[blue-duncan]

"Combined with Pauline call to celibacy in 1 Corinthians 7:32-40, the scriptural teaching is that continence is the minimum requirement for clergy and celibacy is the ideal."

The plain meaning of the three references (1 Timothy 3:2, 1 Timothy 3:12 and Titus 1:6) is that one of the requirements for Pastor or Deacon is that they be married to a real live woman and have a family so they know how to lead a family, the local body given to them to lead by Jesus. Continence or chastity comes under adultery and having a good reputation. It is nonsense to read into this any celibacy theory.

Your use of 1 Corinthians 7:32-40 to support the celibacy theory fails in at least two places. The letter was written to the whole church, not just the leaders. To follow your arguement through to its logical conclusion we should all be celibate and then breaking one of the most fundamental laws of God, "Be fruitful and multiply". Celibacy is a gift of God, not a man made rule for the ministry and Paul says, few have it. This chapter 7 is Paul's judgment, not God's statement on the matter. God's declaration is "husband of one wife and children under control".

"And priests act in the person of Christ. "As the Father hath sent me, I also send you" (John 20:21)."

So then priests aren't members of the church, the bride of Christ, if they are "married" to it. They must be like the groomsmen or friends of the groom or maybe more like Jacob when he became Esau after he bought the birthright. One would think that something that is as important as the bride's relationship to her lover, Jesus, if there was going to be an interim groom to whom she was married, that the scripture would be more explicit about this interim relationship.

[annalex]

The plain meaning of the three references (1 Timothy 3:2, 1 Timothy 3:12 and Titus 1:6) is that one of the requirements for Pastor or Deacon is that they be married to a real live woman and have a family so they know how to lead a family, the local body given to them to lead by Jesus

I agree, that is the plain meaning, but it still needs to be harmonized with 1 Corinthians 7:32-40, -- which you don't dispute calls for celibacy. It also needs to be understiood in the context of church primarily filled with adult converts. Obviously, if a celibate man, otherwise qualified, were to approach the church wishing to become a priest, the verses in Timothy and Titus would not be an impediment. This is why most Christian Churches allow married man to be ordained as priests and deacons; the Latin rite alone demands it also of the priests.

To follow your arguement through to its logical conclusion we should all be celibate

No, because the Epistle sets up celibacy as an ideal for those called to be "solicitous for the things that belong to the Lord" but not as a requirement for all. It is the natural reading that the priests should at least strive for celibacy, but the rest should marry, and the Church teaches precisely that.

So then priests aren't members of the church, the bride of Christ, if they are "married" to it

They are indeed distinct members of the Church, but your speculation that they are not members in any sense is nonsense that does not follow from Catholic ecclesiology.