Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"In the other [Buddhism], it doesn't quite work like that."

No it doesn't. Buddhists seem to deny any concept of sin or forgiveness. Bad conduct is attributed to ignorance that calls for enlightenment. So, no need to involve any third parties at all.

I must have seen hundreds of child acolytes at the temples we visited. Those kids didn’t just visit the temple for services or attend school there then go home ike Catholic children. They lived there for months or years and any pedophile monk would have had access to them. Does that mean that a celibate Buddhist monk could molest a child acolyte and feel his conscience was clear because he was simply ignorant?

No. He would generate some pretty awful karma that would have major ramifications in his next life.

Anonymous wrote:"In the other [Buddhism], it doesn't quite work like that."

No it doesn't. Buddhists seem to deny any concept of sin or forgiveness. Bad conduct is attributed to ignorance that calls for enlightenment. So, no need to involve any third parties at all.

I must have seen hundreds of child acolytes at the temples we visited. Those kids didn’t just visit the temple for services or attend school there then go home ike Catholic children. They lived there for months or years and any pedophile monk would have had access to them. Does that mean that a celibate Buddhist monk could molest a child acolyte and feel his conscience was clear because he was simply ignorant?

Anonymous wrote:Well in one religion, the sins are wiped clean by weekly confession. Bad behavior can also be legitimately blamed on Satin's power over the person. And hey, no one's perfect, that's why Jesus died for the sinners.

In the other, it doesn't quite work like that.

That’s not how confession works. My cousin is a priest. I asked him about this. If you go to a priest and say I raped a child, they won’t just tell you to say a few Hail Marys or fast for 30 days. Even for adultery, there’s a long process that includes the expectation that you aren’t going to do it again. But for crimes like rape and murder, the penitent would be advised to go to the police. And anyone claiming the devil made rape children would be expected to seek an exorcist.

"In the other [Buddhism], it doesn't quite work like that."

No it doesn't. Buddhists seem to deny any concept of sin or forgiveness. Bad conduct is attributed to ignorance that calls for enlightenment. So, no need to involve any third parties at all.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I appreciate the explanation of the differences between Buddhist monks and Catholic parish priests, but it seems to focus on access to children. Is the concern over celibacy based on the idea that celibacy will make a healthy person into a pedophile? That makes zero sense! Celibacy doesn’t make someone a child abuser.

Of course, not. But celibacy amongst the Catholic clergy creates a culture of secrecy where child abusers can thrive. One priest may be abusing children, another priest is having an affair with a woman (or a man) and they each look the other way because they don't want to be exposed.

But that assumes that the other priest thinks child molestation is no worse than two adults in consensual adultery. I seriously doubt that any non-pedophile feels the two are of the same weight.

But celibacy amongst the Catholic clergy creates a culture of secrecy where child abusers can thrive. One priest may be abusing children, another priest is having an affair with a woman (or a man) and they each look the other way because they don't want to be exposed.

And the abolition of celibacy would somehow eradicate this presumed "mutual assured destruction " environment? Because married clergy (business executives, teachers, neighbors, etc.) never have affairs and/or "cover" for each other?

Even in this supposed example, it would not be celibacy creating a "cover for each other" situation, but non-celibacy. Practicing celibates have nothing to cover for.

As for alleged sexual misconduct being confined to Catholic priests, as PP's have observed, we just learned of s huge problem at the Episcopal Cathedral, the Baptist's were in the news a while back, there have been problems with the Boy Scouts, and let's not forget the rabbi with the cameras in the mikva. Nor, as a PP pointed out, have the Buddhists been spared.

As for blaming sexual misconduct on the availability of "weekly" confession (only a tiny minority of very devoted people go weekly), or the Christian belief in forgiveness, the power of evil, or human imperfection (all of which beliefs other than sacramental confession are common throughout Christianity, not just in Catholicism), it is a fundamental component of confession that the penitent must demonstrate true sorrow and a firm purpose of amendment before sins can be forgiven. Human frailty and demonic influence are not "get out of jail free" cards in any version of Christianity. They can be viewed as mitigating culpability, but the sinner must turn sincerely back to God; mere "words" are not enough.

Anonymous wrote:I appreciate the explanation of the differences between Buddhist monks and Catholic parish priests, but it seems to focus on access to children. Is the concern over celibacy based on the idea that celibacy will make a healthy person into a pedophile? That makes zero sense! Celibacy doesn’t make someone a child abuser.

Of course, not. But celibacy amongst the Catholic clergy creates a culture of secrecy where child abusers can thrive. One priest may be abusing children, another priest is having an affair with a woman (or a man) and they each look the other way because they don't want to be exposed.

Well in one religion, the sins are wiped clean by weekly confession. Bad behavior can also be legitimately blamed on Satin's power over the person. And hey, no one's perfect, that's why Jesus died for the sinners.

In the other, it doesn't quite work like that.

I appreciate the explanation of the differences between Buddhist monks and Catholic parish priests, but it seems to focus on access to children. Is the concern over celibacy based on the idea that celibacy will make a healthy person into a pedophile? That makes zero sense! Celibacy doesn’t make someone a child abuser.

the rule seems just cruel and unnatural if it is forced and not embraced.
I can not imagine why you have to be depraved of having a life partner, of having offspring and how can you make such a decision at 18 years old, when you dont' even know who you are yet.

Again, no one is "forced" to become a priest. To the contrary, seminarians undergo years of training and study, including much soul searching directly concerning the commitment to celibacy.

No one is "deprived" of a life partner or offspring. They willingly choose to sacrifice those things as a means to holiness and to be more available to serve their people. Celibates are a "sign of contradiction," showing by their lives that there are eternal goods beyond those of the present life.

Finally, no one makes the decision at 18 to be ordained. Ordination requires a 4 year undergraduate degree, typically a year or two of pre-theology and spiritual training, and a 4 year graduate degree concentrated in theology. So 22-26 would be the minimum and most are older than that. There is significant focus in the seminary on human and emotional maturity.

The idea that it is "unnatural" for grown adults to choose a different life than the mainstream, after years of preparation, bespeaks a profound misunderstanding of the entire question.

First off, the role and responsibilities of Buddhist monks are comparable to Christian monks, not the Catholic clergy.

Generally speaking, Buddhist monks like Christian monks (NOT priests) enter the monastery to distance themselves from the secular world in order to lead a life of quiet contemplation. The overwhelming majority of Buddhist monks are not community figures or leaders in the way that Catholic priests are. There's much less interaction and subsequently, less access to the community.

The differences between monkhood vs priesthood (regardless of religion) make celibacy less problematic for monks. To begin, monkhood generally attracts a different type of personality from than priesthood. Someone who wants to be in a position of authority so that they could have access to children is not going to choose monkhood because monkhood, by definition, means withdrawing from society.

Also, as a pp pointed out, Buddhist monkhood is not always permanent. It is possible to join a monastic order temporarily and later return to your regular life. Moreover, there are actually sects that allow monks to marry (in Japan, Korea, and Tibet). So in some sects, you can be married and be a monk.

So it's not to say that celibacy doesn't cause any problems, because Buddhist monasteries do have scandals. (You can google this.) It's that the differences between Buddhist monkhood vs Catholic priesthood means that the problems are comparatively much much smaller in world of Buddhist monasticism.

Anonymous wrote:One difference is that, at least for some Buddhist traditions, you aren't required to be a monk your whole life. People will become monks for a short period of time to learn about meditation and Buddhism, but then it's expected they'll go back to their regular lives, where they can live like everyone else.

It's important to point out, though, that while sex is considered a monastic transgression in most Buddhist traditions, there are strains of Tibetan Buddhism that use sexual yoga to actually help people get closer to enlightenment.

I guess my point is that it's more complicated than in Catholicism.

I suspect that few critics of Catholic celibacy know that about Buddhism.

One difference is that, at least for some Buddhist traditions, you aren't required to be a monk your whole life. People will become monks for a short period of time to learn about meditation and Buddhism, but then it's expected they'll go back to their regular lives, where they can live like everyone else.

It's important to point out, though, that while sex is considered a monastic transgression in most Buddhist traditions, there are strains of Tibetan Buddhism that use sexual yoga to actually help people get closer to enlightenment.

I guess my point is that it's more complicated than in Catholicism.

Anonymous wrote:People seem really triggered by celibacy in Catholic orders, but never seem to bring it up about Buddhists? Are they unaware that there are Buddhist monks and nuns? Do they know that (with a few exceptions), Buddhist monks and nuns take a vow of celibacy that viewed necessary for enlightenment? Is there a sense that Buddhists have lower sex drives or more self-control? Or do those saying celibacy is unnatural just care only about Catholic priests?

I was wondering about this too but without knowing any facts I would guess that the reason behind this is that whatever and however the celibacy is being handled by the Buddhist monks is not a problem because we don't hear about any horrible things that result of their choices.
We also do not know how it is being handled. Perhaps the herbs and meditations have some effects to a degree?
I assume there must be a bunch of priests in Catholic Church who are doing just fine without being married, but it is the rest who struggle who cause people to feel sorry for them and the rule seems just cruel and unnatural if it is forced and not embraced.
I can not imagine why you have to be depraved of having a life partner, of having offspring and how can you make such a decision at 18 years old, when you dont' even know who you are yet. Then once you are deep into the career, it turns that it is too hard yet if you gave up you loose everything what you worked so hard. I don't think, I can not believe that God would impose any such a thing on a human being. It is just wrong. Unnatural and we see the effects of it. If it was a good thing none of us would have any reason to ponder it. I can assure you. It just does not work. If it works for the Buddhist monks, good for them. We all were told it is working for the Church too, until we learned otherwise.

People seem really triggered by celibacy in Catholic orders, but never seem to bring it up about Buddhists? Are they unaware that there are Buddhist monks and nuns? Do they know that (with a few exceptions), Buddhist monks and nuns take a vow of celibacy that viewed necessary for enlightenment? Is there a sense that Buddhists have lower sex drives or more self-control? Or do those saying celibacy is unnatural just care only about Catholic priests?