Skip to comments.
Young Benedict questioned priestly celibacy
CathBlog ^
| January 31, 2011
| MICHAEL MULLINS
Posted on 01/30/2011 2:01:52 PM PST by Alex Murphy
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-88 last
To: jroneil
add another reason the a Would a Parish want to support a priest wife and children? Follow the money.
Protestant churches have no problem recognizing that they need to be paying their pastor enough to support a family, and most do.
That is not a good reason for a celibate priest.
God said that it was not good for man to be alone, so He created a helper suitable for him. If Adam needed it in perfection in the Garden, certainly fallen men need it as well.
81
posted on
02/06/2011 4:46:38 PM PST
by
metmom
(Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
To: metmom; Alex Murphy; Gamecock; RnMomof7
Actually, elders of the early church were supposed to be married. It was a sign of stability and obedience to the word of God.
82
posted on
02/06/2011 5:55:19 PM PST
by
Dr. Eckleburg
("I don't think they want my respect; I think they want my submission." - Flemming Rose)
To: Dr. Eckleburg; metmom; Alex Murphy; RnMomof7
If a man can't even shepherd his own family who can he be expected to shepherd others?
1 Tim 3:1 The saying is trustworthy: If anyone aspires to the office of overseer, he desires a noble task. 2 Therefore an overseer must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, sober-minded, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, 3 not a drunkard, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money. 4 He must manage his own household well, with all dignity keeping his children submissive, 5 for if someone does not know how to manage his own household, how will he care for God's church?
What we'll hear from the Roman Catholics is:
-Paul was a lunatic
and/or
-Tradition trumps the clear teaching of Scripture.
83
posted on
02/06/2011 6:24:38 PM PST
by
Gamecock
(The resurrection of Jesus Christ is both historically credible and existentially satisfying. T.K.)
To: Gamecock
What we'll hear from the Roman Catholics is: Paul was a lunatic Well, of course he was! After all, he opposed the first pope to his face (Galatians 2:11)!
84
posted on
02/06/2011 6:37:30 PM PST
by
Alex Murphy
("Posting news feeds, making eyes bleed, he's hated on seven continents")
To: Gamecock
Amen! That was the Scripture I was thinking of.
As Christ tells us...
"And Jesus answering said unto them, The children of this world marry, and are given in marriage... For he is not a God of the dead, but of the living: for all live unto him." -- Luke 34,38
85
posted on
02/06/2011 6:40:22 PM PST
by
Dr. Eckleburg
("I don't think they want my respect; I think they want my submission." - Flemming Rose)
To: Alex Murphy; Gamecock
he (Paul) opposed the first pope to his face (Galatians 2:11)!Thus proving that even that "first pope" wasn't "infallible."
86
posted on
02/06/2011 6:43:08 PM PST
by
Dr. Eckleburg
("I don't think they want my respect; I think they want my submission." - Flemming Rose)
To: Dr. Eckleburg
The first recorded words of Peter after his profession of Jesus being the Son of the Living God prove that.
87
posted on
02/06/2011 7:22:12 PM PST
by
metmom
(Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
To: Alex Murphy
Obviously Paul was poorly catechized...
88
posted on
02/06/2011 7:25:36 PM PST
by
smvoice
(Defending the Indefensible: The Pride of a Pawn.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-88 last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson