This is from another discussion, where Catholics were accused of fostering, and defending, homosexuality. And it was stated that not all Catholics are bad because a few are homosexuals. And so, I said...
I agree, not all Catholics are bad. There is a systemic problem, however, and even worse, a coverup. My thoughts are as follows: required celibacy of priests is unscriptural, because celibacy is a gift of God, and not all men can do it. I know--I tried. So what if a young man wants to be a priest? He has to, of course, be celibate. Not biblical, and wrong, and explains the unnatural deprivation of the sex drive.
The vast majority of men *God wants* to marry and raise children. It is the 1st command to Man, to procreate, fill the earth with people created in God's image. In this way, the glory of the Lord is shown in mankind across the earth, and not just in a single individual.
Paul argued that the few who wanted to stay single to avoid the constraints of marriage, in order to serve God, were okay. God was pleased with that, providing it was their gift to do so, and their call to serve. Those who can have that freedom. But God is absolutely pleased with the normal family, and certainly does not see the single life as superior.
Paul was only arguing in favor of those who wanted to live in celibacy. They could indeed serve in a less encumbered way. And serving God is the object, whether single or not, whether having children or not.
Some people think that giving up everything they have, climbing a pole, and sitting there half-naked for 40 days without food and drink makes them spiritually superior. It doesn't. It just makes God look bad. And it makes them look stupid and arrogant.
Depriving ourselves of marriage, food and other things can help us focus on spiritual things, if we do it for awhile. But if we get carried away, the focus gets to be on the deprivation and the physical needs. And that defeats the purpose.
I agree, not all Catholics are bad. There is a systemic problem, however, and even worse, a coverup. My thoughts are as follows: required celibacy of priests is unscriptural, because celibacy is a gift of God, and not all men can do it. I know--I tried. So what if a young man wants to be a priest? He has to, of course, be celibate. Not biblical, and wrong, and explains the unnatural deprivation of the sex drive.
The vast majority of men *God wants* to marry and raise children. It is the 1st command to Man, to procreate, fill the earth with people created in God's image. In this way, the glory of the Lord is shown in mankind across the earth, and not just in a single individual.
Paul argued that the few who wanted to stay single to avoid the constraints of marriage, in order to serve God, were okay. God was pleased with that, providing it was their gift to do so, and their call to serve. Those who can have that freedom. But God is absolutely pleased with the normal family, and certainly does not see the single life as superior.
Paul was only arguing in favor of those who wanted to live in celibacy. They could indeed serve in a less encumbered way. And serving God is the object, whether single or not, whether having children or not.
Some people think that giving up everything they have, climbing a pole, and sitting there half-naked for 40 days without food and drink makes them spiritually superior. It doesn't. It just makes God look bad. And it makes them look stupid and arrogant.
Depriving ourselves of marriage, food and other things can help us focus on spiritual things, if we do it for awhile. But if we get carried away, the focus gets to be on the deprivation and the physical needs. And that defeats the purpose.
-
2
-
1
- Show all
I remained single for a good number of years. Good word!
