Posted on 11/19/2011 5:02:31 AM PST by IbJensen
You wrote:
“Fine, why does the Catholic Church not allow priests to marry?”
Because from the beginning men were either ordained as celibate men or they were already married and then ordained. What you don’t have is men being ordained first and then marrying. It’s just never really been done, so it won’t be. Also, today, in the Roman Church, most men take a vow of celibacy before being ordained (Those who don’t are already married). There’s no reason for those men to break their vows when they took them voluntarily.
Your post makes a lot of sense, but will probably be deleted. There are certain things you can’t say. Calling someone a “smug, small minded twit with more mouth than brain” is one of those things.
Hey dude, maybe you should try to grok Christianity in general better before going all ballistic at the Roman Catholics. Loosening up the rules of priesthood would hardly do squat to push out the homos. Lutherans, who have no qualms about pastoral marriage, haven’t seen significantly less of a proportional pedophilia perversion problem in their ministry. It comes wherever there will be a lot of contact with children. Hard to get a pastoral position that doesn’t have a lot of that, unless you’re ministering at a monastery or old folks home.
It is a community based service with a pretty accurate database of pornography sites and domains that allows you to poison your own DNS lookups in a good way. Read more at opendns.org
It's not a total solution, but it is a tool that has assisted us in making sure our kids are protected from this nuisance and very easy (and free) to implement.
Today, you’re far more likely to get virused or spammed than porned if you use any major ISP.
All she needed to do is substitute their pornography with pictures of janet reno and the problem would have been solved...
true!
Touché....
Correlation is not causation.
Of all the tired, worn out, meaningless cliches - is this the best you can do?
What the heck do you think the Catholic Church does at every Mass? Ya' think it might have something to do with "tending to their sins"?
As a Protestant I find the words of Jesus to be very fitting here: "Take care of the log in your own eye before you criticize the speck in someone else's eye."
You might want to consider that the one with the "log" is not the Catholic Church but those who are fond of condemning it while ignoring their own sins.
Another verse comes to mind about those who "hate the light because their deeds are evil."
[BRACE FOR ANTI-CATHOLIC/CHRISTIAN RANT]
And what makes you think this isn’t part of doing that?
You think the homosexual ephebophiles behind most of the scandals didn’t have extensive porn collections?
Besides...part of church - any church - is addressing morality.
The consumption of porn is absolutely an issue of morality.
Yes, I’m wondering what his definition of “porn” is. And, no doubt, we live in a trashy sex-obsessed culture (not so different from many before us), but that doesn’t necessarily equate to massive addictions to pornography.
They should have just become football coaches.
Every other man coming to the confessional reporting they had looked at “porn” — I’d think I’d have to ask what they meant. Or maybe I’ve been living a sheltered life and the hardcore stuff really does enjoy that kind of widespread popularity. Soft porn, or things that weren’t even intended as more than “sexy” but could be viewed through lustful eyes, is not hard at all to get.
And adults should be able to use drugs if they so choose.
Those that view pornography support a base and evil industry and thus are part of it.
Once someone groks a bit about what Christianity in general is, I think they have to come to grips with the ubiquity of sin.
The Bible teaches that the eyegate is a direct entry to the soul. Denying that porn effects their soul is tantamount to denying what the Bible states.
It represents an estrangement from humanity as it was meant by God to be. Sex is part of the whole family thing and isn’t evil in itself. What’s evil is the state into which it has lapsed. A sane humanity would laugh at the idea of being transfixed by pictures of strangers.
I didn’t think you read the article either. I may be wrong. I sometimes post without reading, so I am not throwing stones at you. I am just wondering if it was read.
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.