Tom's Views

Dear [Mentat],

A revered hallmark of priesthood is sacrifice, and sacrifice by definition, implies hardship, a yoke if you will, that is towed by the priests throughout their careers. It wouldn’t really be a sacrifice if we wanted to do without, now would it?

People admire the priest or monk who appears celibate; because they recognize the chronic and profound physical and emotional discomfort he’s agreed to shoulder. By refusing to ever take lovers, and carrying the resulting ache, he demonstrates a deep belief in God, and desire to serve unswervingly, thus moving his followers to make sacrifices of their own (their money, time, and effort). His implicit message is, “Hey, if I can give up sex and love and being rich forever, you ought to be able to give up some of your lesser treasures for God.”

But don’t think for a minute that his longings have vanished. Swearing that he’ll never have sex by no means eliminates his sexual desires. They remain, unless becomes a eunuch. Even then, total cessation of sexual craze is not guaranteed. Such feelings just can’t be cast off by publicly denouncing them. Rather, they persist and confuse him, burdening him with temptation throughout his life. So it’s not easy to be a priest. And it’s this unfulfilled longing that makes his work all the more difficult. So I don’t see how we can revere such people for the high degree of fulfillment they’ve attained, because the very nature of their occupation involves lacking fulfillment.

To me, the priest acquires admiration through this ongoing struggle. He is revered, not because he’s managed to rid himself of love lust, but rather, because of his victories in his repeated battles against it. His resistance is tested every day, especially when those pretty female parishioners come to confess their own sins of the flesh.

You’ve heard that courage stems not from lack of fear, but instead, an ability to act in spite of fear. That is to say: One who acts courageously need not be fearless, and one who acts fearlessly need not be courageous. In fact, while we might think that the two adjectives mean the same thing, they can in fact, be semantic opposites. The man who acts without fear is not a courageous man, and a courageous man cannot be a fearless one. An ignorant one perhaps. But not a courageous one. Action in and of itself, is not a sufficient condition for courage.

[Indeed,] fear is a necessary ingredient of courage. Acting in the presence of danger, when we aren’t aware of it, or when we’re too immature to appreciate the magnitude of the danger, demonstrates little valor. The true hero on the other hand, takes actions he knows to be dangerous. In light of the risk, he decides to press on, realizing that he’ll likely suffer some profound consequence. He knows full well all the noteworthy ramifications of that consequence. It is when he is in this enlightened state of mind, that his willingness to act, rightfully takes on a truly selfless, laudable meaning of renown, fully deserving of respect from all.

Like the courageous man who is not fear-free, neither is the virtuous, virgin priest free of longing. Just as courage cannot exist without fear, meaningful reverence cannot exist without temptation. In order for a priest to truly deserve our esteem, he must continually wage and win the battle against temptation. Many priests lose this battle, as has happened in the Catholic Church and PTL. And I suspect that many more have lost it besides.

Who exemplifies greater willingness to give himself entirely to the Lord? The eunuch or the intact man? Certainly not the eunuch! Let’s assume for a minute that castration definitely eliminates mating desires (though I’m not convinced of this. But let’s assume this is indeed true for the sake of this discussion). In that case, even though agreeing to be castrated would appear to be a profoundly selfless act in the eyes of the Lord, after it’s done the eunuch no longer has such desires, and so would not thereafter be plagued with carnal urges. It would be easier for him therefore, to be a wholly dedicated servant of God than a man with testes because once his privates heal, no more will he have distractions from them with which to contend. In theory, the eunuch could achieve maximal fulfillment as a priest, because he’s been relieved of his sexual longings – albeit brutally.

Also, most eunuchs have been indoctrinated with the ways of church leaders from very young ages, are intentionally shielded from other ways of thinking and feeling, and so are often agree to castration without ever really understanding what they’re giving up. In this way, maximal fulfillment would be possible, but only after what amounts to brainwashing and radical physical alterations. No, the true test of an admirable servant of the Lord doesn’t allow cult-like indoctrination or physical modifications. It’s the man with his body left whole, and his mind understanding of opposing views that exemplifies excellence in the priesthood. The eunuch makes one big sacrifice when castrated but then it’s essentially smooth sailing from there. But the whole man makes ongoing sacrifices.

With sacrifice so central a theme in priesthood that it is, unfulfilled desires characterize the priest, because sacrifice means to part with something important. That which is sacrificed therefore, is always missed, at least in the beginning.

But when sacrificing the gratification of the human urge for procreation, then I’d think that the feelings of missing never really stop in most anyone. There would be the unfulfilled fantasies, the unrealized dreams, and the wonder about what love is like, to stain the otherwise clean slate of maximal fulfillment. Nope. It’s hard to be completely happy without fulfillment in human-to-human love.

Who’s to say that our sexual vigor declines with age due to reduced hormone production? Is it really the aging itself that makes us less interested in sex, or the experiences that accompany aging that do it? Consider that many folks crave sex less when they get older because they realized their fantasies while younger. The act of sex is not quite so wonderous once you’ve done it a couple hundred times.

But if you haven’t, the highly alluring appeal of sex remains I think. Consider that the lifelong priest can’t reduce his desires through sexual fulfillment, and yet keep his vow of celibacy. So, his unfulfilled desires rage on.

In fact, the very presence of sinful longings could spur him to direct even more of his energies to the church. I put it to you therefore that whatever greatness he accomplishes might well be because of his unfulfilled desires and his interest in avoiding them [and not in spite of them]. In order to keep himself honest, he takes on thought-intensive projects like spreading God’s message as Jesus did.

So while you might site the great accomplishments of spiritual leaders as evidence of self-actualization without sexual gratification, I’d say, well, maybe. But maybe not. Probably not.

Tom Hesley

Related Posts

• Effects Of Unrequited Love Needs
• Find True Love For Lasting Happiness
• The Lovelorn, Antisocial?