[sinkspur]

I do have problems in allowing priests to break vows and date and marry.

I don't have a "problem" with allowing priests to marry, but it would be far outside the tradition of the Eastern Rites, and even of the Greek Orthodox.

OTOH, the fact that so many bishops will not even allow a laicized, married priest (thankfully, not mine) to teach or to serve as a lector is just silly.

The laity are way ahead of the hierarchy on their acceptance of married priests.

[narses]

These priests have broken their vows, married illicitly and you embrace them. The SSPX and the rest of the orthodox community you mock and reject. And you claim to be in Holy Orders yourself. How odd.

[Loyalist]

The laity are way ahead of the hierarchy on their acceptance of married priests.

The laity are "way ahead" of the hierarchy on all manner of moral and theological matters. So are the all the bien pensants in the press and academe.

When will those benighted bishops and curial bureaucrats catch up to the all-knowing, all-enlightened laity?

[St.Chuck]

OTOH, the fact that so many bishops will not even allow a laicized, married priest (thankfully, not mine) to teach or to serve as a lector is just silly.

I don't think it is silly. These vow breakers are bad examples of what it means to make a comitted promise. They have failed in their status as an alter Christus; they have failed in emulating The Promise Keeper, and as such should not be accorded the privelege of serving the Church in it's public worship. They can sit in the back...with me.