h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

>Do you think that doctors, teachers or any others that work vocationally with people, like priests, would care more for the wellfare of their "flock" if they didnt have family or a sexual life?<

No, but what I think is immaterial here, that's my understanding of the reason for the celibacy rule. You could be right with the whole Greek 'enlightenment' thing. Either way I don't think it's a good *or* bad thing. It's just there and anyone who wants to take holy orders in the Roman Catholic Church has to abide by it. I don't think it necessarily benefits anyone but I don't think there's anything particularly wrong with it either.

>On the contrary, that challenge you mention has in many occasions lead to sexual abuse on children, I think because of not having a healthy sexual life.<

No.
No no no no no.
A hundred thousand times no.

This allegation really annoys me because it basically assumes that all priests are deviant (because of their celibacy) and it's just that some are better able to fight it than others.
Sexual abuse is most likely to happen in the family home. The most likely abuser of any given child (including children of practising Catholics, i.e. in regular contact with priests) is their father. Line up a random sample of people and the most likely paedophile is a married man with kids, not the priest. Celibacy does *not* lead to paedophilia. I get really when people suggest that it does because you're just labelling a whole group of people with the suggestion of wickedness. It's like saying 'being a muslim can lead to suicide bombing'.
The Church, as an organisation *does* have a big problem with paedophilia but that doesn't mean it's because of celibacy. I've known many priests (I'd guesstimate 50), either directly in my parish/schools or because they're in a neighbouring parish and I have only once come across any paedophilia connection; that was where the priest in question was bankrolling his boyfriend who was using the money to groom kids (there was no suggestion, from the victim or anyone else that the priest abused the child). Being from rural Ireland (overwhelmingly Catholic) I have lots and lots of Catholic friends and none of my friends have ever been in contact with a priest who later turned out to be a paedophile (or at least it's never been mentioned any time we've discussed the issue). That's a awful lot of non-paedophilic priests. The reason is that the vast majority of priests aren't paedophiles which means most can cope with celibacy without turning to child abuse.


Sorry, that was a bit of a rant, but you hit a big nerve!

I will just end it by saying that, although you may think sex is very important to your life there are many who don't think it is. I'm not celibate myself but if someone told me 'you'll never have sex again' I wouldn't be distraught... a bit disappointed but that's about it.

>'John Climacus states in Step 1 of his Ladder of Divine Ascent that "A lover of God is one who lives in communion with all that is natural and sinless." Sodomy and lesbianism are evil because they are unnatural.'

A good quote to discuss?<

I can do better; I once heard a man declare that homosexuality must be unnatural because the whole point of sex (from an evolutionary POV) is procreation and survival of the species and, homosexuals were unable to procreate by having sex they must be unnatural and that's why it's a sin.
(I think he also claimed there was no homosexuality in the animal kingdom... but that could be someone else I'm thinking of.)


Discuss

Re Paul

I'll have to dig out the article to try and find a rebuttal

Re Having something explained and argued

I'm with you on that, when someone tells you to read such-and-such a book or website or whatever without giving an outline of what the main point of it is it kind of stops the discussion dead!

>has in many occasions lead to sexual abuse on children, I think because of not having a healthy sexual life.<

I'm in full agreement with Mar on this. And no-one said anything about *all* priests. *Men* not women generally, supposedly think about sex 'n' times a day. Biologically they are designed differently in terms of sexual need. For many men it must really twist and cripple them to have to be celibate all their lives. It's hardly surprising that this will lead sometimes to certain things happening. A priest is in a position of huge power, and trusted absolutely to be caring and loving for all his flock. The emotional violence done to children when they indulge themselves in abuse doesn't bare thinking about. Especially when it has been so denied and covered up by the Catholic church for so long.

I think women can more easily deal with celibacy. But I'm generalising of course. But their sexuality is different for biological reasons connected with pregnancy and child rearing.

Personally I couldn't cope with celibacy without crippling myself. But some are quite happy to.

Yesterday, out of the blue, I got a phone call from someone I haven't seen in 10 years. She's always been celibate as a choice. I asked her if she had any sexual relationships since I'd last seen her. She said, no. But I'd already guessed the answer from speaking to her after a couple of minutes. I like her and enjoy speaking about art and cultural things. But she has a certain disconnected with her emotions, and way of communicating, which I find quite difficult. Being the excessively passionate type I am, I find I can't spend too long around her. There's just *so* much she doesn't understand. A whole world of normal red bloodedness. *This is not to criticise*. It's just how I feel when communicating with her, in the way I perceive so much to do with art and creativity, which is hugely important to me. She has a lot of theoretical knowledge, but is unable to instinctively understand a lot of things, because I believe that the sexual side of life often feeds even in a subliminated way into creativity in general, be it creative thought or actual art.

I could never imagine her being able to be someone I could share very much with about my deepest emotional needs.

I think it's most silly and ridiculous that priests are expected to be celibate. There's so much they are never going to understand, except in a theoretical way.

> a man declare that homosexuality must be unnatural because the whole point of sex (from an evolutionary POV) is procreation and survival of the species<

Well that shows his biological ignorance. In hunter/gatherer societies kin selection is very important as well as direct selection of genes. Bonding including sex as a way of intensifying bonding, with either sex is thought to have been important for cohesion of small groups in a hunter gatherer society. Biologically we are still evolved to be hunter/gatherers. This would enable one's genes to increase in the gene pool indirectly through care of children usually closely related.

And natural selection has absolutely *nothing* to do with species survival. It's all about increasing gene survival in the gene pool. This whole thread is predicated on the ideas of Dawkins. His classic 'The Selfish Gene' explains all this in real detail, including the concept of kin selection. It completely debunks the idea of species survival.

>>For many men it must really twist and cripple them to have to be celibate all their lives.<<

Hollyoaks achieved one of it's rare moments of depth a couple of weeks ago, talking about this exact point.

For anyone who hasn't seen it (and I'm guessing that's everyone who isn't me) there's a gay priest who's in love with an openly gay lad, but can't be with him because of his celibacy.

There was a wonderful line when the priest broke up with the guy and the guy said something along the lines of:

"In years to come, when you look back at your life and you see what you gave up, all for a God who doesn't exist. Just think about it - the love I could have given you."

And there's the real issue with celibacy - it isn't just the sex the person is giving up on, they're almost certainly giving up the chance of having a normal, fulfilling adult relationship, because the vast majority of people aren't willing to give up sex.

Hi PP,

So far we agree on that Priests's celibacy adds nothing relevant to their work, is it not?
But for you, celibacy is not bad per se and can't bring harm, as I've said.

Of course, most priests aren't paedophiles.Sorry if I haven't expressed myself clearly.
That mental condition has different causes. However I think that celibacy, not bad per se, can trigger that behaviour.

Celibacy shouldn't be a rule to enter priesthood.

There are many erotic stories that involve religious people "falling down" or trying to run away from temptation.
I remember now the gardener in a convent of nuns, from the Decameron.

And one French story, based on true historical facts, from the 18th century

and La Regenta! a Spanish wonderful novel from the 19th...

Humm We should open another thread

just to share knowlegde, you know...

>it isn't just the sex the person is giving up on, they're almost certainly giving up the chance of having a normal, fulfilling adult relationship, because the vast majority of people aren't willing to give up sex. <

So very true HI....The loss of turning down and experiencing a truly loving relationship is the most tragic part.

I'm presuming you've read E.M. Forster's Maurice. The guy that Maurice is having a full on loving relationship with, finally decides to opt for a loveless marriage instead. I can't remember how religious he is; but he's a product of fine upstanding British morals about right and wrong, which are based to a large degree on good Christian principles of what is sinful and wrong.

And it's great that the brave Maurice finds real true love at the end with someone else.

"what is sinful and wrong"

that is the toxic aspect of religion. That idea has made feel miserable people to a lot of people.

sorry
preview is my friend

the idea has made many people feel miserable

I sometimes think Christianity is quite ironic, depending on how you interpret things. The way I do is that Jesus is saying you take all manner of risk to follow what your heart is telling you about love. He believed he had to bring that message to people about love. He didn't much about much reading bibles and scripture and such like all that much. He got on with things. Knowing full well he was risking his own life to do the authentic true thing to his heart. He had balls.

If Christians maintain one should try to live like Christ, and if you look at it my way, it's quite a good idea really. it's a shame Christians waste so much time studying scripture, quoting scripture, condemning sin etc etc. They really seem to miss the point. I bet they give Jesus a good giggle sometimes at the way they go on.....

<>

<>

Hey, at a distance, I love them! But when they get up in my face, tney scare me witless.. (It may be a childhood incident, I've no clue.)

Actually when I was a child, my sister had pet birds, and we kept chickens. They didn't scare me then...

<>

Beautiful!

<>

I've linked to such articles before, PP, but people here don't want to accept it, so they "forget"...

<>

I am 'fully in agreenace' with you PP (as the Australians say.)


Vicky

Aaaaarrrrrgggggggggghhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Agreeance! ()

Vicky

<>

Ha! Spring for some of you! I am freezing.

I'm going to be completely blunt about this. When people say sex is not so important, I wonder what quality they've ever experienced. I draw the analogy with food of once you've gone trotting with a worm for wild brown trout in a hillstream; caught one; bashed it on the head staright away; gut it immediately in the stream; chuck it on the little fire you've made ready and then eaten it, that's when I'll take seriously someone telling me fish isn't all its cracked up to be. And it's as much about who it is with and the quality of the relationship and the intensity of the love. Just like the hillstream, catching it yourself and the little fire contribute to the exquisite taste of the wild fish.

But if they only eat the 2 day old farmed rainbow trout you get Sainsbury's, that most people eat, I can't take their opinion that seriously.

It's a fair point I'm making.