Posted on 01/28/2017 6:45:01 PM PST by CharlesOConnell
Samuel walked in Adonai's way, but his sons Joel and Abijah whom he appointed to the priesthood and to be judges, were corrupt and perverted justice. Priestly nepotism and corruption have been cited by members of other congregations as causes of dissention and disunity in countries with a married priesthood. The false claim that priestly celibacy is too difficult and causes loss of vocations will be used at the next Synod of Bishops as a wedge issue to break a discipline that has given great spiritual treasure to the Church. This will be on pretext of 'compassion', but it will result in great worsening of spiritual life and increasing separation from God. Like the attack on Matrimony and Holy Communion, it will not end with getting rid of the celibate priesthood, because the revolutionaries are not living according to their call to chastity. As they try in vain to change the Church to relieve their discomfort with the condemnation of their sinful lifestyle, they will not be satisfied until they destroy the Church, as impossible as this is. Their futile plans will only cause their own destruction, for Jesus himself promised that the gates of hell would not prevail against his Church. If not, then he died for nothing and we are still dying in our sins. But his death was the central event in history, giving us birth to eternal life.
What is this? A vanity or some link you forgot to include? Completely nonsensical.
Charles O’Connell is a pseudonym. Charles is my middle name. O’Connell was my father’s.
priestly celibacy is not a dogma, it’s a discipline that was adopted many centuries after the time of Christ. It can be modified without violence to any Christian doctrine.
An unmarried was not always the norm for the Catholic church, and is unscriptural at the very least.
The requirements for elder and deacon which Paul put forth in Timothy and Titus are for the men in those positions to be married.
1 Timothy 3:1-13 The saying is trustworthy: If anyone aspires to the office of overseer, he desires a noble task. Therefore an overseer must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, sober-minded, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, not a drunkard, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money. He must manage his own household well, with all dignity keeping his children submissive, for if someone does not know how to manage his own household, how will he care for God's church? He must not be a recent convert, or he may become puffed up with conceit and fall into the condemnation of the devil. Moreover, he must be well thought of by outsiders, so that he may not fall into disgrace, into a snare of the devil.
Deacons likewise must be dignified, not double-tongued, not addicted to much wine, not greedy for dishonest gain. They must hold the mystery of the faith with a clear conscience. And let them also be tested first; then let them serve as deacons if they prove themselves blameless. Their wives likewise must be dignified, not slanderers, but sober-minded, faithful in all things. Let deacons each be the husband of one wife, managing their children and their own households well. For those who serve well as deacons gain a good standing for themselves and also great confidence in the faith that is in Christ Jesus.
Titus 1:5-9 This is why I left you in Crete, so that you might put what remained into order, and appoint elders in every town as I directed you— if anyone is above reproach, the husband of one wife, and his children are believers and not open to the charge of debauchery or insubordination. For an overseer, as God's steward, must be above reproach. He must not be arrogant or quick-tempered or a drunkard or violent or greedy for gain, but hospitable, a lover of good, self-controlled, upright, holy, and disciplined. He must hold firm to the trustworthy word as taught, so that he may be able to give instruction in sound doctrine and also to rebuke those who contradict it.
Here are signs that Paul gives that indicate if someone has departed from the faith. Forbidding of marriage is a sign of a cult, of wolves in sheep's clothing.
1 Timothy 4:1-5 Now the Spirit expressly says that in later times some will depart from the faith by devoting themselves to deceitful spirits and teachings of demons, through the insincerity of liars whose consciences are seared, who forbid marriage and require abstinence from foods that God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth. For everything created by God is good, and nothing is to be rejected if it is received with thanksgiving, for it is made holy by the word of God and prayer.
The first Pope, Simon Peter, was married. Jesus healed his mother-in-law.
How ironic that Catholics should complain about *attacks on matrimony* and then attack it themselves by forbidding their priests to marry.
Instead of the priests being an example of how to be married and serve God, the Catholic church attacks marriage itself by treating marriage and sex as if it's wrong and dirty and beneath people who are supposedly truly spiritual.
As if someone can't enjoy sex and be spiritual at the same time.
To be deep into history is to cease to believe that because a priest or a monk or a nun is not married to a person of the opposite sex, that he or she is unmarried.
The catholic Church doesn’t forbid married priests; the Latin Rite doesn’t allow it. Most Eastern Rite Catholic churches have married priests - and they are loyal to Rome and the papacy.
The Catholic Church allows married priests in the Eastern Rites, but an issue often raised is who provides for their families? Other Apostles were married, but the fate of their families left behind as they met their martyrdom isn’t recorded.
Because some rites allow it, there is no one position by Rome, but a look at the early twentieth century upheavals supports the case for celibate priests. While many Catholic priests could meet martyrdom because wives and children couldn’t be used to coerce them, married clergy in other faiths were compromised by those relationships.
The church has been in favor of married priests considerably longer than enforced non married priests
Married priests with kids likely to be more rounded and conservative
And far fewer homosexuals
Just saying you guys
It’s a Trent thing and is it all that to serious Catholics and if so why
You missed my point that the Catholic Church allows marries priests - just not in the Latin Rite.
I agree they’d probably have less homosexuals (”disordered personalities”), and I believe the gay infiltration of the priesthood is a serious issue downplayed by the Church AND media (they’ve moved up higher and higher in the hierarchy).
I just can’t say a guy with a wife and kids can make the same commitment as a single unattached guy.
The Eastern Orthodox churches allow married clergy.
Interesting, and not widely known...married deacons in the Catholic Church are expected to be celibate.
It seems logical
Nazirite vows of celibacy are considered to be in violation of Torah.
You’re right that this is not widely known (and I believe deliberately suppressed); there is also no point to the “permanent deaconate” if men who become widowers just leave because they’d like to remarry. IMHO the permanent deaconate directly reduced the number of vocations to the priesthood because men felt they could have it all (families and “playing priest”).
They can make the same commitment, but with a married priesthood, the numbers of priests would very likely increase, easing the burden on those who are doing it.
God never saw any problem with married priests and did not demand it. The priests in the OT were married.
A celibate priesthood is MAN’S idea, not God’s.
BTW, a single man still has the responsibilities of running a home and paying his bills and cooling his meals and doing his laundry and cleaning his home all by himself, and being sick with no care, without the help or support of someone to share life with.
God basically expected martyrdom of 11 of the first 13 priests; that is the problem at its most basic. Enlarging the pool of candidates does nothing if they can’t commit to losing everything for the faith.
That statement is a nonsense
Celibacy is the renunciation of marriage implicitly or explicitly made,
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.