If it were up to the priest, it would imply that
Of course it's best if a priest is all the he should be, a man full of Justice, Courage and Purity, of Faith, Hope, and Love. But even if he is in a state of mortal sin, it does not affect the "realness" of the sacrament, because, to put it plainly, it is not "his" sacrament. He doesn't "do" it nor "own" it.
Thanks for this. This is forgotten, and so important. Through the power of Christ is what the priest does possible. And thus, imperfect people administer imperfect people.
Still leaves the larger question about how much is enough, and what to do about it.
Thank you for your answers.
Thank you for your answers.
“Of course it’s best if a priest is all the he should be, a man full of Justice, Courage and Purity, of Faith, Hope, and Love. But even if he is in a state of mortal sin, it does not affect the “realness” of the sacrament, because, to put it plainly, it is not “his” sacrament. He doesn’t “do” it nor “own” it.”
So why have priests at all if all a priest does is act as a middle man in the sacrament distribution franchise?
You will of course now have to argue that no, a priest is important,which brings you back to the original point.
If it matters not whether a priest is forthright, moral, and a man of good character, then it allows the Church to let homosexuals run wild for decades molesting countless thousands just like church leadership has done.
No, if a Sacrament can be delivered by such men, as you explain, God does not care about the Sacrament, and neither does the Church and therefore it ceases to be a Sacrament in the hands of such evil men and the Church enables them is reduced to farce.