Oaths of Celibacy

[SweetDee]

I've made an oath to be celibate until I'm married wOoT

Seriously though, I think anyone who has the strength to live a life of religious service and celibacy...so admirable.

I hate to just use someone else's thoughts but this is what I was going to post. Cheers Vicky!

 

[crishmael]

I've never understood it, to be honest.

I guess if one has no desire for a mate, sex, marriage, etc. it makes sense. But otherwise, it seems to go against 1 Tim. 4:3.

Matthew 19:12 specifically speaks of those who would abstain from sex for the kingdom's sake. Taking a vow is only a more formal statement of one's calling.

For there are eunuchs who were born that way, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by others—and there are those who choose to live like eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it. (NIV)

 

[Fremdin]

I have always been disappointed in my weakness and desire and respect very much those people who take take such an oath. I am a shameful girl and am jealous of their strength.

 

[BreadAlone]

I've never understood it, to be honest.

I guess if one has no desire for a mate, sex, marriage, etc. it makes sense. But otherwise, it seems to go against 1 Tim. 4:3.

Read 1 Corinthians 7. Paul wishes all Christians could be unmarried.

 

[Im_A]

If you don't understand it, that's fine, but to insult it like that is completely lacking in charity.

Give us something to be charitable about. Anything is able to be criticized.

 

[MacFall]

Christians are called to be celibate. It is if you are unable to handle it that you should be married, according to scripture.

According to Paul, who said that it was advice from himself and not from the Holy Spirit.

Some people are called to celibacy, and others are called to marriage. Both institutions are holy, and the calling to either should be regarded as a gift to the one who receives it. To say that Christians are universally called to be celibate is to say that marriage is sinful, because the refusal of a calling can only be sin. There is no loser's bracket for those who can't meet the standard; there is only righteousness, and unrighteousness.

 

[Im_A]

I have always been disappointed in my weakness and desire and respect very much those people who take take such an oath. I am a shameful girl and am jealous of their strength.

That is sad in my opinion.

There's no reason to think by refraining from natural desires is a sign of more strength.

Refraining can also be a sign of staunch immorality hence why most of those saints who live to the outside view, 'holy lives' still call themselves wretched sinners. Gotta be a reason why they separate themselves.

Making a choice not to do something is the same thing as making a choice to do something. Easy to do.

 

[MacFall]

Read 1 Corinthians 7. Paul wishes all Christians could be unmarried.

He wishes they could be. He does not say they should be. To say that someone "should" do something implies a moral requirement.

Also, keep in mind that Paul, like other Christians of his day, very likely believed that Christ would return within a few generations if not sooner. In which case, procreation would not make as much sense for Christians as it does otherwise.

In any case, it is nothing but legalism to suggest that those who do not marry are holier than those who do. Sin did not give us sex drives. God did. What God has established can only be holy. What sin has done is to corrupt what God created and turn it away from its intended purpose, as it can do with absolutely anything that God gives man choice over.

 

[BreadAlone]

According to Paul, who said that it was advice from himself and not from the Holy Spirit.

Some people are called to celibacy, and others are called to marriage. Both institutions are holy, and the calling to either should be regarded as a gift to the one who receives it. To say that Christians are universally called to be celibate is to say that marriage is sinful, because the refusal of a calling can only be sin. There is no loser's bracket for those who can't meet the standard; there is only righteousness, and unrighteousness.

I don't know if I'd go so far to say that Paul's word were uninspired. If you asked Paul at the time, did he think his letter to the Corinthians was divinely inspired? I don't know if he did. I think his reference to "the Lord" is with regard to what the Lord Jesus revealed to him by direct revelation, in person. Just because it "came from Paul," doesn't mean it didn't come from the Holy Spirit.

But that aside, you'll note that Paul doesn't say that it is sinful to marry. He only wishes all could be unmarried so as to be fully devoted to God and others.

 

[Im_A]

I don't know if I'd go so far to say that Paul's word were uninspired. If you asked Paul at the time, did he think his letter to the Corinthians was divinely inspired? I don't know if he did. I think his reference to "the Lord" is with regard to what the Lord Jesus revealed to him by direct revelation, in person. Just because it "came from Paul," doesn't mean it didn't come from the Holy Spirit.

But that aside, you'll note that Paul doesn't say that it is sinful to marry. He only wishes all could be unmarried so as to be fully devoted to God and others.

I see a point in MacFall's post...
Christians needs to stop putting words in Paul's mouth. If Paul stated himself in the epistle that it was not inspired by the Holy Spirit...if Paul's words are so 'important' than why add to it in Christian doctrine and perception of those who live a certain way? Saying that verse is inspired is a contradiction to one, taking Paul's words strongly with Christian doctrine and its adding to what Paul stated.

 

[MacFall]

But that aside, you'll note that Paul doesn't say that it is sinful to marry. He only wishes all could be unmarried so as to be fully devoted to God and others.

Right. But to say that Christians are called to celibacy attempts to impose a standard of morality upon Christians that is not only contrary to scripture, but also suggests that God created sinful desires in people. It is only fair to say that SOME people are called to celibacy, and if they are, they should be celibate, and receive it as a gift.

 

[BreadAlone]

He wishes they could be. He does not say they should be. To say that someone "should" do something implies a moral requirement.

Also, keep in mind that Paul, like other Christians of his day, very likely believed that Christ would return within a few generations if not sooner. In which case, procreation would not make as much sense for Christians as it does otherwise.

In any case, it is nothing but legalism to suggest that those who do not marry are holier than those who do. Sin did not give us sex drives. God did. What God has established can only be holy. What sin has done is to corrupt what God created and turn it away from its intended purpose, as it can do with absolutely anything that God gives man choice over.

Oh don't mistake my intent! I don't think anything we do makes us holier. Only God working within us makes us holy. But sometimes it's harder to submit some things than others. Maybe God wants us to be a missionary to the lost overseas, but we hold back because we want to have a family and a normal, capitalistic life.

But you are right, nothing we do makes us holier in God's eyes. But we can always do more to be like Him.

"Your works, not mine, O Christ."

 

[BreadAlone]

Right. But to say that Christians are called to celibacy attempts to impose a standard of morality upon Christians that is not only contrary to scripture, but also suggests that God created sinful desires in people. It is only fair to say that SOME people are called to celibacy, and if they are, they should be celibate, and receive it as a gift.

I'd say it's more of "if you can, do" sort of thing, as opposed to a "do as thou will" sort of thing. Albeit, very few can abide by such a lifestyle, because we are base and natural creatures this side of eternity. Hence why forced celibacy ends in fail.

 

[Apollo Celestio]

Celibacy is praised because it was more useful to the effort ( and many think there were some apocalyptic strains in there too) than marriage was. That's all there is to it.

 

[BreadAlone]

I see a point in MacFall's post...
Christians needs to stop putting words in Paul's mouth. If Paul stated himself in the epistle that it was not inspired by the Holy Spirit...if Paul's words are so 'important' than why add to it in Christian doctrine and perception of those who live a certain way? Saying that verse is inspired is a contradiction to one, taking Paul's words strongly with Christian doctrine and its adding to what Paul stated.

If we take that approach, where do we start believing Paul again? When he specifically says "okay now this is from God:"? What if He doesn't say that in the text? Is the rest of the epistle uninspired? It leaves much room for doubt of the Scripture.

Having said that, I think Paul sums it all up nicely here:

21 Were you a slave when you were called? Don’t let it trouble you—although if you can gain your freedom, do so. 22 For the one who was a slave when called to faith in the Lord is the Lord’s freed person; similarly, the one who was free when called is Christ’s slave. 23 You were bought at a price; do not become slaves of human beings. 24 Brothers and sisters, each person, as responsible to God, should remain in the situation they were in when God called them.

25 Now about virgins: I have no command from the Lord, but I give a judgment as one who by the Lord’s mercy is trustworthy. 26 Because of the present crisis, I think that it is good for a man to remain as he is. 27 Are you pledged to a woman? Do not seek to be released. Are you free from such a commitment? Do not look for a wife. 28 But if you do marry, you have not sinned; and if a virgin marries, she has not sinned. But those who marry will face many troubles in this life, and I want to spare you this.

 

[BreadAlone]

Celibacy is praised because it was more useful to the effort ( and many think there were some apocalyptic strains in there too) than marriage was. That's all there is to it.

Agreed, and I don't really think that's changed at all. And quite frankly, we should always be living with the mindset of "the End is near." I don't know of a generation that didn't live with that mindset. We are called to be ever-alert. "Each moment souls are dying - soon comes eternity."

 

[Fremdin]

That is sad in my opinion.

There's no reason to think by refraining from natural desires is a sign of more strength.

Refraining can also be a sign of staunch immorality hence why most of those saints who live to the outside view, 'holy lives' still call themselves wretched sinners. Gotta be a reason why they separate themselves.

Making a choice not to do something is the same thing as making a choice to do something. Easy to do.

No, I don't think you understand it isn't about sex at all. It's about being brave enough not to define yourself through other people.

 

[broken_one]

What about simply being able to make the choice of who to have sex with and who not to?

It's sort of like celibacy. Of the forced kind.

 

[Apollo Celestio]

Sex drive makes you forget eternity. Some people think eternity isn't worth it without sex.. makes you remember the whole "be conformed not to this world" thing.

 

[MacFall]

Others of us just see sex as an added benefit to being in a loving partnership with someone else. But I get what you're saying. The common attitude of sex as the end-all and be-all of life really does annoy me quite a lot.