Posted on 01/19/2014 11:09:43 AM PST by Dallas59
This is the first picture of nun and new mother Roxana Rodriguez.
The 33-year-old woman, a nun with the order of the Little Disciples of Jesus, stunned her mother superior and local church chiefs after giving birth last week to a baby boy which she has called Francis, in honour of the current Pope.
Sister Roxana initially claimed to have no idea that she was pregnant and thought her labour pains were 'stomach cramps' when an ambulance rushed her to hospital in severe pain after being called by fellow nuns when she collapsed at her nunnery.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
//Not exactly. There is supposed documentation that Christ consorted with known prostitutes. It is “biblical”, by the way. //
Post please.
//“...as she took her vows and became a nun in the order last September.”//
Was she a novitiate then when she got pregnant? Or did she become a novitiate in September. It does make a difference in most if not all orders.
//But, if she had missed periods as pregnant women usually do, then she should NOT have applied for acceptance to the religious order.//
Some women have irregular periods. I have a good friend who hadn’t had a period for almost a year and got pregnant and she didn’t realize it until she started gaining weight.
Ministering is not the same as ‘consorting’. Consorting usually has sexual connotations and I think that is what elk is implying.
Do your own homework, please.
Go wherever you go to peruse that voluminous work of fiction and search out Mary Magdelene.
I spent close to two decades (involuntarily) in a Southern Baptist church and even I can recall those sermon topics.
Most Catholics know their Bible less than most Protestants and that verse is regarding divorce, not a command for celibacy.
//Christ might have been a real man,or might not have been.//
Are you implying that you have to have sex in order to be a ‘real man’?!
"Consorting" means "associating".
Do not interpret what I say, because I generally imply nothing.
“Thank you. But I wasn’t aware that Catholic priests had a choice to not be celibate and was strictly ”voluntary.””
How could anyone force someone to take a vow? Vows are always voluntary of they are non-binding. Technically it is seminarians who take the vow. They are ordained after taking the vow.
“Her and his first responsibility would seem to be to take care of their baby.”
Agreed.
There is more documentary evidence (outside the Bible) to support the existence of Jesus of Nazareth than there is for most of the Caesars.
But those who hate Christians will believe the death of Caesar was stabbed 23 times based upon one source written much later that is 3rd hand and deals with allegory in death (somatics) than in the existence of Jesus of Nazareth
No. You would have to have been male, born and existed on this planet to human parents and lived to or beyond the age of puberty.
dust...sandals...you get the idea.
“I know people who believe Christ was married (and a polygamist).”
They’re wrong.
“However, Christ not being married (which would have been a sin - selfishness) does not mean that we should not be married.”
Agreed. No one is making the opposite argument, however.
“Also, while there were celibate marriages as early as the 4th century, priestly celibacy did not become a rule until later.”
There’s no such thing as a “celibate marriage”. If you’re celibate, you’re unmarried by definition.
You might want to read this:
http://www.amazon.com/The-Case-Clerical-Celibacy-Development/dp/0898705339
THere are literally TONS of evidence (archeology, documentation, etc) to support the Biblical narrative as history. Even atheist archeologists agree that much of the Bible is verifiable. Do your research.
“Ministering is not the same as ‘consorting’.”
Exactly.
“Consorting usually has sexual connotations and I think that is what elk is implying.”
I knew that. Hence, I very deliberately used the words I used.
“Most Catholics know their Bible less than most Protestants”
Not from what I have seen.
“and that verse is regarding divorce, not a command for celibacy.”
I said nothing about a command for celibacy. Thus, not only are you wrong about any verse I posted, but you imputed words and ideas to me that I never posted.
Who says that can only happen every 2,000 years or so?
//But I wasn’t aware that Catholic priests had a choice to not be celibate and was strictly ”voluntary.”//
In Western rite, they must remain celibate in order to remain priests. However, in the Eastern rite, they can be married. If an eastern rite priest moves over to the western rite, than can remain married. Several years ago, many Western rite priest would go over to the Eastern rite to get married, stay awhile and then move back to Western rite - however that has now been restricted.
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.