if your girlfriends parents didn't give you their blessing to marry her

[DreadFish]

So you'd be happy taking your car to a mechanic who has never even had a driver's license?

I wouldn't take this as a good comparison. Besides, like BSM said, you can know how a car works without knowing how to drive it.

 

[Apex]

So you'd be happy taking your car to a mechanic who has never even had a driver's license?

As much as I agree with getting advice on marriage from a celibate person is not a very good idea, this is also a bad analogy. Aircraft mechanics are almost never pilots. But you trust them with your life every time you step on a plane.

 

[Drolefille]

So you'd be happy taking your car to a mechanic who has never even had a driver's license?

More like a really bad analogy. I gave an explanation of why any particular counselor's personal life isn't terribly relevant to their counseling ability as well as the fact that counseling is preferable to not having it and that whole cost factor of seeking clergy rather than $100/hr counseling.

Since when was clergy trained in relationships? :areyoucra From my experience, many of them have not had any training in those areas, so my statement still stands. I just feel like people who are actually trained in these things should be help, but that's just my opinion.

They're generally trained in counseling. Your experience is to what extent and in what faith? It isn't training to the extent of a secular counselor unless that was the degree the individual sought prior to ordination. Some are bad counselors as some secular counselors are bad. And some may simply not be skilled at that role but have skill at the others they fill. But their sex life isn't relevant any more than your sex therapist's sex life is. I am speaking of Catholic priests here. As well as the general principle that it doesn't actually matter - if the individual is a good counselor- what their sex life is or isn't. This is a principle upheld by counselor educators- the ones with PhDs.

 

[Nymphs]

What do you mean by trained? By whose standards? Clergy are educated in areas relevant to their duties which I would dare say includes counselling in common areas of concern. Your position on church social and moral teaching be what it may doesn't mean that it's not useful for those who hold some consideration for it.

Trained. By any standards. At all. have they been trained by professionals? Have they taken courses? Have they been certified? Anything other than the BS, they are a clergy, so they automatically have the right to counsel people on things.

I have the impression that your question "Are they qualified?" Is really just a cover for "Are they advising what I'd have them advise?"

You can assume all you want, but you are going to be wrong.

 

[Nymphs]

Your experience is to what extent and in what faith?

Personally. I was Mormon, been married 10 years. They receive no formal training at all. None. They often give advice that isn't helpful (from my experience, it was incredibly unhelpful for my marriage).Other experience, I've been with others when they've been counseled by their clergy (Catholic and Evangelical). I'm not really sure why that matters to you.

 

[Glaurung]

Because becoming a Catholic priest isn't something you can just sign up for. Usually, they are educated and trained professionals in what they do. The Church to its credit does have real standards, even though they may not be yours.

 

[Nymphs]

Because becoming a Catholic priest isn't something you can just sign up for. Usually, they are educated and trained professionals in what they do.

Usually? I'm curious what training they receive in relationships, psychology, marriage, etc.

The Church to its credit does have real standards, even though they may not be yours.

I'm not saying they don't, I'm just curious what they actually are -- no one seems to be able to provide that so far, so I have my doubts.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

As much as I agree with getting advice on marriage from a celibate person is not a very good idea, this is also a bad analogy. Aircraft mechanics are almost never pilots. But you trust them with your life every time you step on a plane.

And I'm not sure that aircraft mechanics are a good analogy with car mechanics. As a rough guess, an airplane is about an order of magnitude more complex than a car, and flying is about an order of magnitude more demanding than driving. It makes sense for the pilot to be a specialist in piloting and the mechanic to be a specialist in the workings of the plane's systems (and more often than not on a big plane, actually a specialist in some subset of the plane's systems).

Not to mention it would probably be cost-prohibitive for, say, a 737 mechanic to actually get and maintain all the licences and ratings he would need to fly a 737... if it was even logistically possible for him to do all that without being a professional pilot.

OTOH, getting and keeping a driver's licence is way easier, and knowing how a car feels and behaves to a driver is important to understand when diagnosing a car.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

More like a really bad analogy. I gave an explanation of why any particular counselor's personal life isn't terribly relevant to their counseling ability as well as the fact that counseling is preferable to not having it and that whole cost factor of seeking clergy rather than $100/hr counseling.

If you don't like that analogy, there's also the old saying "never trust a bald barber - he has no respect for your hair."

FWIW, I actually think that the priest's celibacy is probably going to be less of a factor for the quality of his counselling as two other factors:

- as you sorta alluded to, priests don't necessarily have training in counselling.
- when they do have training, it's often from a religious point of view. I've heard very bad stories about the quality of counselling from religiously-based counsellors (e.g. telling couples to "get right with God" or "pray on it" to solve their relationship issues).

 

[Drolefille]

Personally. I was Mormon, been married 10 years. They receive no formal training at all. None. They often give advice that isn't helpful (from my experience, it was incredibly unhelpful for my marriage).Other experience, I've been with others when they've been counseled by their clergy (Catholic and Evangelical). I'm not really sure why that matters to you.

To my knowledge Mormon clergy aren't celibate by mandate, is this inaccurate? I believe that only married men can be bishops? If Mormon clergy are poor counselors AND are married, doesn't that suggest that the issue isn't celibacy itself?

It matters because we were talking about celibate clergy, I mentioned specifically I was speaking about Catholic priests as they are the most well known of the celibate clergy and they also have a very structured training - including having a BA. It also matters because you were using your experience as a gauge without defining what that experience was.

If you don't like that analogy, there's also the old saying "never trust a bald barber - he has no respect for your hair."

FWIW, I actually think that the priest's celibacy is probably going to be less of a factor for the quality of his counselling as two other factors:

- as you sorta alluded to, priests don't necessarily have training in counselling.
- when they do have training, it's often from a religious point of view. I've heard very bad stories about the quality of counselling from religiously-based counsellors (e.g. telling couples to "get right with God" or "pray on it" to solve their relationship issues).

And so here's my point, really that there are excellent counselors amongst the clergy and there are crappy counselors and it makes a lot of sense if you're not religious at all that you'd never consider seeing a clergy member for counseling. However I'm challenging the strict point of "celibate = incapable." That would be like saying any counselor must have experience in everything they counsel for and that simply isn't considered true. So it appears we agree

Priests do get education on counseling - it does vary on the extent of the education as well as their ability/skills, but pastoral counseling is a thing and some have bachelor's or master's degrees in a related psychological field as well. You'll find good and bad. I would generally recommend someone see a licensed counselor over a clergy person but I acknowledge that ever present cost factor and the fact that for some religion is really important in their lives means that clerical counselors remain a thing.

Good priests will counsel what they can - many of us just need someone to listen now and then and provide that outside, non-judgmental support - and encourage them to go seek licensed and/or medical help when they can't. I've met those priests and know they exist. I also know there are some who fail mightily at this.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

It sounds like we're arguing past each other. I'm not arguing that celibate equals incapable; I'm arguing that having had a marriage or a marriage-like relationship can help one's understanding of rmarriages, so all else being equal, a non-celibate counsellors will be as good or better than a celibate one. In this context, celibacy is a detriment. The fact that some people do a decent job despite this detriment doesn't mean that that person with all his training and counselling experience wouldn't be better if he had relevant relationship experience of his own.

 

[Drolefille]

It sounds like we're arguing past each other. I'm not arguing that celibate equals incapable; I'm arguing that having had a marriage or a marriage-like relationship can help one's understanding of rmarriages, so all else being equal, a non-celibate counsellors will be as good or better than a celibate one. In this context, celibacy is a detriment. The fact that some people do a decent job despite this detriment doesn't mean that that person with all his training and counselling experience wouldn't be better if he had relevant relationship experience of his own.

No, I'll actually continue to disagree. First, not all currently celibate people have always been celibate. Secondly there is not a correlation that having the experiences personally makes you a better counselor on those matters. Else my field would be entirely different. In fact having personal experiences can get in the way of being impartial - if a client reminds me of my ex boyfriend and the crap he used to pull then I might be unfairly biased, if I have a traumatic experience in the past I may not handle someone else's trauma well - if not well managed.

The assumption that having the experiences makes one better at counseling someone - which isn't even the same thing as giving advice- is one of those "common sense" things that isn't borne out. Again otherwise the field would train counselors entirely differently.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

I don't think having a certain experience or not puts you in a better or worse position for giving advice. Personally, I'm usually the one people come to for advice and the one giving advice on various things, but especially sex and relationships. I'm "mostly" a virgin and that was true even when I was completely a virgin.

 

[Thief]

My daughter is getting married tomorrow.

No one bothered to ask my approval.

Life goes on.

 

[edwinic]

Lets put numbers into the equation.
What are the advises sought from the priests and bishops by those about to be married?
Spiritual?
Personal human relationship?
Sexual?
Family planning?
Child raising?

 

[Planets and the Sun]

It would be up for her to decide in that case, and the couple together as well. I don't see how you can "go ahead and marry her" if she decides she doesn't want to have to choose you over her family. Depending on the situation it could lead to her being estranged from her family, and not everyone can cope with that. I also think this goes both ways, if you were marrying a guy and his family disapproved for religious reasons he'd have to be the one making that call based on what consequences could come from that... of course, other people could cope just fine, or in other cases the family could just get used to it and accept it eventually.

I don't even understand the thing about asking a woman's family to marry her. Women are not possessions. I think it's a good idea, if both your partner and your family are important to you, to introduce them to each other... but that's just common sense and it's for people no matter their gender. It's not about asking a woman's family to make that sort of decision for her. I also think it's a good idea for people to listen to their families depending on what the subject is, sometimes when they're in love, it's easy to miss flaws the other person might have. For example, my family is very open-minded so I know they wouldn't object to me marrying anyone as long as it was a loving and respectful relationship on both sides. If they had any objections, it would be a good idea to listen to them since it would be because of the other person not treating me right (or vice-versa I suppose). But that's not the same as religious prejudice, however, in a case of religious prejudice, it can be tough for people to be put in a position where they have to choose sides like that.

 

[Nymphs]

To my knowledge Mormon clergy aren't celibate by mandate, is this inaccurate? I believe that only married men can be bishops? If Mormon clergy are poor counselors AND are married, doesn't that suggest that the issue isn't celibacy itself?

I've known unmarried men that are bishops, and I never said celibacy was the only issue, only that it is AN issue. Celibacy, poor training, etc. all lead the the point that clergy (in my mind) are not good advisors for relationships and marriage.

 

[Nymphs]

Lets put numbers into the equation.
What are the advises sought from the priests and bishops by those about to be married?
Spiritual?
Personal human relationship?
Sexual?
Family planning?
Child raising?

What kind of numbers are you looking for?

 

[Drolefille]

I've known unmarried men that are bishops, and I never said celibacy was the only issue, only that it is AN issue. Celibacy, poor training, etc. all lead the the point that clergy (in my mind) are not good advisors for relationships and marriage.

And you don't have to seek them out, it wouldn't make sense for you to. Just know that your belief about celibacy is just a belief and not backed up in facts.

Also, wikipedia is apparently wrong about only married men being bishops. Dunno if any LDS members can comment on that or not.

 

[edwinic]

What kind of numbers are you looking for?

:thud: