Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Call To Action: Dump Celibacy
Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel ^ | 11/8/03 | Tom Heinen

Posted on 11/08/2003 6:58:17 AM PST by ninenot

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 281-296 next last
To: ninenot
I would be thrilled to see priests allowed to marry. I wouldn't turn to my hairdresser for advice on my carburetor, why would I turn to a priest for advice in marriage? Not everything can be fixed spirtually and by quoting scripture. Sometimes common sense derived from experience is the best there is.

101 posted on 11/08/2003 12:50:37 PM PST by ShadowDancer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #102 Removed by Moderator

To: independentmind
Envy?

Maybe they see in others who are celibate, men who are able to control their sensual appetites and that serves as a rebuke to their own inability to exercise chastity.

103 posted on 11/08/2003 12:52:41 PM PST by Catholicguy (MT1618 Church of Peter remains pure and spotless from all leading into error, or heretical fraud)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: TonyRo76
Thank you !! :)
104 posted on 11/08/2003 12:53:48 PM PST by gcruse (http://gcruse.typepad.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: WackyKat
The Gospels provide no basis for that assumption.

St. Paul says that the love of man for his wife images that of Christ for the Church. Doesn't sound like there's room for a "Mrs. Christ" in there, does it?

And we know from the Gospels that St. Peter was married, at least at one point. Do you seriously think they would have mentioned Peter's marital status and neatly avoided mentioning Jesus'?

As near as I can tell, you aren't a Christian. At least I haven't observed you self-identify as one. If I am correct, why is any aspect of this issue any of your business?

105 posted on 11/08/2003 12:56:17 PM PST by Campion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: gcruse
It doesn't tell me that. It merely tells me the penalty was codified.

If you are interrested, there is a book that Documents the "Apostolic Origins of Priestly Celibacy," and it was writen by Christian Cochini.

Or, you can continue to ignorantly rant that your desires/opinions are Ecclesiastical History.

106 posted on 11/08/2003 12:57:46 PM PST by Catholicguy (MT1618 Church of Peter remains pure and spotless from all leading into error, or heretical fraud)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Oztrich Boy
Man oh man, you again? What is your obsession with the Jesus had sex issue? Why is it that more and more this issue arises?

Is Howard Stern writing a book on Theology or something?

107 posted on 11/08/2003 1:00:23 PM PST by Catholicguy (MT1618 Church of Peter remains pure and spotless from all leading into error, or heretical fraud)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: DallasMike
Lisen, Ace; most pedophiles are married men.
108 posted on 11/08/2003 1:02:40 PM PST by Catholicguy (MT1618 Church of Peter remains pure and spotless from all leading into error, or heretical fraud)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: TonyRo76
God's redemption isn't bought with deeds. Amen! One of the main points of the whole Protestant Reformation. Luther nor any of the other Reformers ever said anything this simplistic, beause this Pelagaian doctrine was always rejected by the Catholic Church.
109 posted on 11/08/2003 1:03:08 PM PST by RobbyS (XP)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: Catholicguy
It tells me Jesus surrounded himself with married disciples, and that the first pope, Peter, was also married. That tells me celibacy was on nobody's mind. Seeing that priests were advised to not sleep with their wives before Mass as late as AD 300 tells me celibacy is just something created for its own ends hundreds of years later. There is no benefit to it in God's eyes, inasmuch as it is not commanded nor even preferred by Jesus for his followers. I don't need to read apologetic treatises to see what is before my very eyes, as Martin Luther also came to realize.
110 posted on 11/08/2003 1:05:17 PM PST by gcruse (http://gcruse.typepad.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

Comment #111 Removed by Moderator

To: TonyRo76
You missed the point. The Catholic Church has never taught that redemption can be bought with deeds.
112 posted on 11/08/2003 1:17:48 PM PST by RobbyS (XP)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

Comment #113 Removed by Moderator

To: ShadowDancer
...why would I turn to a priest for advice in marriage?

I'm guessing then that you would never have a cancerous tumor removed by a surgeon who has never himself had cancer? You would never accept psychological counseling from a psychologist who had not himself been disturbed? You would not accept financial advice from a broker who was not fabulously wealthy?

114 posted on 11/08/2003 1:24:48 PM PST by Petronski (Living life in a minor key.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

Comment #115 Removed by Moderator

To: Petronski
You can't be serious. Either that or you're single.
116 posted on 11/08/2003 1:34:14 PM PST by ShadowDancer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: ShadowDancer
You don't understand the difference between expertise and experience.
117 posted on 11/08/2003 1:38:53 PM PST by Petronski (Living life in a minor key.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: TonyRo76
Must these things be done in order to be saved? How is that not making salvation conditional upon the doing of certain deeds?

If you accept Jesus Christ as your personal Lord and Savior, but thereafter lead a life filled with sins of omission and commission, are you still saved? Is this kind if 'saving' sealed and guaranteed, no matter how heinous the sin you might commit thereafter?

I suspect the answer must be know, which must in turn mean salvation is at some level 'conditional.'

118 posted on 11/08/2003 1:49:53 PM PST by Petronski (Living life in a minor key.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | View Replies]

To: TonyRo76
Spritually, Jesus is engaged to be married. The Church is his bride.
119 posted on 11/08/2003 1:51:03 PM PST by invoman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: Snuffington
We need to slow the heck down and give our predecesors the benefit of the doubt that perhaps they were not complete idiots for a change.

Actually, Snuff, this is my position. Ya gotta know when to do do nuthin'. The RCs have one major flaw, IMHO, and that is they think they are the only Catholics on the planet. Of course, they're not. If some churches want to keep celibacy of the clergy as a church rule, they certainly are entitled to do so.

If those born to Roman Catholicism wish to join one of the Eastern Churches, the Copts, The Syriacs,the Abyssinians, The Armenians, or whatever, what exactly is to stop them? It would in no way undermine their allegiance to the Bishop of Rome.

120 posted on 11/08/2003 1:53:13 PM PST by Kenny Bunk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 281-296 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson