Why is sexual hypocrisy so rampant in the religious world? Is it possible that the requirement of celibacy has anything to do with it?

[laurieluvsit]

I mean it would be one thing if it was just an isolated incident here and there but the number of scandals that we know about is off the charts and I can only imagine the number there really are, as statistically only a small percentage are ever reported. And not just church members but church leadership is waist deep in it as well.

Here are just a few internet articles and/or headlines...

"Almost 1,700 priests and clergy accused of sex abuse" ~NBC News
"Church Sex Abuse Scandals Around the World" ~Time
"A Church-commissioned report in 2004 said more than 4,000 US Roman Catholic priests had faced sexual abuse allegations in the last 50 years, in cases involving more than 10,000 children - mostly boys" ~BBC News
"10 Sex Scandals That Rocked The Christian Church" ~Essense
"... newspapers reported that hundreds of Southern Baptist clergy and staff had been accused of sexual misconduct over the past 20 years" ~Associate Press

Many churches require members who are not married to remain virgin and some church leaders to not even get married, but doesn't that make it even more tempting? I mean isn't there more temptation to be doing something that you are not suppose to do?

What I find really bizarre is the teaching that it is not only a sin to masturbate but just to even THINK ABOUT anything sexual is a damnable sin. Why does that sound crazy to me? Am I the only one that thinks this way?

Wouldn't more sexual freedom and flexibility prevent many of the dark hidden sins?

Can't I be a sexual being too?

Wouldn't it be better to loosen up and let the members and even the leaders to have an active sex life so they don't have to sneak around and even have salacious affairs with other married members and leaders?

Am I missing something?

Forgive my sexual desires Father...(I mean, you're kidding right?)

[NamerOfStars]

Yes, you are missing something: historical context. It wasn't until the Council of Trent that Catholic clergy weren't allowed to marry (though it was often discouraged before), and that was in the mid-sixteenth century. For three-quarters of the Church's history, it wasn't a problem; then suddenly it was.

This is going to be an unpopular opinion, and probably sound VERY strange coming from a Catholic, but Christianity got screwed up the moment it ceased being a Jewish religion and became a Roman one. There are a LOT of parallels between Christianity and Buddhism; you take the long-standing, traditional faith of an area (Judaism and Hinduism, respectively), which has, over time, calcified (in the eyes of many) into a rigid, hierarchical system requiring allegiance to a set of rules enforced by a select cultural elite, with little to no bearing on how the everyday people live their lives, and then along comes a reformer who suggests a clean break with the traditional power structure, preaching a message of simplicity and goodwill, open to all- the old lines of blood and culture don't matter anymore; all are equal before the gods.

You can see this in Christianity when you look at the other Orthodox branches: the Eastern (Greeks and Russians) and the Western (Catholics, but don't tell the Greeks; they get REAL snippy about it, despite them being technically further from the practices of the Early Church, which was basically a Jewish apocalypse cult) are pretty much intertwined with Rome (or Byzantium), but the Coptic Christians don't have these problems, and the Maronites don't either (until they started moving more towards Roman ways of doing things, at least). The Thomasines aren't usually classed as Orthodox, but they should be, and they're clean, and even the Irish were good on this front- up until the English conquest and genocide and their own mass conversion pushed the people away from traditional Celtic Christianity (Palladius tried the Romanized form and failed horribly; Patrick Celtified it, and it went down like gangbusters) into outright Jansenism. [A side note on that: in Catholicism, the Pope is only infallible when making an "ex cathedra proclamation", which does not actually mean "when he's in a certain chair"; the Pope does not have magic furniture (to my knowledge). The debate over what, exactly, it DOES mean is still ongoing (yay politics, I guess), but there are seven proclamations generally considered to qualify: two are about Jesus (big surprise), two are about Mary (big surprise), one is about the blessed dead being in Heaven now (as opposed to waiting until the end of the world, like everyone else), and TWO are condemning the Jansenists. And as religiously tolerant and understanding as I try to be, I can't disagree with those condemnations.]

[NamerOfStars]

When you look at the other Churches' treatments of, and attitudes toward, sin, you begin to see where Romanization caused problems (the idea of religion controlling sexuality is not unique to Christianity, and did not originate with it, but in the Western world today, it's the primary cause, and its reach is still felt among the non-supernaturally religious, too, so that's where I'll be working from): in early Roman Christianity, penance was PUBLIC. You'd spend a year appearing outside the church in sackcloth and ashes, making your transgression known. It was also a one-time deal; a second murder or theft, and you were kicked out. The Irish were smarter. Confessions were between you and your priest, and penances were private, and offered as needed; the idea that perfection would be required of fallible humans would've been rejected as lunacy. The Ethiopians (and to a lesser extent, the Egyptians) had similar practices; the farther you got (culturally) from Rome, the safer you were. Heck, look at the Bible itself: when Jesus said "When you look at a woman and feel lust, you've already committed adultery with her in your heart", did He mean that sexual feelings were inherently sinful, and you should repent of them? Or did He mean that sin was an inherent aspect of the human experience, and that THAT is why we should seek to transcend it?

[KlinkyCoder]

Because I was raised Catholic too, that was an interesting opinion.

[KlinkyCoder]

@NamerOfStars What do you think about Jesus saying that there are no marriages (=sex) in Heaven?

[NamerOfStars]

@KlinkyCoder Sex (and by extension, marriage) is an outgrowth of the conditions under which we evolved; it stands to reason there'd be no need for it as a different kind of life form.

[RealMarek]

In the case of the Catholic Church, there was a decision in many seminaries back in the 1960s to psychoanalyze candidates and screen out the ones who claimed to have normal sexuality on the basis that they were repressed. Consequently, the church ended up with many priests who struggled with sexual addictions and issues, or who were homosexuals trying to avoid coming to terms with their sexuality. Also, many new priests in the 70s expected that priests would be allowed to marry not long after Vatican II, but instead the chastity requirement remained. These factors led to problems when that generation of priests were put into contact with parishioners.

[Daniela1982]

First of all the Catholic church is considered a cult by main stream churches because of their theology. Also not every pastor or priest are actual Bible believing Christians and are in it just for the money. God knows who they are and they will be judged for their misleading the flock.

Matthew 7:21-23
21 "Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of My Father in heaven. 22 Many will say to Me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?’ 23 Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you workers of lawlessness!’…

[Ericalovescats]

It won't stop sexual abuse because if you are horny and a normal person they typically have affairs with other consenting adults.

I do think that the Bible doesn't outright forbid masturbation it forbids lusting after married people but not other people who aren't married.

Plus a lot of people think that arousal and lust are the same thing... which they are not.

[Lliam]

I don't have any particular opinions aside from thinking that vows of celibacy are perverse. Only a bunch of misogynistic Roman aristocrats would come up with that nonsense.
I don't know if enforced celibacy leads to overwhelming desires. But if it does, why would priests go after little boys and not women? Or is there something about the priesthood that is attractive to pedophiles? Is it the prospect of being around all those altar boys?
Also, Catholic Bishops, Cardinals and the Vatican seem to be into some pretty perverse shit.

Then there are ministers in various other denominations. Henry Kissinger once said that power is the greatest aphrodisiac. And some ministers accumulate great, wealth, power, prestige and trust. So it makes sense that such avaricious con men would take advantage of their positions to prey on the weak and gullible.

All that being said, I'm sure that a minority of religious leaders are hypocritical sociopaths. The majority are pious and sincere in their beliefs.

I have to say that the photos and memes you posted were hilarious. And that little nun in the stockings, kneeling like a supplicant, gave me impure thoughts. 😯🙄 We're probably both going to go to Hell for that. 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

[IMuser]

Majority of religion assume natural material desires (such as pleasure, violence etc ) as evil, not natural because it's easy to convince the masses (I sincerely believe that religion should never be preached by humans, it should be studied by oneself).

What some religions promote is regulation (having sex with your wife and keeping her and yourself sexually satisfied), indulging in other pleasures in amounts which does not hamper your duties. The key word is regulation.

But it's easy to say "whatever desire you feel except to serve the god is evil, kill this demon in your mind" rather than accepting and regulating them.

Makes sense?

[KlinkyCoder]

This is one of the reasons why Islam is rising as a popular religion.

[IMuser]

@KlinkyCoder Exactly what is the cause of rising of Islam?

[KlinkyCoder]

@imuser Islam happens to be one of the few faiths that don't really assume natural material desires are inherently evil, and in fact in the Islamic paradise, it's like a luxurious party.

[IMuser]

So, it's like hedonism?

[FunkyMonkee]

Explain sexual hypocrisy.
And, if sex is such a terrible thing to holy rollers, why did their god create it?

[Grond21]

It's a tough topic you brought up. But I appreciate your inquiring attitude.

So if you want to address this right you have to look at the full picture. And a couple things can be true at the same time. Number one, sexual abuse is always wrong. No matter who does it, under any circumstances. And it should always be called out as wrong. Second, it is very hypocritical when someone goes against their professed beliefs. Especially a leader.
But we have to take a broader look at this. And even though it's awful that religious leaders will sexually abused others, sometimes to the point of having entire sex rings and abuse cabals, it isn't unique to them. In the Catholic Church, which usually gets the focus of the headlines, the numbers are somewhere in the 5% to 6% range. In Protestant denominations, it's slightly higher at just around 6%. What's crazy though, is that in school teachers it's even higher than that. At close to 7%. And to me it is just as awful to have a priest or a minister abuse a child as it is a school teacher. And when you look at other demographics of leaders the ranges are similar, with some being significantly higher.
So we can't put the blame on their vow of celibacy. That avenue has been studied and the numbers just don't add up. (Additionally, the fact that there are a great many of abuses that go unreported is also universal.) Instead it seems to be a pervasive problem, that those to whom we entrust our children have a small percentage of them that will abuse that trust. It's not about being religious, it's not about being celibate, it's not even about being in a position of authority over others. It's just unfortunately a twisted part of the human condition that we all are hypocrites in some way, and a percentage of us are hypocrites in a really bad way. And this is universally true.
So no, removing the vow of celibacy doesn't have any material impact on the abuse rate. Those who are celibate abuse and those who are not abuse. If you're looking for the source of the problem, unfortunately it's human weakness.

[Grond21]

Also, I forgot to mention, I've never heard that it's a sexual sin to even think about sex. That's crazy! In my church sex is seen as beautiful, holy, and amazing.

[KlinkyCoder]

Often sex itself is framed as "a very holy, spiritual thing to be taken in a very serious manner" as if God originally created sexuality as good, but because of it's abuse from man, God regrets making this part of his creation. That sounds exceptionally cruel.

I wouldn't consider the view that sex should only belong in marriage to necessarily be an anti-sex in itself, but there is another school that does seem to believe at least implicitly that sexual nature and desire is corrupted and sinful in and of itself. I skimmed the other day on a site that mentioned Saint Augustine who influenced the idea that the only "non-sinful" sex even in marriage is just to procreate and not for pleasure.

It is also unfair that those who were involuntarily celibate in this life go to Heaven but are stripped of their sexual desire and sexuality as asexual eternal eunuchs while people who may still go to Heaven still got to have that kind of stuff down here. I was raised Roman Catholic and no longer very religious, if there is no sexuality in Heaven or the sexuality is only allowed for procreation, I hope that isn't true. Imagine dying a virgin and getting the equivalent of a sexual lobotomy.

[KlinkyCoder]

In other words, placing such an excessively high value on it that if it becomes abused by somebody, because of this that means the rule changed and that X thing is now bad or sinful.

[jahaims]

Religion is hypocrisy

[motownplayer2000]

Because the devil is attacking the church in a lot of ways. But sex is a huge weakness for humans.. for both men and women

[Juxtapose]

They believe in a magical sky daddy, they're not exactly very bright so you can't expect them to follow logical behavior.

[Honestguyopen]

The problem is not that we were created with sexual desires. The problem is that the devil promotes having sex outside of the arrangement of marriage that it was intended for. It's meant to be a special part of the union of a man and woman who vow before God to honor the arrangement of marriage. So you have a bit of truth in each part of the answers here. The problems relating to sex come when we try to operate contrary to the rules God has. made about it. In the world, sex is focused on on pleasing the other person, but pleasing yourself. Sex crimes especially are a selfish and greedy consequence of ignoring the simple principle to look out for the interests of others and not just your own.

[najekim]

It's all about religious leaders keeping control of people's lives.

[MrPickles13]

Sadly that is religion tbeg preach one thing and do another it's one of the reasons I dislike religion.

The Morales have an opportunity to be there but they just aren't as often. As they should be. And well it's a bit controversial but I don't think we need religion anymore.

[emperor90]

People should have the right to choose

[Tstrbrainer]

You can't just be a Catholic priest by being forced by someone. It is pretty difficult.

Also celibacy is only one of the three vows.
And they are voluntary. So obviously the people who go on to become priests are obviously willing to sacrifice a lot.

So what I'm saying is letting people have sex won't stop sexual crimes.

Are all the sex offenders in the planets were people who are depraved of sex?

[KlinkyCoder]

There is some anecdotal link between rape and the would-be rapist being sex-deprived. Obviously I don't condone rape or assault, I'm just saying I read about an anecdotal relationship. Like how hungry and poor people are more likely to steal food. And the stereotype of Christians and most particularly the Catholic church being generally anti-sex has some truth in there.

[Tstrbrainer]

I agree, but we don't really hold depravity as an excuse just like you agreed. Because we don't have any contradictory evidence that just feeding them with sex will not completely deter them from commiting a crime

[jimmy2]

The Devil at work