Replies

We were talking about the Sacrament of Holy Orders.

"WE" were not.

You were.

Since the discussion was about the possibility or non-possibility of Catholic clergy to be married men and validly receive Holy Orders, this is not an apples-and-oranges comparison.

No; goalpost mover; 'we' were talking about PRIESTS.

269 posted on 07/29/2017 1:09:55 PM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)

See, that's just what I was saying: if you don't understand the diaconate as partaking of the priesthood, you don't get the connection.

It's not me moving the goalposts. Its you not "getting" the definition: the Sacrament of Holy Orders as understood by Catholics, nor even what we mean by "Catholic" "Church".

This is not surprising, and I can't blame you, since (correct me if I'm wrong) none of this forms any part of your priestless, sacrament-less, canon-lawless religious gig, regardless.

It does make me wonder what motivation keeps you tirelessly jumping into and reiterating this discussion over and over again, since none of it matters, really, on your give-a-damn scale.

As I understand it.

271 posted on 07/29/2017 3:24:47 PM PDT by Mrs. Don-o (He that falls into sin, is a man; he that grieves it, is a saint; he that boasts of it, is a devil.)

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794