Posted on 01/27/2013 12:31:22 PM PST by marshmallow
John Cornelius, who is married, will be ordained this weekend -- and sex-free life begins
John Cornelius will be ordained a Roman Catholic priest this weekend — and with the blessing of his wife they're giving up their sex life. Cornelius, a father of three, will become the first married Roman Catholic priest in New York — and Sharyl, his wife of 33-years, has agreed to the whole celibacy thing.
“We have decided to do that voluntarily,” Cornelius told WGRZ-TV. “I have always had friends that are Roman Catholic priests and I appreciate what they've given up to serve God and the priesthood.”
Cornelius, 64, is a former Episcopalian priest who converted three years ago to Catholicism. He said his old church had gotten too liberal for him.
Also, it may be seen as rather contradictory in principal that Rome considers entering marriage with the intention of never having children to be a "grave wrong and more than likely grounds for an annulment."[McLachlan, P. "Sacrament of Holy Matrimony." http://www.catholicdoors.com/faq/qu164.htm] , while praying to a women [woman] who apparently went thru with a marriage intending to do just that, according to Rome. ["Our lady intended to remain a virgin," by Pope John Paul II...For apparently I read: as Catholic doctrine states.
So, Pope John Paul condones Mary's "intention" to sin?
Well, when you are dealing with an autocratic entity which has effectively declared it is answerable to nothing and no one on earth, then not only can conditions for marriage be defined to allow annulments, but executive exceptions can be given.
Contradictory?
It's downright hypocritical.
Rome’s defines hypocrisy, and define what is right, so she cannot be wrong when she says she is right.
However,the word of man and what he thinks the work of God is has the complete opposite effect.The more that is pronounced,the more traps are fallen into,the deeper you delve the more it unravels.It builds on shifting sand and when the storm comes it will not stand.
daniel112,
You’ve posted some great stuff on this thread. I appreciate it. Rock on!
no they don't...the Jews basically wrote the old testament (including the dead sea scrolls) And, no they were not SOLELY responsible for preserving and protecting it and making it available to YOU.
Yes, they were solely responsible for preserving the bible, old and new testament, in the form of the bible, so that you could read it......had it not been for the Catholics, you might have been able to find a copy of the old testament somewhere....but you'd know nothing of the new testament. PERIOD. All anyone needs is one example to disprove that claim and it's *Dead Sea Scrolls*
OLD TESTAMENT And the Catholic church did it's darndest to keep the Bible OUT of the hands of the laity.
97+ % of the people at that time were illiterate....the bibles, at that time were hand printed and VERY EXPENSIVE, all were in the hands of royalty, wealthy families and libraries (mostly Monastaries).....no need for Amazon at that time...By the time that the middle ages arrived, the church NEVER attempted to keep the true bible out of the hands of the people, just contaminated versions (maybe the book of mormon) from the public. Until the printing press was invented, the bible couldn't possibly have been in the hands of the public....not a chance. There isn't a person in the world who thinks that another group could have possibly brought you the bible. The Catholic church was in physical possession of whatever writings that there were at the time and they alone were in a position to transcribe them and copy them by hand 1 copy at a time.....noone else could have possibly done it.
Again you are woefully uninformed on the church..after a very thorough investigation, an annulment is granted when it can be shown that for a small variety of reasons, the marriage was not valid in the first place....pretty involved procedure.
The popes are exactly like the apostles, men of faith and character with human failings....Judas was an apostle, Peter, who denied christ three times was an apostle. When you seek perfection, you will seldom meet your goal
Continuing to deny the 7,000.
Sad...
So THAT's what happened to Joseph!
His 'marriage' was NEVER consumated; so he took off!
of course you realize that Mary and Joseph were married under the old covenant and were therefore bound by whatever regulations that were in effect at the time. Joseph could have died unbaptized, but he is treated the same as all who were born before baptism....Christ did not come to destroy the law, but to establish a new and everlasting covenant.
Nobody knows that for sure because nobody was there to see it. It's pure speculation on the part of those making the claim.
Not only that, *illiterate* does not mean *stupid*. Those people had minds they could use and anyone who has to exercise their memory as much as someone who could read does, is going to have an awesome memory. Ever hear of MEMORIZING Scripture?
By the time that the middle ages arrived, the church NEVER attempted to keep the true bible out of the hands of the people, just contaminated versions (maybe the book of mormon) from the public.
Baloney.
The Catholic church's prohibiting Scripture from being in the hands of the laity was not about stuff like the BoM which did not exist at the time. The edicts the RCC issued dealt with the books of the Bible and they were clear about that.
COUNCIL OF TOULOUSE - 1229 A.D Canon 14. We prohibit also that the laity should be permitted to have the books of the Old or New Testament; unless anyone from motive of devotion should wish to have the Psalter or the Breviary for divine offices or the hours of the blessed Virgin; but we most strictly forbid their having any translation of these books.
Source: Heresy and Authority in Medieval Europe, Edited with an introduction by Edward Peters, Scolar Press, London, copyright 1980 by Edward Peters, ISBN 0-85967-621-8, pp. 194-195, citing S. R. Maitland, Facts and Documents [illustrative of the history, doctrine and rites, of the ancient Albigenses & Waldenses], London, Rivington, 1832, pp. 192-194.
The Council of Tarragona of 1234, in its second canon:
“No one may possess the books of the Old and New Testaments in the Romance language, and if anyone possesses them he must turn them over to the local bishop within eight days after promulgation of this decree, so that they may be burned lest, be he a cleric or a layman, he be suspected until he is cleared of all suspicion.” (-D. Lortsch, Historie de la Bible en France, 1910, p.14.)
Scripture makes no such exemption. The only exemption allowed is for adultery and that is not the result of an *invalid* marriage.
The RCC making that exemption is just an excuse.
It allows people to break their marriage vows. Divorce by any other name is still divorce.
Mark 10:2-12 2 And Pharisees came up and in order to test him asked, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife?” 3 He answered them, “What did Moses command you?”
4 They said, “Moses allowed a man to write a certificate of divorce and to send her away.” 5 And Jesus said to them, “Because of your hardness of heart he wrote you this commandment. 6 But from the beginning of creation, ‘God made them male and female.’ 7 ‘Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, 8 and the two shall become one flesh.’ So they are no longer two but one flesh. 9 What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate.”
10 And in the house the disciples asked him again about this matter. 11 And he said to them, “Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery against her, 12 and if she divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery.”
Relabeling divorce so people can justify their sin does nobody any favors whether it is church sanctions it or not.
Matthew 5:17-19 17 “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18 For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished. 19 Therefore whoever relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever does them and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
Quite the indictment of the Catholic church by Jesus Himself.
The RCC lauding Mary for her alleged perpetual virginity in marriage while condemning virginity in marriage otherwise is rank hypocrisy.
you cannot break your marriage vows with someone that you were not able to make them in the first place....you discover that your wife was born a male and later in life had a transexual operation giving him female genetalia.......invalid marriage
it is discovered that your husband was mentally incompetant to make such a commitment.....invalid marriage your wife/husband declares that he/she never intended to have children.....could be invalid marriage it is discovered that one of you is unable, physically or mentally to consumate the marriage....could be invalid marriage
an annulment does not dissolve a marriage, it declares that there was not a valid marriage in the first place...
by the way, it is Protestants, not Catholics that allow remarriage after a legitimate divorce.....not biblical.
so the average newly formed Christian is going to MEMORIZE scripture....O.K., where does he get the scripture to Memorize???? well lets say he/she is in the world of religious service or academia....he/she has access to Jewish scrolls and has heard of the newly formed Christian groups. He/she meets with them , talks with them, and begins to learn what they believe................you now have what Catholics know as tradition, which you constantly poo-poo!!
COULD have?
You are now reduced to SPECULATING about Joseph?
Hell!
Use the same sources to find out about HIM as you have about Mary's alledged SINLESSNESS and/or ASSUMPTION!
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.