a human reflection of the marriage between Christ and His church.
Priests are a part of that creation.
The fruit of marriage is children.
The fruit of enforced celibacy can and often is grievous error.
... And he said to the woman: Why hath God commanded you, that you should not eat of every tree of paradise? 2 And the woman answered him, saying: Of the fruit of the trees that are in paradise we do eat: 3 But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of paradise, God hath commanded us that we should not eat; and that we should not touch it, lest perhaps we die. 4 And the serpent said to the woman: No, you shall not die the death. 5 For God doth know that in what day soever you shall eat thereof, your eyes shall be opened: and you shall be as Gods, knowing good and evil. 6 And the woman saw that the tree was good to eat, and fair to the eyes, and delightful to behold: and she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave to her husband who did eat.Eve, correctly, goes to the source of the commandment. She is aware of her disobedience to God as she does not even mention Adam, other than by the symmetrical "we" referring to the recipients of the command.
In Catholic ecclesiology celibacy reflects the marriage of Christ to His Church, and the fruit of that is the faithful to whom the priest ministers.
Eve had not yet been created when the command was given, she was commanded by Adam.
What would happen negatively if priest were to marry?
What article of God's grace would be denied? What part of Jesus' redemption would be nullified? What sheep would be lost whom God gave to Christ to return home?
Whether Adam taught Eve expressly, or God repeated the commandment to Eve, or Eve received that command as she was made form Adam in some nonverbal way is open to speculation. I am comfortable with the theory that she got the command from Adam. It is however clear that her defiance was of God, -- she said so, and her temptation was to be like God, and not like Adam, because Satan said so.
If you are looking into the origin of the notion that women want to be men, other than a broad disordered desires produced by the original sin, we should look into the modern times, I think. I understand that there were other forces shaping modernity beside Luther, but I still could not resist sneering.
Well, as a practical matter some priests do marry. The overall principle is that God wants our all, so naturally there are vocations that give their all in pursuit of a spiritual fruit.
This is what is denied the congregation of a married priest: the knowledge that he is there to serve God 24/7. If I need to see a priest because of some grave need, -- someone is dying for example, -- I can do so without the hesitation of thinking of a wife and children woken up by my call. Also, an example of dedication to God is denied. When a priest advises someone to abstain from premarital sex, it carries weight of his own abstinence.
We cannot delude ourselves that times or persecution of Christians are not going to recur. They happened on our memory; there are signs that they are to come. When my priest is facing tough times, I would like to think that he is not torn between Christ and his family, just as his predecessors were not.
It is important to point out that Eve was deceived into the fruit. Sin came into the world by ONE MAN-Adam. It did not come into the world by Eve even though she was disobediant first.
1Ti 2:14 And it was not Adam who was deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression.
Three of us met today to read & discuss Part One. And in the process to thank God for the Reformation.
It is important, as it establishes the symmetry between Eve and Adam on one side and Mary and Christ on the other. Eve hesitates, then believes Satan; Mary hesitates, then beleives the Archangel. Adam is one flesh with Eve and Christ is one flesh with Mary. Adam sins and Christ redeems sin.
In all my years of church-going, I've never heard of a minister who was unable to fulfill his "obligations" to both his congregation and his family, i.e. when "someone is dying, for example."
When a priest advises someone to abstain from premarital sex, it carries weight of his own abstinence.
Certainly one can argue that a married priest would be better able to advise someone about sex and marriage and abstinence because he actually knows what he's talking about.
Neither of these reasons seems compelling enough to maintain the current situation which has spawned so much pain and distrust of the church in general.
Right. And we have married firefighters and emergency room workers. But you asked, what gift would be denied, and I answered: the grace of having a man out there whose only purpose is serve God (priests say Mass daily) and minister to you.
I alluded without elaborating on the gift denied the married priest. That is a chance to maximize the family income (honorably, of course). I am a computer engineer. If I see an opportunity to increase my salary by switching employees, or even the line of work, it is my duty to consider that for the sake of my family which I support. A priest goes where his conscience and his bishop sends him, and he is needed in poor parishes more than in well-to-do ones. If your minister were told to go and look after the lepers in Calcutta, what would his wife say, and what will it do to his children's college fund?
And again, your question needs to be seen in the marital context. I am sure many a husband, having cheated on their wives, inquired, what gift was denied the wife so long as the paycheck still arrives and the marital bed is still kept warm. A priest is a husband of one wife: my Church. That is enough trouble for him, usually. The fact that some could manage a family of flesh that predated the ordination and had an opportunity to voice their concerns, does not make it an ideal arrangement. Married priest is not unlike a sick priest, someone who has an additional burden. If he has it, that is God's will, but he should not look for it.
advise someone about sex and marriage and abstinence because he actually knows what he's talking about.
The advise that is needed is not a plumbing advice an adolescent receives from a parent. The advise a priest gives is on abstinence. That is something he is uniquely qualified to give.
the current situation which has spawned so much pain and distrust of the church
Allow me to venture a guess that you, a hardened Calvinist, would not trust the Church no matter what priests we have. As to the pederast priests scandal, I already addressed that: marriage of the flesh has instances of infidelity and marriage of the spirit has instances of infidelity. Yet people marry, in both senses, and they should.
It is interesting to note verse 6 of Genesis 3, "She also gave to her husband with her, and he ate." Adam had been present the whole time and had abdicated his authority to his wife and she ran with it.
Adam consciously, knowingly, willingly sinned - in more ways than just eating the forbidden fruit.
Confident, grateful, undeserving, Bible-believing Trinitarian Christian Calvinist by His will alone.
But never, ever "hardened."
"These things I have spoken unto you, that in me ye might have peace. In the world ye shall have tribulation: but be of good cheer; I have overcome the world." -- John 16:33
Good. I will do more softening on you then, as opportunity arises...
Cheers.
Adam watching Eve fall into sin and not doing anything about it would have been sin. Consequently his sin wouldn't have been the taking of the fruit but of watching a "sister" stumble. Eve was confused as to what to do. I don't believe Adam was around to ask for advice. Consequently she was deceived and took the fruit. I believe "...with her" means that Adam was in the Garden but not necessarily right next to her.
The argument against my interpretation was the verse does sound like she took a bite and immediately gave it to Adam. However scripture is full of time lags so I don't think that is a very persuasive argument.
As I have stated on other posts I believe Adam and Eve's problem was that they lacked the wisdom from God. God told Adam what to do-not Eve. Adam must have communicated something to Eve because she had it almost right but we don't know if Adam didn't communicate it well to Eve or if Eve just failed to understand. Like God commands each of us, if any of us lacks wisdom we are to seek it from God who gives it generously. Eve didn't ask for wisdom when she was confused. Adam didn't ask for wisdom when he saw what had happened. This, of course was according to God's perfect plan.
This is off topic but I think Adam and Eve is extremely interesting. I will add that I don't know of a single commentary that has ever interpreted this event my way so take it for what's its worth. ($0.02) :O)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.