[sittnick]

That's a selective reading of the Scriptures (St. Paul has passages that it is better to be unmarried, so as to serve God. The ultimate example is Our Lord Himself, who the priest should take as his ultimate model.

Our Lord, Himself, of course, teaches about the need for workers in the vineyard, and that a man will leave his parents, wife, fields, etc.to follow him.

And, of course, neither the scriptures nor the Catholic Church has ever stated Scripture Alone, Sola Scriptura. That makes Sola Scriptura a non-scriptural teaching. The Church was alive and kicking for decades before the last books of Scripture were written, and for centuries before the canon of Scripture was finalized. (and of course, it was the Church that did the finalizing, which is why we don't have the Gospel of Thomas, the Shepherd of Hermas or the Didache in the Bible)

BTW, unfortunately, the Church's protection by the Holy Ghost does not necessarily extend to every Bible translation. While the NAB is in fact popular in American churches, the Douay-Rheims is the better translation.

[Rytwyng]

the scriptures nor the Catholic Church has ever stated Scripture Alone, Sola Scriptura. That makes Sola Scriptura a non-scriptural teaching.

Ironic. The issue that drove me out of Catholicism was not "Sola Scriptura" but "Contra Scriptura".

Perhaps that is indeed a selective reading of the scriptures. But read them in their whole context, read them in your preferred translation, you'll see that they don't say or imply anything different from what I've said. Yes, for those few who "can accept this saying", celibacy offers more freedom in the service of God -- but nowhere in the scripture does it state that celibacy is a REQUIREMENT for church office. And St. Paul explicitly anticipated married bishops -- with kids. St. Paul also told married couples not to deny each other. Do you deny this?