Poll: Unmarried or Faithfulness to Church More Important in Priesthood

  • Thread starter Thread starter Greg_McPherran
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
40.png
yochumjy:
BTW, you didn’t say anything about what affects/damage a dissenting married priest might do to the Church on abortion/contraception…
Click to expand...
That’s the point. You could choose much more carefully to avoid this by having more to choose from. There are many married men who are faithful to the magisterium and many priests who dissent. You seem to ignore that.
40.png
yochumjy:
There is more to this than just picking from a larger pool of people, and you disregard this.
Click to expand...
Agreed, you pick much more carefully from a larger pool and do not hesitate to remove dissenters as necessary and replace with either a married or unmarried priest who does not dissent. (and other problems)

The point of the poll is that’s its better to pick only the faithful and obedient from a larger pool of potential priests, than some dissenters and some faithful (and other problems) from a smaller pool.

If I were to redo the poll I would ask it this way:

What would be better if the Church hypothetically allowed married priests:

a priesthood of all celibate priests with few exceptions, some who dissent (and cause other problems) and some who are faithful

or

a priesthood of many celibate priests but some married, most of whom are faithful

Remember, that this is a valid hypothetical because the magisterium can allow married priests if they decide it is in the best interest of the mission of Christ.

That’s how I would reword it to make it clearer. However, I think many can see that is the gist of the poll anyway.

Greg
 
I can’t even vote on this poll. If the Vatican says no then why are you debating?

The protestants have married male clergy and female clergy. They still can’t get enough people.

I think that your question is missing the boat. There are other reasons why we don’t have enough priests:
  1. Families are a lot smaller.
  2. The laity is not as devout as they used to be. If we were all doing what we’re supposed to be doing, we would have enough priests right now.
  3. Families discourage their sons from becoming priests.
  4. Good men have been turned away from the seminaries. Hopefully, now that we have cleaned up the seminaries a bit we will have more men entering the priesthood. We still have a lot of praying and fasting to do. Can’t let these men down.
I have seen the results of clergy with families in the protestant denominations. They really have a tough time of it. The ministers feel such an obligation to their congregations that, for a lot of them, their families have to take 2nd place. My heart goes out to them.

Celibacy is a sacrifice that they offer up to God with love. If the Vatican puts restrictions on the priesthood then so be it.
 
40.png
Greg_McPherran:
If I were to redo the poll I would ask it this way:

What would be better if the Church hypothetically allowed married priests:

a priesthood of all celibate priests with few exceptions, some who dissent (and cause other problems) and some who are faithful

or

a priesthood of many celibate priests but some married, most of whom are faithful.

Remember, that this is a valid hypothetical because the magisterium can allow married priests if they decide it is in the best interest of the mission of Christ.
Click to expand...
No, once again you loose your valid hypothetical when you insert things like most of whom are faithful. Why don’t also say that some of the married priests could cause even more problems with abortion/contraception if they dissented. (assuming that they could carry more weight with the average person)

If you want a real poll, loose the commentary that tries to sway people to your desired result.

John
 
(see post #14)
The Barrister:
Grege McPherron’s latest private message to me:

I assume everyone reading this can spot the deceptive nature of the post.
Click to expand...
Greg, :tsktsk: Barrister is right. He’s not being a moderator but he is telling you where you are wrong. If you want to report me, go ahead. Make my day.
 
This is not a very good poll…
What about the unmarried priest who teaches the truth of the church, lays down his life for Jesus’ little ones, and always reverant, faithful and true to his beloved church.
Why doesnt’ this poll also accout for married priest who neglect their wives or children just like any lay married person who is “too busy at work” to take care of family???
 
My dear friends,

I seek to help Jesus. Many Catholics do not vote pro-life. This poll is to help end abortion, contraception, divorce, rampant immorality in society, and advance the Catholic Church in the world.

For those of you dear friends who do not see this, I am offended.

It is not wrong to make suggestions to the magisterium especially when things have gotten as out of hand as they are. Have you not read Veritatis Splendor? Even my own Archdiocese allows articles about VOTF on the web site.

www.rcab.org

Some scold me! Yet, have you sought to correct a dissenting priest today!
 
40.png
yochumjy:
If you want a real poll, loose the commentary that tries to sway people to your desired result.
Click to expand...
**I think the point of the poll is clear: the magisterium might do well to consider that whether a priest is faithful to the Church may be more important than whether he is married. **

Pollsters, chime in and let us know if the above point was clear to you.

Greg
 
40.png
yochumjy:
If you want a real poll, loose the commentary that tries to sway people to your desired result.
Click to expand...
Actually, the way the poll was worded also seeks to avoid the bias of those who refuse to consider that whether a priest is married is much less important than whether he is faithful.

This bias of some people toward married priests may be based on mistrust. Some people may obstinately refuse to even consider that allowing married priests is meant to improve the missoin of the Church rather than harm it. Some women may also be concerned about married priests and have their own biases. For these and other cases their answer also may be unfairly biased.

Given the widespread dissent and other problems, why would it not be better to let dissenting married priests go and replace them with some faithful married men?

I would fire Father Greeley and Fr. McBrien and replace them with married men such as Scott Hahn or a married man from Catholic Answers anytime.🙂 Apparently, many of you wouldn’t? Explain.

Do you like “Father Greeley” encouraging Catholics to vote for pro-abortion candidates?

Do you like Fr. McBrien a theology professor at Notre Dame, going on national TV and proposing saying that Jesus’ wife was at the last supper!

At theology professor at Notre Dame!!!
My dear fellow Catholics - wake up! The wolf is running freely among the sheep! Have we gone completely bonkers!!! No excuse in the world can justify this state of affairs.
As a faithful holy priest here in Massachusetts put it - it’s pathetic - and he repeated and emphasized, pathetic! I certainly will speak up, just as Jesus courageosly spoke up and He was crucified for it. So yes, Susan, I will speak up and I will illustrate that we may be straining a gnat (celibacy) and swallowing a camel (dissent and other issues), an expression that Jesus used. I will not be ashamed because I want the world to experience the joy of Jesus!
People say, stop comlaining and do something about it. That’s exactly what I am doing in this poll!
 
Sorry, but this poll smells like a setup to me… it smells a little like a question the Pharisees asked Jesus… “Which is the most important commandment?” Of course, we know Jesus gave His answer with 2 commandments, even though they only asked for one… shows how important that 2nd commandment was, since Jesus gave it without even being asked.

Back to the Poll:
FAITHFULNESS to the Church’s teaching body is, of course, an important ingredient in the daily lives of all who believe that Jesus gave us a Church. Scripture shows even St. Paul being obedient to the Church (although some might wish it were not so).
On the other hand, a CELIBATE lifestyle, for those wishing to serve God at a higher level, is “preferred and encouraged” in Scripture by both St. Paul and Jesus himself.

The Church is simply following what she sees in Scripture, that’s how I see it.

Your poll seems to be pitting one good against another. It is like running a poll to see “Which person can help humanity more—one who loves God almighty and hates his neighbor, or one who loves his neighbor and rejects God almighty?”
Do you see? It makes no sense to run such a poll, because we cannot take commandments from God and arbitrarily decide which one to keep and which one to throw away.

To be more honest, your poll should more directly address the crux of the issue…“Should the Church find a way to relax her preference for a celibate priesthood?” What’s wrong with asking it out in the open? And keep in mind, it is a preference, not an absolute requirement, (just as scripture says is should be a preference). I personally see practical benefits from the Church’s long standing preference for celibacy, and believe it should be maintained. But if the Church relaxes it, hey… I would follow her policy.
Thanks for allowing the comment…
 
Kurt G.:
Back to the Poll:
FAITHFULNESS to the Church’s teaching body is, of course, an important ingredient in the daily lives of all who believe that Jesus gave us a Church. Scripture shows even St. Paul being obedient to the Church (although some might wish it were not so).
On the other hand, a CELIBATE lifestyle, for those wishing to serve God at a higher level, is “preferred and encouraged” in Scripture by both St. Paul and Jesus himself.

To be more honest, your poll should more directly address the crux of the issue…“Should the Church find a way to relax her preference for a celibate priesthood?” What’s wrong with asking it out in the open? And keep in mind, it is a preference, not an absolute requirement, (just as scripture says is should be a preference). I personally see practical benefits from the Church’s long standing preference for celibacy, and believe it should be maintained. But if the Church relaxes it, hey… I would follow her policy.
Thanks for allowing the comment…
Click to expand...
Hello Kurt,

Several have said similar and the poll wasn’t intended that way. I expected people to see the gist of the poll. The poll was intended to show that we may be straining a gnat and swallowing a camel by preferring celibacy over faithfulness. (Note I say may be, I’m not saying I know.)

I appreciate your polite expression of disagreement.

I have started another poll that words it better.

Thank You,
Greg
 
Honestly this is the silliest poll I have ever seen… give me the “what car would Jesus drive?” any day over this.

We do have a few married priests. I would rather have a faithful married priest then a celibate one who is not… but that is a no brainier… That doesn’t mean I would PREFER a married priesthood
-D
 
40.png
darcee:
Honestly We do have a few married priests. I would rather have a faithful married priest then a celibate one who is not… but that is a no brainier… That doesn’t mean I would PREFER a married priesthood
-D
Click to expand...
Hi darcee - we have addressed that repeatedly in the previous posts.
 
40.png
SusanL:
Don’t talk to me about love after what you did.
Click to expand...
What did I do? The gist of the poll is clear and I have made it repeatedly clear in many posts thereafter.

There is rampant dissent. Perhaps it is you who should be open-minded to further the mission of Jesus. Perhaps you have a misguided sense of what is good for the Church. Have you even considered that possibility?

Married priests is not at all a liberal idea and I am orthodox. Married priests is fully within the scope of Church authority. Yet, I am insulted merely because I propose it in a way that makes a powerful point.

It can be readily seen and is clear from the poll itself that I intended the allowance of married priests to help end dissent. There was no hidden agenda and to accuse me of that is unfair and offensive.

If you don’t agree or of you want to suggest a better format - fine. I did a better format. I think this poll makes the point so well that perhaps that is what people are really concerned about.

The results of the poll are valuable. It makes it clear that to the voters, celibacy is less important than faithfulness. It just goes to show that people would prefer to see an orthodox married man in place of a dissenter if the Church authorized it. That is a fair poll. There is nothing wrong with that.

I smell an agenda from those who say they smell an agenda and I will not be scared away by those of you who have your own spin and don’t even seem open-minded. You won’t bully me - and you should be ashamed for trying.

Greg
 
40.png
Greg_McPherran:
What did I do? The gist of the poll is clear and I have made it repeatdly clear in many posts thereafter.

There is rampant dissent. Perhaps it is you who should be open-minded to further the mission of Jesus. Perhaps you have a misguided sense of what is good for the Church. Have you even considered that possibility?

Married priests is not at all a liberal idea and I am orthodox. Married priests is fully within the scope of Church authority. Yet, I am insulted merely to propose it. This is nonsense.

It can be readily seen and is clear from the poll itself that I intended the allowance of married priests to help end dissent. There was no hidden agenda and to accuse me of that is unfair and offensive.

If you don’t agree or of you want to suggest a better format - fine. I did a better format. I think this poll makes the point so well that perhaps that is what people are really concerned about.

Greg
Click to expand...
What a joke.
This is not what I was talking about. It was the way you threatened Barrister with reporting to the moderators. You know that because I quoted that post. It undermines your credibility and your trustworthiness.
 
<>

I think you’re mistaken about that, and about many if not most of those who are responding to you,

but I will certainly be happy to join you in praying for an end to dissent in the church by means of unity in Christ. OTOH, I don’t think that we’ll ever agree in the means by which this will happen. I for one do not think that dissent is even bad, if the case is that there is one POV which is wrong, and the other POV disagrees with the wrong and wants to put it right. You can’t compromise by agreeing to accept a little “wrong”, or a “temporary” wrong, or a “wrong” that will PRODUCE a “right”. Even if it’s hard, you still have to stand up for what’s RIGHT against what’s WRONG. IMO.
 
There are some married Roman Catholic priests.

I’ll take a valid Roman Catholic Priest over somebody who dissents or is rebellious and independent (they are really Protestants).
 
OK I see you were not bothered as much by the poll itself? I apologize then.
40.png
SusanL:
It was the way you threatened Barrister with reporting to the moderators. You know that because I quoted that post. It undermines your credibility and your trustworthiness.
Click to expand...
Yes, I did because he made large letters telling everyone not to participate in my poll and accusing me of a false agenda. This is not the place for bullying and interfering but respectful debate and discussion. I am reasonable and open to discussion. Barrister had no need to use huge letters telling everyone not to participate in the poll.

I was not hiding what I said to Barrister at all - I didn’t want to fall into his game of cluttering up my poll with sidetrack arguments. I think the poll has well made the point. Perhaps the point this poll makes doesn’t meet your own and Barrister’s agenda, so perhaps you need to sidetrack with personal attacks? - I don’t know - I hope not because that is not a Christian model. I could see if there were something really wrong with the poll but the question of married priests is in no way an objectionable topic and it is very fair to discuss. Again, my purpose of the poll was also not hidden and any narrowness only served to make the point but was not inherently unfair because the narrowness focused on the point I wanted to make. The abvious right answer also makes the point. I do not consider it to be a bad point - do you?

Greg
 
40.png
Greg_McPherran:
OK I see you were not bothered as much by the poll itself? I apolocize then.

Yes, I did because he made large letters telling everyone not to participate in my poll and accusing me of a false agenda. This is not the place for bullying and interfering but respectful debate and discussion.

Greg
Click to expand...
Greg, I understand what you’re saying. I may not agree with your position but I understand. If you don’t like what he says than PM him or say it on the board. I don’t like the threat of running to the moderators. We can handle this ourselves.

Enough said. If you are ok with it, let’s call this discussion between us done.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top