Replies

This acceptance also includes matters of discipline,which can be changed,but until they are,are included in those things we must hold to be correct. I do think that the internet is an appropriate place to discuss those matters of discipline with which some Catholics disagree,but they should be predicated by a statement that shows an understanding of the Church postion.

I understand the Church's position on celibacy (I know this is the discipline to which you are referring), I just do not agree that mandatory celibacy is necessary to the full witness value of the priesthood nor to the identity of the priest himself.

If he embraces it voluntarily, that is all to the good. But, obviously, married men can be priests, have been, and are today.

Disagreeing with disciplinary matters should not be any kind of factor in determining one's Catholicity, otherwise disciplines (like laws of fasting and abstinence) would never be changed.

I profess all the creeds I need to profess, sara, with a full and willing heart. Celibacy will likely not be changed in our lifetimes, but we can discuss it, nonetheless, and should.

The point that I was making was that it is not "Catholic" to make statements that do not reflect the facts of a matter.Most especially when those non-facts are presented as truths,and intended to denigrate the teaching in question,and then when disproved,are not retracted.

I asked you for your definition of "Catholic" and you tell me that you profess all the creeds I need to profess,sara,with a full and willing heart".

I had no doubt that that is/was what you do and while it seems to be so reasonable,so kind,so catholic,so american,so inclusive,it's not so "Catholic".