My Father's Day's Thoughts on Roman Catholic Priestly Celibacy Compared to God's Demand for Pastors to Be Married
Since today is Father's Day, I want to give my thoughts on priestly celibacy by the Roman Catholic institution in contrast to what God required for both the Old Testament priest and the New Testament pastor. Roman Catholics tend to appeal to the Old Testament whenever its convenient then they end up saying, "It's just Old Testament." when it comes to issues like death penalty.
The Old Testament priesthood didn't demand celibacy. Yes the priests wore miters and robes but that doesn't make the Roman Catholic priesthood biblical. The priests of Dagon wore miters and robes like the Levites but they were priests to a pagan god. Let's take a look at what the Bible requires for Biblical priesthood which I'm taking from the Good News Translation for Roman Catholics:
Leviticus 21:7 says, "A priest shall not marry a woman who has been a prostitute or a woman who is not a virgin or who is divorced; he is holy."
1 Timothy 3:1-7 says, "This is a true saying: If a man is eager to be a church leader, he desires an excellent work. A church leader must be without fault; he must have only one wife, be sober, self-controlled, and orderly; he must welcome strangers in his home; he must be able to teach; he must not be a drunkard or a violent man, but gentle and peaceful; he must not love money; he must be able to manage his own family well and make his children obey him with all respect. For if a man does not know how to manage his own family, how can he take care of the church of God? He must be mature in the faith, so that he will not swell up with pride and be condemned, as the Devil was. He should be a man who is respected by the people outside the church, so that he will not be disgraced and fall into the Devil's trap."
If you take a look at the requirements of the priests, they were not only to be Levites but they were also required to be married to a virgin. It says a priest shall marry not may marry. Priests were required to be married no questions asked. If God says it you ought to believe it. But the problem of Roman Catholics is that they have too many petty objections to Bible alone. Even one apologist I encountered foolishly said that adhering to Bible alone means condoning to stuff like the slave trade. He hasn't really read the Bible properly to see that slaves were required to be treated well. The whole argument that Scriptures aren't sufficient has all been made to keep their own tradition (Mark 7:8-9). Strangely, I know another Catholic apologist who quoted those verses against me to justify what the Bible doesn't justify.
The New Testament also writes this that any church leader must have only one wife as one of the requirements. Celibacy doesn't make anyone the husband of one wife but no wife. Before they tell me that a Roman Catholic priest isn't a church leader I'd tell them right ahead they're contradicting themselves. The reason is because a Roman Catholic priest is a church leader. Doesn't the Pope and the priests act as spiritual leaders to Roman Catholics like how pastors serve as spiritual leaders for Christians? It also says that the church leader must also manage his own family well and make his children obey him with respect. They may say they're the children of the Roman Catholic priest but what about the verse that says that a church leader must have only only one wife? If they say the church is the wife then that's really stupidity. The Church is the Bride of Christ and not the wife of a church leader!
Going back to the King James, 1 Timothy 3:1-7 says:
This is a true saying, If a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work. A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach; not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous; one that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity; (for if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?) Not a novice, lest being lifted up with pride he fall into the condemnation of the devil. Moreover he must have a good report of them which are without; lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the Devil.
In short, the church leader is required to a family and manage it well. If a church leader can't even manage his own wife and children how can he take care of the church? I really want to throw this question on whether or not Roman Catholic priests are even fit to give marriage counseling when they have no experience in rearing children with a wife. They're celibates called to a life of celibacy all because someone misquotes 1 Corinthians 7:32-34 and may have ignored verse 35. Celibacy itself isn't evil and any lay person can take it if they want to. But the pastor is called to be a husband of one wife and an example to the pulpit. He has more credibility to counsel people for marriage and during marriage because he's got experience.
On the other hand, what experience does the Roman Catholic have? Some Roman Catholics may say, "Well Peter was married but celibacy was later added." Excuse me Roman Catholic apologist but that's one of the dumbest things I've heard aside from Peter leaving his wife. If it were so, why would Paul write to Timothy saying that the church leader or overseer must be the husband of one wife and have a family ran by integrity? The arguments of Catholic.com and other Catholic websites are really plain out of context and even when it's written in simple English, they still can't understand it. For Peter to even leave his wife would make him unqualified to be a church leader. 1 Timothy 5:8 says that if one doesn't provide for one's household, they have denied the faith and have become worse than an infidel. Plus, for Peter to divorce his wife to become the first Pope also implies he doesn't keep God's Word. It's already established that what God has put together, let no man separate it (Matthew 19:6, Mark 10:9).
What's even dumber is that why are Roman Catholics called "father" by misquoting 1 Corinthians 4:15. True Paul calls them as his "children" but this is because he's the father figure. He claimed to be a father to them but not towards all Christians. It's very different from the Roman Catholic priests. The priests aren't even allowed to get married and it's stupid that they have to be called "father". I can't really trace back the origins of calling all priests as "father" though I want to speculate it's a later heresy that developed. Not all pagan priesthoods were celibate either. If there was really no command not to call anyone father in the spiritual sense as a title, the Evangelical pastors deserve to be called "father" because they are required to be family men of integrity and honor. But Jesus already warned ahead not to call anyone father in the spiritual sense (Matthew 23:9 which also exists in the Good News Translation).
Besides, priestly celibacy is not even Biblical. 1 Timothy 4:13 says:
"The Spirit says clearly that some people will abandon the faith in later times; they will obey lying spirits and follow the teachings of demons.Such teachings are spread by deceitful liars, whose consciences are dead, as if burnt with a hot iron. Such people teach that it is wrong to marry and to eat certain foods. But God created those foods to be eaten, after a prayer of thanks, by those who are believers and have come to know the truth." (Good News Translation)
There were already movements that taught it's wrong to marry for certain people. The Roman Catholic institution simply perpetuated pagan doctrines and Old Testament practices based on their choices. One instance is that they simply chose miters and robes but left out the rest of the Old Testament attire. Then years later, the Roman Catholic clergy was required to have celibacy like other pagan priesthoods from some pagan sects. Then they ended up condemning people to mandatory fasting even if Colossians 2:16 tells people not to let anyone judge in eat or drink for religious reasons. Judging anyone in eat or drink for health reasons is but practical but not for religious reasons. The doctor has the right to tell you like don't eat meat during a feast because of your high blood condition because it's a dietary prescription. A pastor has the right to tell anyone who has high blood pressure to skip eating fatty foods. But when it comes to religious reasons that's another story. The idea of enforcing priestly celibacy is a doctrine of demons. Quote 1 Corinthians 7:32-34 all they want but their doctrine of demanding priests for celibacy is a doctrine of demons.
Then again, some of them "deserve" to be called "father" not out of respect but out of spite. A lot of reports based on Roman Catholic history has priests siring illegitimate children. What's even not surprising is that there were Popes who illegitimately sired Popes. It's very different from high priests who sired high priests. Aaron sired sons by his wife. Eleazer sired sons by his wife. The priesthood of Aaron required the priests to be married and sired priests. It's very different if a priest illegitimately sired a priest out of either fornication or adultery. When God required marriage for the priests of the Old Testament, it was to create a legitimate lineage of priests for the Old Testament priesthood. Pastors siring pastors by their wives is biblically correct. Priests siring priests by women who are not their wives is not biblically correct. A lot of Roman Catholic priests do deserve to be called father because they're siring illegitimate children. Some of them can be called "mother" because many of them are homosexuals.
Then again, some of them "deserve" to be called "father" not out of respect but out of spite. A lot of reports based on Roman Catholic history has priests siring illegitimate children. What's even not surprising is that there were Popes who illegitimately sired Popes. It's very different from high priests who sired high priests. Aaron sired sons by his wife. Eleazer sired sons by his wife. The priesthood of Aaron required the priests to be married and sired priests. It's very different if a priest illegitimately sired a priest out of either fornication or adultery. When God required marriage for the priests of the Old Testament, it was to create a legitimate lineage of priests for the Old Testament priesthood. Pastors siring pastors by their wives is biblically correct. Priests siring priests by women who are not their wives is not biblically correct. A lot of Roman Catholic priests do deserve to be called father because they're siring illegitimate children. Some of them can be called "mother" because many of them are homosexuals.
Besides, Jeremiah 3:15 promised, "And I will give you pastors according to Mine heart, which shall feed you with knowledge and understanding." God condemned the corrupt pastors six times in Jeremiah but promises to give pastors according to His heart. Although these pastors may not be perfect but pastors according to God's own heart means they don't live a life of sin even if they aren't perfect. What's ironic is that most of the uncovered scandals involve a lot of the Roman Catholic clergy. Still, many Roman Catholics refuse to believe them saying it's just the Devil's penmanship over it even when evidence says otherwise.