No, it's not, metmom.
Look, Iscool just told me that "No one in my church promotes any one unmarried to higher positions...In fact, there are no higher positions than a pastor or elder..." So therefore, is it fair to say that there is no choice about marriage for someone who is going to be a pastor or elder?
That marriage is imposed on those who would choose to be pastor or elder?
That choosing to be an elder is voluntary, but the marriage attached to it is not?
That if someone has to forego a pastorate or eldership because of the marriage rule, that marriage is not voluntary?
On each of these statements, I am exactly quoting Iscool, switching the terms "celibate" and "married," and he himself concludes, "Matter of fact, if it's a rule, it's not voluntary."
Q.E.D. Are either of you, Iscool or metmom, ready to defend a forced marriage requirement?
Absolutely it is rationalization. Scripture does not demand celibacy for ministers. And since it is tied to the priesthood, there is no choice for those men who want to become priests unless they are willing to circumvent the policy and become Episcopalian priests first and then convert to Catholicism and viola, married priest.
Why allow for some men what the Church denies to others?
Why should I defend the forced marriage requirement of a church when Scripture doesn’t demand it? And there is a difference between the different offices. Elder and deacon are offices within the body, which are different than preachers and evangelists.
You're being goofy now...I'm not interested in man's rules...God says you hafta be married with a family...If God wants you to oversee one of his flocks, he'll provide what ever is necessary and you will like it...