Italian cardinal: Pope mustn’t confirm Amazon Synod’s ‘wrong choice’ calling for married priests

LifeSite News ^ | November 7, 2019 | Bree A. Dail

[ebb tide]

Ping

[SaxxonWoods]

What, no gay marriage in the Catholic Church?

[Redcitizen]

Why no married men? Peter was married. He even had a mother in law.

[marktwain]

Hard to know exactly why the Catholic church decided to have celibate priests.

It all seems based on Paul saying it was better not to be married.

It is a Catholic church rule, not even doctrine or dogma.

Most likely, priesthood in Middle ages was such a high level in the social order, with high material rewards in security and material comfort, that there was very stiff competition to be a priest.

This would be one way to trim down the competition.

[oblomov]

Be fruitful and multiply- except priests.

[Pontiac]

Another reason to adhere to the requirement for celibacy, said the Cardinal, is that married priests and their wives are not immune to the effects of the crisis in the institution of marriage.

I know that in my marriage there have been days when I was glad to go to work just to be away from my wife and family.

But on those days, I don’t think I could have cleared my mind to say a mass or hear a confession.

On those days my mind could not have focused on God and the divine rites.

On those days you may need a priest, but you are not ready to be a priest.

Although a priest may take a day off from time to time, they never get a day off from being a priest. This is also true of being a husband. Both are vocations that require 100% commitment. I think this is why priest can not be married. There can be no divided responsibilities in either vocation.

Don’t take this the wrong way. A husband and father must be devoted to God 100%. But he must be the head of a family and devoted to bringing those souls entrusted to him to the eternal salvation of Christ.

A priest has the same responsibility but on a larger scale. A priest is entrusted with a parish and has that same responsibility to the members of his parish, to bring those souls to ever lasting life in the City of God.

[Pontiac]

Hard to know exactly why the Catholic church decided to have celibate priests.

It predates the Christ and goes back to Judaism.

The Temple Priest were required to be celibate on the days that they performed sacrifices in the temple. It was part of the rituals of purification prior to performing sacrifices.

The priest could be married but must be celibate on the days of sacrifice. But the priest rotated the duties of performing sacrifices, so they needed only be celibate occasionally.

Also, sacrifices could only be offered in the temple in Jerusalem so a priest anywhere else was not obligated.

Roman Catholic priest are required to offer the sacrifice of the mass daily, so such an arrangement is impossible.

[ebb tide]

Be fruitful and multiply- except priests.

Did Jesus Christ or any of His twelve apostles "multiply"?

[Biggirl]

The 3 pastoral letters from Paul beg to differ.

[boatbums]

Be fruitful and multiply- except priests.

Did Jesus Christ or any of His twelve apostles "multiply"?

Have we no right to food and to drink? Have we no right to take along a believing wife, as do the other apostles and the Lord’s brothers and Cephas? (I Corinthians 9:5)

1 Timothy 3:2
A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;

Titus 1:6
If any be blameless, the husband of one wife, having faithful children not accused of riot or unruly.

Now the Spirit expressly states that in later times some will abandon the faith to follow deceitful spirits and the teachings of demons, influenced by the hypocrisy of liars, whose consciences are seared with a hot iron. They will prohibit marriage and require abstinence from certain foods that God has created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth. For every creation of God is good, and nothing that is received with thanksgiving should be rejected, 5because it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer. By pointing out these things to the brothers, you will be a good servant of Christ Jesus, nourished by the words of faith and sound instruction that you have followed. (I Timothy 4:1-6)

We CAN know that Jesus didn't, but can anyone say the same about the Apostles? Well, let's see what some early church fathers mentioned:

From http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/250103.htm, Eusebius of Caesarea's Church History talks a bit about this:

Of the family of the Lord there were still living the grandchildren of Jude, who is said to have been the Lord's brother according to the flesh.

Clement, indeed, whose words we have just quoted, after the above-mentioned facts gives a statement, on account of those who rejected marriage, of the apostles that had wives. Or will they, says he, reject even the apostles? For Peter and Philip begot children; and Philip also gave his daughters in marriage. And Paul does not hesitate, in one of his epistles, to greet his wife, whom he did not take about with him, that he might not be inconvenienced in his ministry.

That Philip the apostle dwelt at Hierapolis with his daughters has been already stated. But it must be noted here that Papias, their contemporary, says that he heard a wonderful tale from the daughters of Philip.

Clement, indeed, whose words we have just quoted, after the above-mentioned facts gives a statement, on account of those who rejected marriage, of the apostles that had wives. "Or will they," says he, "reject even the apostles? For Peter and Philip begot children; and Philip also gave his daughters in marriage. And Paul does not hesitate, in one of his epistles, to greet his wife, whom he did not take about with him, that he might not be inconvenienced in his ministry."

[oblomov]

Peter was married and may have had children.

Phillip was married also. He may have had four daughters, if he was the same Philip the Evangelist mentioned in Acts.

Philip’s daughters were evangelists in their own right, since they are mentioned in the context of converting people to Christianity.

Some of the other apostles were married as well, but the Bible doesn’t say which ones, specifically.

[ebb tide]

That’s not sola scriptura, is it?

[boatbums]

That’s not sola scriptura, is it?

Huh? I would think that after all this time you would finally understand what that term means. Guess not.

[boatbums]

Nobody’s dancing here but YOU! LOL!

[boatbums]

It's also telling that not only do you not show any evidence of knowing what sola Scriptura means, you sidestep the facts presented that go against your biased opinion WRT to the Apostles being married and fathering children - which was the normal thing for their day. Like I said, you're the one doing all the dancing! But that is what I've come to expect. What's your next step? Bringing up Luther?

[ebb tide]

Why would I bring up Luther? He’s the prime example of breaking his vow of celibacy.