Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: Graves; kosta50; AlaninSA; gamarob1; NYer; Agrarian; Kolokotronis; MarMema; gbcdoj
I'm not waging a campaign, just offering an observation as to human nature. The Latin discipline is simply on the wrong side of reality.

The singular example you provided from history - of Archbishop Cranmer - was also a violation of your own system. If he is proof we are on the wrong side of reality, the proof goes against you also.

As to celibacy and chastity being contrary to reality, I must disagree vehemently. First, you do a disservice to all holy monks and nuns, and to the Roman priesthood, with such a proclamation, by declaring that they are living contrary to themselves, when the reality is that they are far more in tune with their trueself than the vast part of humanity. Second, you do a disservice to Our Lord and Lady, to St. John the Baptist, and many other Holy Prophets, Apostles, and Fathers, who also lived after this manner, by claiming that their lives and victory over the flesh was the wrong side of reality. Lastly you make a mockery of humanity, treating us as no better than animals in our ability to live chastity, and this even after the reception of grace.

That some people do not live chastely is because they do not wish to. If they wished to, and prayed for it, they would. THAT is reality, not the humans must have sex or explode into vice arguement, which is a vain modern reinvention of Freudian psychological error, a revival of the errors of Vigilantius and Jovinianus which were fought by St. Jerome and condemned by the Roman Church 1600 years ago.

I again invite you to familiarize yourself with the arguements against these errors.

Against Vigilantius - http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/3010.htm

Against Jovinianus - http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/3009.htm

If Catholic Priests WERE allowed to be married, we would then have a whole new set of problems introduced - that of clerical adultery and divorce, which we can see so often in highly publicized cases among Fundementalists. And we would still have offenders with young men, as you see also in your own Church, and as we see in secular society at large.

Marriage isn't some magic shield that protects you from all sexual immorality. Only the grace of God can do that, and that grace is not limited to the married.

You go ahead and defend your system and I'll just watch from the sidelines as you fall.

The fall will be you and your pride.

151 posted on 07/11/2005 7:21:08 AM PDT by Hermann the Cherusker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 145 | View Replies ]


To: Hermann the Cherusker; kosta50; AlaninSA; gamarob1; NYer; Agrarian; Kolokotronis; MarMema; ...

Cranmer was, I grant, a poor example. But he was hardly an example of the Orthodox discipline as to the episcopate because, he was an Oxford don, not a monk, upon being tapped by the king to be Abp.
Now as to the rest, why such hostility? The Orthodox have no desire to force you to change your system. Do as you wish. St. Photius the Great was appalled by it but he also knew that it fell outside his jurisdiction. If you really want to go down in flames with your system, have at it.


153 posted on 07/11/2005 7:36:19 AM PDT by Graves ("Orthodoxy or death!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 151 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


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