Dr. John
MacArthur delivered a 2002 sermon on the Roman Catholic priesthood, which later appeared on You Tube. It is theological at the beginning, historical
in the middle, and empathetic at the end.
It may sound judgmental, but please read it to the end. That was not what it was intended to be. Here is a summary of his words:
Let’s talk
about the issue of celibacy. Celibacy is
an obligatory law to be a priest. But a poll shows that 70-80% of Roman
Catholics believe that the priests should be allowed to be married. The Magisterium
(Catholic official doctrine) defends celibacy partly on Matthew 19:12 where
Jesus said ‘there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom
of heaven’s sake.’ The Apostle Paul, in I
Corinthians 7, also says in times of extreme distress, being single is better. Catholic thinking was, you don’t have to worry about the wife and
the family’s safety, so you can give your entire focus on the Lord, even in poverty. But I question all that. Paul also says in the same chapter that in
normal times it’s better to marry than to burn with passion. Actually, those verses make it very clear
that overall, marriage is preferable to singleness. Some tried to twist the
Scripture so as to make Peter into an unmarried man. In I Corinthians 9:5, where Paul says, “Do we
have no right to take along a believing wife, as do also the other apostles, the brothers of the Lord, and Cephas” (Note: that’s another name for Peter) He clearly had a wife. The Catholic Bible says, “…a believing
sister....” But the Greek word is “wife.” Twisting
Scripture to make it agree to doctrine. Thus, making celibacy mandatory is utterly
unbiblical. Here’s an interesting reference to celibacy in I Timothy 4: 1-5:
Now the Spirit expressly says that in latter
times some will depart from the faith, giving
heed to deceiving spirits and doctrines of demons…having
their own conscience seared with a hot iron, 3 forbidding to marry, and commanding to
abstain from foods which God created to be received with thanksgiving by those
who believe and know the truth. 4 For every creation of God is good,
and nothing is to be refused if it is received with thanksgiving; 5 for it is sanctified by the word of God and
prayer.
Paul is saying, those who forbid marriage (or
certain foods on Fridays) are advocating a doctrine of demons (with the exception of economic or political extremes, such as persecution). They are listening to deceitful spirits. I really believe that Satan has managed to
control this element of the Catholic system.
The Bible clearly says that marriage, like food, is to be sanctified,
and received with gratitude—because marriage comes from God.
Celibacy grew slowly in the Catholic world; it
started in the 2nd century.
It had a pagan history already in places like Asia and Buddhism. The 3rd century saw the theology
of Gnosticism becoming popular—they emphasized that ‘matter’ (like the body)
was evil. Its followers took the path of
scorning the things of the flesh. It was felt that attainment of the highest
levels of spirituality was only possible if the body’s needs or desires were
supplanted. Many took vows of poverty,
of chastity, of obedience, of stoic diets, even of silence. Many other groups felt that Mary remained
chaste, a virgin, so they followed her.
The truth is, she had a whole family with Joseph (Matthew 13:55-56, as any
version reads. Assuming Joseph had a
family before he met Mary has no Scriptural support.) Others followed Christ, who was celibate. But
forcing celibacy among bishops,
priests, and deacons happened first in Spain around 390 AD; Catholic supervisors
were simply told they would be deposed if they kept their wife and children. Nevertheless,
celibacy spread and completely dominated Catholicism in the West by the 5th
century. But east of Constantinople
(Istanbul today), the Orthodox churches never took to it and later split.
It was finally made canon in 1079. But widespread sexual sin followed. Quoting a
reliable historian:
This
mandate generated all kinds of immorality.
The abodes of priests were often dens of corruption. It was common to see priests frequenting
taverns, gambling, having orgies, and speaking blasphemy. Many priests kept mistresses; and convents
became houses of ill fame. In many
places the people were delighted at seeing a priest with a mistress because the
married women would be safe from him.
This celibacy requirement began under Pope
Gregory VII. If you ask, “Why did he do this?”
The answer is political. The
priest, if married, was immediately separated from his wife and his children—permanently--AND
it was required that all his property was confiscated. Priests, up to that time, were very
influential, very powerful people. They had wealth, passed it down through
their families, and it accumulated, giving families power and influence. The Pope determined that priests controlled
too much wealth, and the Church should take it.
Because if the Church was going to have more power than the State, if it
wanted to rule the world, it needed to take wealth and property away from the
people in power. (The number-one landowner on the planet today is the Church).
In 1123, they went further and declared all
existing marriages among priests invalid.
Women were cut loose with no means of support, and many of them died of
hunger. Some were suicides; some turned
into streetwalkers. But the Church accumulated massive wealth. The people,
largely illiterate and poor, enthusiastically supported this dictum. (Get back
at the rich priests!) They scorned, even attacked and mutilated the priests
when they refused to obey. The disobedient priests were run out of town and
exiled. If they wouldn’t give up all their property, the Church would exile
them and confiscate their property.
Their children were designated as illegitimate, and their wives were
often buried in unconsecrated earth.
So it was all about power, about avarice, about a
system that wanted to engulf the earth—a horrible story surrounding an
unbiblical, pagan doctrine. In an Oxford
Encyclopedia entry under the Reformation Age, Hans Hildebrand, editor, Oxford
University Press, 1996, wrote that the priests, without a wife now, often lived
with a long-term concubine, and received special dispensation from their
religious supervisor so as to have their children legitimated. But this, too,
changed in the late 12th century when concubinage was
prohibited. Some clergy responded to this
latest dictum by rioting. Enforcement of
this meant women from reputable families no longer entered into relationships
with priests, knowing that it could never be called a valid marriage. But the priests often could not withhold their
sexual desires, and defied the mandates by simply using discretion in their
sexual relations. Denied any release,
and usually unsaved, they still slid into gross corruption.
Keep one thing in mind: a vow of celibacy does not mean you are bound
to a promise of chastity. Canon law does
not require sexual chastity; it only prohibits marriage. You don’t break the law of celibacy by
engaging in sexual relationships. Because
of its ‘lesser’ importance, they decided that absolution for sexual relations
comes by pardon from a fellow priest.
That’s all you have to do to get it expunged! (Sorry, but God doesn’t so
easily absolve this unbiblical ‘law.’) If
a priest wanted to get married, on the other hand, absolution has to come only one
way—from the Pope. Why this inequality
of treatment? Because they care more
about a priest who marries, and the impact that will have on the power of the
system, than they do about a priest who commits sexual sin. Marriage is far worse for the system than
sexual sin, because it threatens the Church’s power and property.
In light of all this, how can the Church hold
that marriage is a sacrament, the way that they compromised it? Their most holy
people—priests and nuns—are denied this sacrament. The Council of Trent, which solidified Catholic
doctrines to counteract the Reformation, pronounced anathema (damnation) on all
who teach that the marriage state is preferable to celibacy. But Jesus even
said, ‘Not all men can bear that.’ Paul
said, ‘It is better to marry than to burn.’
In the eyes of the priesthood, considering they were still often taught
that the flesh is evil, they often perceived that sexual desires is inherently
unclean—so, they were (and probably are) filled with guilt. And unable to give good advice to families.
Lorraine Boettner, in a book on Catholicism,
writes:
Henry
VIII of England, in 1535, appointed commissioners to inspect all monasteries
and nunneries. So terrible were the
cruelties and corruptions uncovered, that a cry went up from the nation that
all such houses without exception to be destroyed.
True, Henry wanted to dismiss Catholic theology
so he could continue to divorce and remarry, but he couldn’t have gotten away
with destroying their housing without approval of the people. We conclude that priests were still actively
involved with sexual sin. By the way, having men who are trying to
suppress their minds, in monasteries with other pent-up men, and all day, every
day, listening to people in confessionals describing their own iniquities,
sexual or otherwise—is that a healthy environment? How can the priest think holy thoughts? My heart goes out to priests. Boettner’s book
further says, ‘The largest collection of books in the world on the subject of
sex is in the Vatican Library.’ (Who
checks them out?!) Seriously, better
that they could go to prison, when found guilty; at least they have a time
limit on their sentence, so they can get out and lead a normal life.
The Catholics still teach priests a divided
system, which is not in the Bible; the natural, or secular, and the spiritual. Only
the spiritual was pleasing to God. While the natural man is satisfied in the
day-to-day mundane, the ideal was the mystic, who disdained the day-to-day
issues. To him, the natural events were
viewed as a hindrance. For the priest
and the nun in monasteries or convents, withdrawal from everyone was the only
way to truly develop the spiritual. BUT in God’s eyes, there is no difference
between the sacred and the secular, in seeking spirituality. Scripture tells us that whatever you do,
whether to eat or drink, you do it all to the glory of God (I Corinthians
10:31). You don’t serve God better by
withdrawing from the world. Jesus even
prayed, ‘Father, I’m not asking that You take them out of the world, but to
protect them from the evil one (John 17).
The Catholic doctrine of celibacy, as we have seen, given our sinful
nature, had actually the opposite effect; it forfeited the reality of
developing the spiritual life. Forced
celibacy introduces hindrances that will diminish, even pervert, most peoples’
spirituality. Charles Hodge wrote the
truth about marriage in his Systematic
Theology:
It is
only in a married state that some of the purest, most disinterested, and most
elevated principles of our nature are called into exercise. All that concerns filial piety and parental
and especially maternal affection depends on marriage for its very existence. It is in the bosom of the family that there
is a constant call for acts of kindness, of self-denial, of forbearance, and of
love. The family therefore is the sphere
best adapted for the development of all the social virtues, and it may be
safely said that there is far more of moral excellence and of true religion to
be found in Christian households than in the desolate homes of priests or in
the gloomy cells of monks and nuns.
To introduce another element, latest surveys say
that 50% of new priests are homosexuals.
But these men are predators, tempting the pent-up priests already
there. The thing that’s so sad about the
priests is, he gave up all relationships, so he has no past to bring with him
and treasure it. His family name,
without a child, has no future, so he has no legacy, and no binding family
life. This is truly sad.
A Scripture often misapplied is in Luke 14:26,
where Jesus says:
If anyone comes to Me and does not hate his
father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters, yes, and his own life also, he cannot be My disciple.
This verse is often taught to mean that Jesus
told us to cut ourselves off from family.
It is instead a hyperbole, much like Matthew 19:24, where the likelihood
for a rich person to enter heaven is compared to a camel going through the eye
of a needle. It’s not impossible for the
rich to enter heaven, just difficult. Likewise here: Jesus is not saying to cut
off and hate wife, mother, etc. He is
saying that our love for Him must greatly exceed our love for our wife,
etc. To the point that if your wife or
your mom rejects Christ, you should still trust Him and endure persecution,
even if you’re abandoned by your family by so doing. But it does not teach to
cut priests off from family. Priests are broken, shattered, tragic,
disconnected people. They are victims of
a terrible system. It is a soul-destroying process.
On the elephant in the room, pedophilia: A recent
survey shows that the average male homosexual offender will abuse 150
boys. (The average heterosexual violator
will abuse 20 girls or women). Abusers
of children don’t quit, they can’t quit.
The Church should have taken lightning action to eliminate this—but
they’re spending most energies on hiding it and just moving these awful priests
around. Pedophilia is not where a priest
begins, it’s the end of a long, long, pornographic conduct trail. Pedophilia is
the caboose on the train. You don’t start your sin there—you end there. The
deviation, after awhile, still doesn’t satisfy anymore as at first; so, often, the
age of the child-victim has to get younger, so as to increase his excitement.
About the nuns:
There is a corrupt system to proselyte young women to become a nun. The confessional is the recruiting booth for
the convents. The best ‘prospects’ for nuns are women who are coming off of a
shattered relationship. The Church looks for a sensitive soul who comes often
to confession, often attends Mass. So
they prey on these women in their time of weakness, offering them that they can
be like the Virgin Mary, having a secondary virginity. Or they will emphasize
that the young woman could be married to Christ, and experience no betrayal of
trust. They have 60 days to give their
possessions to the Church. For her to renounce the family is harder than for
the men. She has to kill all maternal
instincts, which are God-given; she has to put to death the idea of being cared
for by a man, which is God-given. In the
end, the nun is one of the most remarkable products of the Catholic Church; she
is really a slave—she occupies hundreds of hospitals, or she teaches—either
way, is poorly-paid; likewise in parochial schools and orphanages; one who is
willing to offer her life (this would fill Communist leaders with jealousy). I’m
surprised Amnesty International doesn’t raid those places.
There is no way we can strike an alliance with
this system. We need to rescue these
people, both priests and nuns, and give them the real Gospel which does not
depend on works to get saved. Give them freedom and deliverance in Christ.
No comments:
Post a Comment