Posted on 03/09/2010 12:13:22 PM PST by the invisib1e hand
Married or single priests from the early stages of Christianity practiced celibacy, according to a Vatican archaeologist.
During the first four centuries, married priests would renounce having intimate relationships with their wives, but they needed their the approval of their spouse.
From:The Life of Fr. De Smet, Apostle of the Rockies:
“With his soul inundated with joy, Father De Smet thanked God for having chosen him to be the instrument of His designs. “I believe firmly in the hundredfold promised by Our Saviour. What we have given up in this world is as nothing compared to what we have found and experienced in the wilderness.
How is the phenomenal success of these missions to be explained? Many of the Indians possessed admirable natural virtues; they but needed to know Christianity to embrace it. Even the most degraded had preserved a high ideal of the greatness of the power of God. Blasphemy was unknown among them: not presuming to address the “Great Spirit,” they entreated their manitous to intercede for them. Superstition if you will, but beneath it was a religious sentiment which the missionary had only to enlighten and direct. None held back through false pride or prejudice. Even the Sioux, the proudest of the Western tribes, compared themselves to children bereft of a father’s guiding hand, and to the ignorant animals of the prairie, and with touching humility begged the missionary to “take pity on them.”
Such elevated, upright souls could, moreover, appreciate the chastity of the Catholic priesthood. With rare discernment, the Indian understood that, belonging as he does to all men, a priest cannot give himself to one person, and not for an instant did they hesitate to choose the Black Robe, who had consecrated his life to them, rather than the minister in lay dress, installed in a comfortable home with wife and children, devoted to the interests of his family, giving only the time that remained to distributing Bibles” .
There are no unforgivable sins. CCC 982 - "There is no one, however wicked and guilty, who may not confidently hope for forgiveness, provided his repentance is honest. Christ who died for all men desires that in his Church the gates of forgiveness should always be open to anyone who turns away from sin. Reconciliation through the sacrament of Penance can be granted only to those who have repented for having violated the sign of the covenant and of fidelity to Christ, and who are committed to living in complete continence.
Might want to read the 'fine' print, as there IS an unforgivable sin, although adultery or marriage or administrative policy are NOT that particular sin. And there is NO administrative policy that will set aside that penalty....
So sex made them too dirty to do WHAT SACRIFICE ? duh... the bread
385-Pope Siricius left his wife in order to become pope. Decreed that priests may no longer sleep with their wives.
567-2nd Council of Tours: any cleric found in bed with his wife would be excommunicated for a year and reduced to the lay state.
590-604-Pope Gregory “the Great” said that all sexual desire is sinful in itself
Jesus said there was an unforgivable sin... do you know what it is?
The practice of purchasing indulgences was banned over 500 years ago, rendering Luther Moot. Further, indulgences in no way forgive sins. They deal only with punishments left after sins have been forgiven. The definition of indulgences presupposes that forgiveness has already taken place: "An indulgence is a remission before God of the temporal punishment due to sins whose guilt has already been forgiven" (Indulgentarium Doctrina 1).
The title is misleading. The author means “practiced continence” or “abstinence.”
Celibacy means unmarried.
Continence means abstinence from marital relations, either outside of marriage or within marriage.
Whoever divorces his wife and marries another, commits adultery against her; and if she divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery" - Mark 10:11-12 he did not say it was not a sin, he said it was not THE unforgivable sin
I am a 'she', and sin is the transgression of the law, but marriage nor divorce was never ever the unpardonable sin. Marriage was NEVER ever forbidden by the clergy by the Heavenly Father or His only begotten, it was an by admission an administrative policy.... Paul did say it was better to marry than to 'burn' with passion if one was to be away from the 'wife' and or husband.... gasp imagine that woman in the office of 'teaching', why I might just get some holy water tossed upon me....
The passage you quoted says not to refrain from sexual relations unilaterally (the “marriage debt”). But St. Paul goes on to make an exception: “except with consent for a time, that you may give yourselves to fasting and prayer; and come together again.”
The bishop’s (priests derived from bishops) life is to be one of prayer.
This is the basis for the discipline that required arried bishops and priests to abstain from marital relations, by mutual consent, upon ordination.
But I doubt I’ll convince you. Your mind is made up if you post something that undermines your own claim and don’t realize that it does.
One cannot seek the forgiveness from God while at the same time rejecting God. "The unforgivable sin of speaking against the Holy Spirit has been interpreted in various ways, but the true meaning cannot contradict other Scripture. It is unequivocally clear that the one unforgivable sin is permanently rejecting Christ (John 3:18; 3:36). Thus, speaking against the Holy Spirit is equivalent to rejecting Christ with such finality that no future repentance is possible. 'My spirit shall not always strive with man,' God said long ago (Genesis 6:3).
Really? Now how much does it cost to annul a marriage so as to bless a marriage within the church.... Please don't tell me it is 'free' of charge as I know different....
The requirement of abstinence before service at the altar goes back to Jewish priestly practice. Priests served at the temple in rotation and were to abstain when “on duty.”
Christianity saw priesthood (bishops, from which office that of priest is derived) as a totally consuming, self-sacrificing office. St. Paul assumes that all devout Christian couples will regularly abstain from marital relations in order to pray and fast. Priests’ whole lives are to be given to what other couples do regularly but intermittently rather than continuously.
We know that he had been married, but we know that only because his mother-in-law is mentioned. His wife is never mentioned. We have to infer her existence from the mention o his mother-in-law. It’s a proper inference.
But since he’s never portrayed as “actively” married and his wife is not mentioned, no children are ever mentioned: who knows whether she was even living at the time he left his nets to follow Jesus or, if she was living(possible) whether they had marital relations after that. Telling the world whether you and your wife are doing the deed regularly or not is not something most of us are going to do. It’s not exactly the sort of thing you’d expect to make its way into Scripture.
Nothing in Scripture precludes the possibility that Peter and his wife practiced continence after he was chosen to be the head of the Twelve, if she was even still living at that point.
Gregory the Great did not say that sexual desire was in itself sinful but that in a fallen world it is disordered, as are our appetites for food and a lot of other things.
Unlike Buddhism, desires cannot in themselves be evil or sinful for Christians and Jews because desires were created by God. Since the Fall, however, they are disordered, big time.
When you find the Latin quote from Gregory that supports your claim, please post it. But don’t bother with quotes in translation from your anti-Catholic Cliffs Notes.
Further, indulgences in no way forgive sins. They deal only with punishments left after sins have been forgiven.
So God forgives sin but still wants to punish you for it?
The definition of indulgences presupposes that forgiveness has already taken place: "An indulgence is a remission before God of the temporal punishment due to sins whose guilt has already been forgiven" (Indulgentarium Doctrina 1).
So you confess your sin, the priest tells you that you are "forgiven" if you say a few prayers..and then when you die you have some corporal punishment even though God "dropped the charges " So what you need is a bail bondman to give some money to Rome and then they will tell God to let you out early"
Acts 2:17 describing what is speaking the Holy Spirit comes from Joel 2:28-31 "And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, 'I will pour out of My Spirit upon flesh: and your sons and your daughters (gasp) shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams".........
Slight correction. Priests were still permitted to be married long after 325. If married before being ordained (they could not marry after ordination), they were expected to be continent/abstinent in both East and West until the East changed in 695. The West forbad ordination for already married men only later (because married priests were not obeying their continence pledge) and only really enforced the prohibition of being marred (celibacy) in the 1000s.
And since the priest had already been married AND the RC does not acknowledge divorce tell me please how one such as that can be celibate???
And of course they can’t. Chaste perhaps but nothing in the scripture requires that
Celibacy is defined as the lifestyle of someone who is, and is striving to remain, unmarried all his/her life. It is also used to describe a state of life where one chooses to abstain from all sexual activities (also known as “continence”). Often, it is incorrectly used to refer to a mixed, an involuntary, or even temporary abstinence from sexual relations – celibacy is by definition a freely chosen state of being unmarried and practicing sexual abstinence.
in a simplistic definition perhaps
That’s fine with me but then I don’t want to hear ANY nonsense about how preist’s are really just Christ on earth and that is why they are unmarried.
Please at least have some consistency in the logic
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.