Uh, did you forget about Paul? In the “Bible”, Paul had a lot to say about marriage and celibacy, didn’t he? I know I read it!
This idea of celibacy didn’t originate w/ Gnosticism. The Apostle Paul said something about it being better to marry than to “burn”. However, he said it was better to remain unmarried to be free to serve God more easily. You can look that up in “New Testament”, it is definitely there! I can’t remember exact book, page, or chapter.
He remained celibate himself (for all that we know)most or all his life. Furthermore, he encouraged those who were virgins or widowed to be celibate too; and several did. They did it by their own choice!
A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;
3
Not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous;
4
One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity;
5
(For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?)
6
Not a novice, lest being lifted up with pride he fall into the condemnation of the devil.
7
Moreover he must have a good report of them which are without; lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil.
8
Likewise must the deacons be grave, not doubletongued, not given to much wine, not greedy of filthy lucre;
9
Holding the mystery of the faith in a pure conscience.
10
And let these also first be proved; then let them use the office of a deacon, being found blameless.
11
Even so must their wives be grave, not slanderers, sober, faithful in all things.
12
Let the deacons be the husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well.
13
For they that have used the office of a deacon well purchase to themselves a good degree, and great boldness in the faith which is in Christ Jesus.
I don,t know what Pauls meaning was about celibacy but it contradicts most of what he says otherwise so most likely it was for some reason that is not clear, they knew what he was talking about, but you can see from the above scriptures he was not talking to the clergy. ( The church leaders )
First,for clarity:celibacy is a discipline, not a teaching. There are several married priests and deacons in communion with Rome.
This is relevant to the Pauline quotes. Disciplines can change; “new occasions teach new duties, time makes ancient good uncouth.”
Second, it’s not YOUR argument, but the Gnostic argument amounts to: rectangles have four sides; squares have four sides, therefore rectangles are squares. Until the Meiji Restoration in Japan, zen monks were celibate, therefore until that time Catholic bishops were Zen Monks?
Third, the “celibacy makes a haven for homosexuals” argument runs into the fact that it is among several denominations which permit matrimony that homosexual activity and marriage are being legitimized.
YES, especially some years ago when candidates for ordination were slapped into seminaries as if into greenhouses when they were in their mid-teens, that culture could and did offer some pathological refuge to boys and men who were, um, conflicted about their sexuality.
But in the early 70’s there were many Episcopal priests and seminarians who were homosexual and who mingled in a culture that promoted matrimony.
It’s interesting: I knew personally two Episcopal bishops who studiously ignored serial heterosexual adulteries among their priests, and one seminary professor who preyed (or, at least, attempted to prey) on the female students. It was swept under the rug and he was later made a bishop.
I also know that NO practical advice, cautions, prudential wisdom were offered in seminary. When female parishioners started hitting on me at first I couldn’t figure out what was going on and then I was staggered! Fortunately I picked up that for some women a priest is kind of a challenge.
People are weird, gang, and none of us has too much of a clue.