Jump to content
The World News Media

El celibato, un requisito que se debate en las religiones


Guest Nicole

Recommended Posts

  • Guest

El debate de si se debería mantener o no el celibato para los sacerdotes de la Iglesia Católica ha ido más allá del marco de la fe. Se ha trasladado a la esfera social porque, en los últimos años, los casos de pederastia que han salido a la luz han hecho que se relacione a la abstinencia que deben guardar los religiosos con los abusos sexuales.

El tema se ha puesto bajo el foco mundial debido a las controversias generadas por las denuncias directas a curas católicos. La situación más reciente fue la de Theodore McCarrick, arzobispo de Washington, que a sus 88 años dimitió de su cargo porque fue acusado de abuso sexual a un adolescente.

Sucedió a finales de julio y en medio de la tormenta mediática, el Papa Francisco ha dicho en varias ocasiones que eliminar el celibato no es la solución a los problemas. En el panorama mundial, esta semana, la Iglesia Católica en Australia solicitó que el celibato sea opcional, pero no ha recibido respuesta.

A mediados de septiembre, la máxima autoridad de la Iglesia Católica señaló en un conversatorio con medios que “el celibato no es un dogma de fe, es una regla de vida que yo aprecio mucho y creo que es un don para la Iglesia. No siendo un dogma de fe, siempre tenemos la puerta abierta para cambiarlo”.

el-celibato-un-requisito-que-se-debate-en-las-religiones-imagen-1-_20180929075729-682x512.jpg

Para la Iglesia Católica, el celibato es considerado un nivel superior al matrimonio. Uno de los referentes de lo que se piensa de la práctica en la actualidad es la declaración que hizo el Papa Pío IV,  durante el Concilio de Trento en noviembre de 1563, sobre el matrimonio.

Manifestó: “Si alguno dijere que el estado matrimonial es preferible al estado de virginidad o celibato, y que no es mejor y más feliz permanecer en virginidad o celibato que unirse en matrimonio [cf. Mateo 19, 11; 1 Cor. 7, 25]: sea anatema”.    

De forma legal, los concilios de Letrán en 1123 y en 1139 declararon el celibato en la Iglesia Católica. Después de su preparación en los seminarios, los futuros sacerdotes hacen votos y renuncias. Uno de ellos el celibato.

EL DATO
Originalmente, los primeros sacerdotes católicos no necesitaban ser célibes.Pero no todas las ramas en las que se dividió el cristianismo siguieron con esa norma. En la iglesia evangélica, la luterana y la ortodoxa el celibato no es un requisito. Además, se considera que los pastores que están casados pueden impartir consejería de pareja y familia.

Los rabinos judíos no siguen esa práctica a pesar de que su religión es el punto de partida del catolicismo. 

Quienes sí conservaron el respeto del celibato son los Testigos de Jehová. A pesar de que su razonamiento parte desde la Biblia, consideran ejemplos como el de Jesús, que según lo que se sostiene, nunca se casó.

En el artículo ‘¿Es obligatorio el celibato para los ministros cristianos?’, publicado en la página oficial de los Testigos de Jehová, se lee que Jesús dijo acerca de quienes permanecían solteros como él, “por causa del reino de los cielos”. También, el apóstol Pablo habló de los cristianos que, siguiendo su ejemplo, escogían la soltería “por causa de las buenas nuevas”.     

El celibato tampoco es obligatorio para quienes presiden las mezquitas. Ellos tienen la libertad de casarse como todo hombre musulmán. Sus esposas incluso reciben mayores consideraciones por su posición. (PCV)

Leer más: https://www.lahora.com.ec/quito/noticia/1102189847/el-celibato-un-requisito-que-se-debate-en-las-religiones

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Views 311
  • Replies 0
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Popular Days

Posted Images





  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Popular Contributors

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • I have considered all of their arguments. Some even apply VAT 4956 to their scenarios, which is acceptable. Anyone can use secular evidence if they genuinely seek understanding. Nonetheless, whether drawing from scripture or secular history, 607 is a plausible timeframe to believe in. People often misuse words like "destruction", "devastation", and "desolation" in an inconsistent manner, similar to words like "besiege", "destroy", and "sack". When these terms are misapplied to man-made events, they lose their true meaning. This is why with past historians, the have labeled it as follows: First Capture of Jerusalem 606 BC Second Capture of Jerusalem 598 BC Third Capture of Jerusalem 587 BC Without taking into account anything else.  Regarding the second account, if we solely rely on secular chronology, the ancient scribes made military adaptations to align with the events recorded in the Babylonian Chronicles. However, the question arises: Can we consider this adaptation as accurate?  Scribes sought to include military components in their stories rather than focusing solely on biblical aspects. Similarly, astronomers, who were also scholars, made their observations at the king's request to divine omens, rather than to understand the plight of the Jewish people. Regarding the third capture, we can only speculate because there are no definitive tablets like the Babylonian chronicles that state 598. It is possible that before the great tribulation, Satan will have influenced someone to forge more Babylonian chronicles in order to discredit the truth and present false evidence from the British Museum, claiming that the secular view was right all along. This could include documents supposedly translated after being found in 1935, while others were found in the 1800s. The Jewish antiquities authorities have acknowledged the discovery of forged items, while the British Museum has not made similar acknowledgments. It is evident that the British Museum has been compelled to confess to having looted or stolen artifacts which they are unwilling to return. Consequently, I find it difficult to place my trust in the hands of those who engage in such activities. One of the most notable instances of deception concerning Jewish antiquities was the widely known case of the ossuary belonging to James, the brother of Jesus. I was astonished by the judge's inexplicable justification for acquittal, as it was evident that his primary concern was preserving the reputation of the Jewish nation, rather than unearthing the truth behind the fraudulent artifact. The judge before even acknowledged it. "In his decision, the judge was careful to say his acquittal of Golan did not mean the artifacts were necessarily genuine, only that the prosecution had failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Golan had faked them." The burden of proof is essential. This individual not only forged the "Jehoash Tablet," but also cannot be retried for his deceit. Why are they so insistent on its authenticity? To support their narrative about the first temple of Jerusalem. Anything to appease the public, and deceive God. But then again, after the Exodus, when did they truly please God? So, when it comes to secular history, it's like a game of cat and mouse.  
    • I'm not bothered by being singled out, as you seem to be accustomed to defending and protecting yourselves, but it's a good idea to keep your dog on a leash. Speaking of which, in a different thread, TTH mentioned that it would be great if everyone here shared their life stories. As both of you are the librarians here, I kindly ask you to minimize any signs of intimidation or insincerity. It is you people who need to be "banned" here. However, it is quite evident that you hold a negative influence, which God recognizes, therefore you are banned from your own conscience in His eyes.
    • One issue with historian Flavius Josephus is that he suggests that the Royal Captain of the (Guard) can also be regarded as General Nebuzaradan. A confusion arises from Josephus' account of the captives mentioned in Jeremiah, as he claims that they were taken from Egypt instead of Babylon. Since Nebuchadnezzar was occupied in Rilah, he directed his generals to lay siege to Jerusalem. This could potentially account for the numerous dispatches that Nebuchadnezzar would have sent to the west, but the considerable distance to Borsippa still poses a challenge. As a result, the Babylonians managed to gain control of regions such as Aram (Syria), Ammon, and Moab. The only territories that remained were the coastal cities, where the Egyptians held sway. King Josiah decided to form an alliance with Babylon instead of being under Egyptian rule. So, that part of the territory was covered until King Josiah was defeated.  It's interesting how they started back then in 4129, but still end up with the same conclusion with Zedekiah's Defeat 3522 607 B.C. 3419 607 B.C. even though their AM is different.  
    • In the era of the Bible Students within the Watchtower, there were numerous beginnings. It is essential to bear in mind that each congregation functioned autonomously, granting the Elders the freedom to assert their own assertions and interpretations. Most people embraced the principles that Pastor Russell was trying to convey. You could argue that what you are experiencing now, they also experienced back then. The key difference is that unity was interpreted differently. Back then it had value where today there is none. To address your inquiry, while I cannot recall the exact details, it is believed to have been either 4129 or 4126. Some groups, however, adopted Ussher's 4004. It is worth mentioning that they have now discarded it and revised it to either 3954 or 3958, although I personally find little interest in this matter. I believe I encountered this information in the book titled "The Time is at Hand," though it may also be referenced in their convention report. Regardless, this is part of their compelling study series 3. Please take a moment to review and confirm the date. I am currently focused on Riblah. The Bible Students who firmly believe that Israel is the prophetic sign of Armageddon have made noteworthy adjustments to their chronology. They have included significant dates such as 1947/8 and 1967/8, as well as more recent dates. Therefore, it should come as no surprise that, according to their calculations, 2024 holds immense importance. The ongoing tension of Iran targeting Israel directly from its own territory amplifies the gravity of the situation. If their trajectory continues, the subsequent captivating event will occur in 2029, rather than as previously speculated, in 2034 by some.
  • Members

    • Jw.Org1976

      Jw.Org1976 0

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Pudgy

      Pudgy 2,407

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Anna

      Anna 5,083

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
  • Recent Status Updates

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      65.4k
    • Total Posts
      159.3k
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      17,679
    • Most Online
      1,592

    Newest Member
    Techredirector
    Joined
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Service Confirmation Terms of Use Privacy Policy Guidelines We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.