Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: Natural Law

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


38 posted on 03/09/2010 1:23:57 PM PST by the long march
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]


To: the long march

The title used the wrong word. “Continence” is what was meant. Celibacy dir not applied to married priests in the early Church. Continence did apply. Just plug in the word “continence” or “abstinence” and your problem is solved.


45 posted on 03/09/2010 1:34:15 PM PST by Houghton M.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies ]

To: the long march

Sorry, I was responding really to Natural Law. But you used “chaste” incorrectly. Chaste does not mean abstinence or continence in all cases.

For unmarried people, chaste means abstinnce, no sex.
For married people, chaste means proper sexuality—not selfish, not abusive, full-self-giving—but yes, one can engage in marital relations chastely. Chaste does not mean abstinent if one is married.

For the married priests before celibacy became mandatory, chaste meant abstinence just like for unmarried people.

Chaste simply means “good, proper, ordered”—and what constitutes good and proper varies with one’s state in life.


47 posted on 03/09/2010 1:37:38 PM PST by Houghton M.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | 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