Celibacy is a vocation, a special call from God. No human can call another human to a life of celibacy. Only God can make that call. Therefore no human has the right to declare to a Christian gay man or lesbian, "You are called to a life of celibacy".
In the absence of any mention of gay or lesbian sex by Our Lord Jesus Christ, who only spoke of faithfulness, one to the other, no human has the right to call gay or lesbian sex sinful.
"It is not good for man (or woman) to be alone."
Anyway, that's how I work it out. Of course, I could be wrong.
(Inspiration for my thought from this post by MadPriest.)
There you go again, Grandmére, making entirely too much sense.
ReplyDeleteMimi,
ReplyDeleteYes, I agree with you. But using the 'not good to be alone' definition doesn't describe celibacy, does it?
I have heard many say that being celibate refers to the sex act itself. Many married couples are not having sex, but are still commited... Does this mean they are celibate, or disfunctional, or just have figured out that sex is not always making love, and making love does not always have to be 'sex'?
Susan, apparently the meaning of "celibate" has changed over time and even today can have various meanings. Here's information from Dictionary.com:
ReplyDeleteDictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1)...
cel·i·bate
–noun
1. a person who abstains from sexual relations.
2. a person who remains unmarried, esp. for religious reasons.
–adjective
3. observing or pertaining to sexual abstention or a religious vow not to marry.
4. not married.
...
American Heritage Dictionary
cel·i·bate...
n
1. One who abstains from sexual intercourse, especially by reason of religious vows.
2. One who is unmarried.
adj.
1. Abstaining from sexual intercourse, especially by reason of religious vows.
2. Unmarried; unwed.
[Latin caelibātus, from caelebs, caelib-, unmarried.]
Usage Note: Historically, celibate means only "unmarried"; its use to mean "abstaining from sexual intercourse" is a 20th-century development. But the new sense of the word seems to have displaced the old, and the use of celibate to mean "unmarried" is now almost sure to invite misinterpretation in other than narrowly ecclesiastical contexts. Sixty-eight percent of the Usage Panel rejected the older use in the sentence He remained celibate [unmarried], although he engaged in sexual intercourse.
...
WordNet...
celibate
adjective
1. abstaining from sexual intercourse; "celibate priests"
noun
1. an unmarried person who has taken a religious vow of chastity
I was thinking more in terms of married or committed with sex.
I didn't know that blogging would require research.
I want somewhere to unpack sexual ethics for single heterosexuals too.
ReplyDeleteI know the standard line is "You can get married. Therefore, no dispensations. Married sex is the only licit sex for you."
And maybe that's right.
But I'm wondering if a committed, monogamous relationship between a man and a woman who, for whatever reason, have chosen not to be LEGALLY married is, by its very nature, sinful?
(I want to stress "committed" and "monogamous." I'm not talking about mating like rabbits with whomever you please...)
Clearly, this is weighing on me because my experience with marriage has not been good. (In the interest of full disclosure, my mother has been married--count 'em--FIVE times, and I refuse to become like her...the perfect example of "the triumph of hope over experience.")
I refuse to subject my children to a stream of "new dads" (not that this would even be possible, given that they have a perfectly good dad already...but I trust you know what I mean.) That's what my mother did to us---and some of the results were horrific.
But I don't know that I feel called to celibacy (permanently, anyway), and I'm not sure what my responsibilities as a Christian woman ought to be.
I DO know I am not alone in this predicament. I can think of several women with whom I attend church who are doing just that---living with their partners without "benefit of clergy." No one seems scandalized or fussed about it. Should we be?
But I'm wondering if a committed, monogamous relationship between a man and a woman who, for whatever reason, have chosen not to be LEGALLY married is, by its very nature, sinful?
ReplyDeletePaige, my answer would be "No," but what do I know? I am a humble Episcopalian in the pew. Please, don't mistake me for a spiritual director.
If you want to load the dice, make the couple elderly, both with modest pensions, whose incomes would be adversely affected if they were legally married. More and more often in these instances, elderly couples are choosing to cohabit rather than marry.
I must admit I'm a hardliner on the matter of sin. Sinful behavior is behavior that hurts ourselves or other people. Period. Even casual sex is not always sinful -- certainly sex in a committed relationship is not automatically sinful. Abusive behavior, either inside or outside of marriage is sinful because someone is hurt.
ReplyDeleteBTW, way off topic, I just posted something about ethics on my blog Morningsider.
Allen
Oops, this has turned out to be loooooong.
ReplyDeleteI think of my learnings last summer in El Salvador where I was supposed to spend the morning talking about marriage. The clergy said it was not really relevant since less than half of the people of their congregations got married and one priest said in 12 years of being in his congregation, he had presided at one marriage. Mind you, in ES, one goes through civil and then religious marriage ceremonies (like most of the world). Why? Because in his poor, poor rural congregation, people felt that a marriage ceremony in church would be too expensive (they would have to throw a party). So, there's a lot of educating that needs to happen all over the world.
I encourage you to read a newly published book by my colleague, John C. Morris, First Comes Love? The Many Traditions of Marriage (Pilgrim Press 2007), where he unpacks twenty-one traditions of marriage. It apparently doesn't show up on amazon or Pilgrim Press websites but if you go to
www.hopkinsbookstore.com
you can order it.
This doesn't really answer the question about whether it is 'sinful' or not to live together without sanction of the church. However, as John's book points out, a couple has already married itself when it presents itself to the clergyperson for a church ceremony. For a marriage to be 'legit,' though, it needs the promises of the couple, as well as a public affirmation.
Grandmère's example of the couple living together without benefit of civil marriage for fear of losing pensions and such is all too real. I think IMHO that in the US we absolutely need to unhook civil marriage from religious marriage. Let the couple, should they desire, get God's blessing and the affirmation of their families but not get entangled in the legal complexities. There was a resolution at the Episcopal Diocese of Massachusetts' diocesan convention last fall to study precisely this point.
Lastly, there seems to be confusion between celibacy and chastity. One can be in a long-term committed, promised, vowed relationship and be chaste (not engage in intercourse). So perhaps chaste is the word that needs to be used here?
I'm in total agreement with Allen.
ReplyDeleteA sin is something which is hurtful to you or another. If you are consenting, committed and monogamous, I don't see the "harm" to either of person in the relationship.
Morningsider, I'm of the old school, and, in all honesty, I prefer a degree of commitment before entering into a sexual relationship. But I'm too busy getting these damned logs out of my eye to overly concern myself with the sexual activities of others, except in the case of hurtful behavior.
ReplyDeleteCaminante, loooong is good. In all the years I spent in Roman Catholic schools, through university years, I was always taught that the priest does not marry the couple, rather, the couple marry each other. The priest is there to bless and officiate.
I'd like to see the church out of the marriage business. Churches could offer a blessing to the couples who wanted it.
I thought that one could engage in intercourse and still be chaste. I believe in using "chaste", you'd run into ambiguity, too.
Indeed you would. From Merriam-Webster:
1 : innocent of unlawful sexual intercourse
2 : CELIBATE
3 : pure in thought and act : MODEST
4 a : severely simple in design or execution : AUSTERE...b : CLEAN, SPOTLESS
I'll make note of the book you mentioned.
re: running into ambiguity:
ReplyDeleteWell, heck, then we're just being good Anglican theologians!
Or we could ask MadPriest what he thinks, but I'm not sure he would tell us.....
ReplyDeleteWhat a wonderful blog, Mimi. Thanks for getting us to think.
ReplyDeleteWhy, if I didn't know better, I'd think you were Episcopalian.
I have such lovely people to talk to. The pleasure is all mine.
ReplyDeleteI worry about one thing. we are all so often a "wounded bird" when it comes to love and sex. Ive tried the sex without love and commitment thing and really gotten hurt. Love and a commitment free sex up to feel safely grounded and when that happens really powerful stuff can happen.
ReplyDeleteI think I am such a campaigner for our right to marry as a gay man in a life relationship because I really and truly do believe in marriage. I watched my parents generation really mess it up. I don't want to follow in their path. Sex is fire, it is exciting and powerful and when we find the person we love what a great place to explore it and each other in the midst of a life commitment.
good point on no one but God issuing callings, by the way.
Dennis, that's very well put. In sex, we are giving of our most imtimate selves to another, and at least to me, trust seems a vital part of the package if we are not to end up "wounded birds".
ReplyDeleteCommitment and faithfulness set us free to explore and enjoy this most powerful gift which God has given us. As you say, it is fire.
I'm with you in your campaign for allowing everyone to marry. For those in committed relationships, it should not only be permitted, but it should be encouraged.
Mimi,
ReplyDeleteI can't help but think that this "thought for the day" about it not being good for "(hu)man(kind) to live alone" is not connected to your previous day's post about your son's fight for custody of his children.
When you can - if you can - would you share what you can for those of us who have been holding a vigil of prayer?
Elizabeth, it could be. My son misses his children terribly. He's gone from a full house to an empty house, on the days when the children are not with him. He's just now starting to be able to be alone in his house for long periods of time.
ReplyDeleteMonday is our day in court. The custody evaluator has recommended joint custody. We'll find out the judge's decision, then, and I will let all you wonderful prayer warriors know the outcome.
Thank you, thank you! I feel the prayers. I feel the presence of God in the midst of this mess.
My love goes out to all of you.
I justfound my way here, Grandmere, and I must say you are a wise woman.
ReplyDeleteI agree that sex should be the ultimate physical expression of love between a committed couple. Some people view it as simply a physical need, like scratching an itch. I respect their different view but could never, never treat it that way in my own life.
Fortunately I have a beloved partner who sees it the same way.
How cruel some are to tell my GLBT brothers and sisters that they must be celibate, and alone for life, even if not called to it--that they must forgo love and companionship and all its expressions. Of all the anti-gay comments made by some religious types, this is agonizingly cruel.
On other topics: my partner and her ex. work very hard at joint custody and put the children's needs ahead of all else. while divorce is never easy for the kids or the parents, if there is sufficient good will and generosity all can come to a healing place. We have, and are fortunate to share now a meaningful friendship with partner's ex, a kind and decent man.
I hope that your son and his ex can find that place for the children. It is so so important that the kids are taken care of and not used as a weapon against one another. Good luck and best thoughts.
IT
IT, welcome. Thanks for your kind words.
ReplyDeleteRegarding divorce and children, I totally agree with all you've said. I'm afraid the mother of my grandchildren tends to use the children as a weapon. I pray that she'll move past that.
Mimi - My BIL is doing that in his house. It breaks my heart.
ReplyDeleteAnd they have the kids 50/50, but, he still puts them in the middle. Ugh.
Prayers ascending to you today.
Eileen, it ain't pretty, is it?
ReplyDelete