Because the Church doesn’t look as far down on Protestants as you do, because this is an exception that doesn’t do away with the general rule, because the Western Church currently thinks that celibacy is a good thing that should be the norm among the priesthood, and because celibacy is seen as a gift as well as a burden.
Just because somebody disagrees with clerical celibacy does not mean that they would find a spiritual home in Eastern Catholicism. The liturgy is different, the spirituality is different and the theology is different. Many in the Roman church who support the ordination of married men to the priesthood would also support allowing priest to marry after ordination, women priests, liberal theology and the general relaxing of the moral teachings of the church. They also often prefer a more contemporary liturgy with heavy involvement from the laity. They would generally not feel particularly comfortable in an Eastern church. While I understand that these things are not in the same category, many of those who support a married priesthood do not.
Heresy is only possible for baptized Catholics. Please stop using the word heresy incorrectly. The Chatholic Church does not view Protestants as heretics, nor is what they teach heresy. The only way to be a heretic or to teach heresy is if you are Catholic first.
Only half-right. The church canonically considers all baptised Christians subject to the Church.
This ^^ really doesn’t do justice to the Ordinariate (and before that the Pastoral Provision). Offering Anglican ministers the married priesthood as an “incentive” (if you will) to switch sides wasn’t a decision made lightly, and certainly not without sensitivity to Anglican feelings. Cardinal Kaspar puts it succinctly: “We are not fishing in the Anglican pond.” (Of course, that statement is itself controversial. And after all, the Anglicans – starting with the Episcopalians back in the 1970s – really brought it on themselves, so to speak, by abandoning Christian traditions like the male-only priesthood. In other words, these Anglican-turned-Catholic-priests didn’t so much leave Anglicanism, but rather it first left them.)
Canonical transfers are the exception, not the everyday – and I say that in general, not specifically in regard to whether someone believes there should be married priests or not.
Because the majority of Catholics who complain that married men should be ordained also tend to want women to be ordained, which ain’t gonna happen. So they figure why not just stay where they’re comfortable and keep kvetchin’?
[citation needed]Because the majority of Catholics who complain that married men should be ordained also tend to want women to be ordained, which ain’t gonna happen. So they figure why not just stay where they’re comfortable and keep kvetchin’?
If anyone gives you “proof” you’ll dismiss it as false as you just did with Paul’s epistle.
With all due respect to Marcionite Christianity, I think I’ll stick with Catholicism.
You need me to provide a citation to back up my personal opinion?
I just want this to be proved:You need me to provide a citation to back up my personal opinion?
Citation needed back atcha!!
From what poll or sociological study did you take this?
The majority of Catholics I personally have heard or spoken to. How’s that?