Poll: Unmarried or Faithfulness to Church More Important in Priesthood

[Greg_McPherran]

Let me start by saying that the many priests and bishops who are celibate and faithful to the magisterium deserve our love and support are to be praised. We are most grateful for you.

However, I consider the possibility that the Church could be better served by also allowing faithful and loyal married priests.

What would you consider better?:

A celibate priest who:?

• teaches contraception is OK
• dissents
• encourages voter’s that they don’t need to vote pro-life
• is involved with other problems on the forefront today

or

A married chaste priest who:

• has deep love for Jesus
• faithfully adheres to the magisterium
• condemns abortion and contraception and teaches the beauty and unselfishness of openness to life.

Which of the above is better?

 

[redkim]

At this point, both would be dissenting from the Magisterium. HOWEVER, if the Vatican ever decided to allow priests to marry, then the married, chaste priest who is faithful to the Magisterium is better.

Greg_McPherran:

Let me start by saying that the many priests and bishops who are celibate and faithful to the magisterium deserve our love and support are to be praised. We are most grateful for you.

However, I consider the possibility that the Church could be better served by also allowing faithful and loyal married priests.

What would you consider better?:

A celibate priest who:?

• teaches contraception is OK
• dissents
• encourages voter’s that they don’t need to vote pro-life
• is involved with other problems on the forefront today

or

A married chaste priest who:

• has deep love for Jesus
• faithfully adheres to the magisterium
• condemns abortion and contraception and teaches the beauty and unselfishness of openness to life.

Which of the above is better?

 

[The_Barrister]

Catholics - don’t participate in spurious polls.

This so-called “poll” sets up a false choice that requires you to set aside your values - a lose-lose proposition no matter which way you answer.

Greg, you should be ashamed at the way you push your agenda.

Again, Catholics - don’t participate in stupid polls.

 

[Greg_McPherran]

Yes, the poll question is to be considered within the scope of Church approval of married priests. Therefore, at the moment the question is basically hypothetical. I think though that there are even now a few exceptions of married priests (converts etc.)

 

[Greg_McPherran]

The Barrister:

Greg, you should be ashamed at the way you push your agenda.

Why do you judge an agenda? It’s a poll and it assumes the scope of Church approval and I am faithful to the magisterium.

Barrister, where do you stand on dissent?

 

[Daria]

Well, if he’s a married priest now, he meets that narrow exception. Is that what you mean?

 

[Tantum_ergo]

The poll doesn’t take all the options into account.

It sets up only two categories, neither of which is acceptable to current Church teaching, and asks us to choose one or the other as the “lesser evil”.

It is utterly spurious, IMO.

 

[yochumjy]

Greg_McPherran:

Yes, the poll question is to be considered within the scope of Church approval of married priests. Therefore, at the moment the question is basically hypothetical. I think though that there are even now a few exceptions of married priests (converts etc.)

In that light, does your poll make any sense at all? If the church supported married priests in first place, then your poll is simply:

Which is better

A Priest who dissents against Church teaching

A Priest who adheres to Church teaching

Is this really even a question?

John

 

[Greg_McPherran]

FAQ:

**The poll can be taken as a hypothetical proposal if the Church were to allow married priests or as a suggestion to the magisterium to allow married priests. **The poll is in no way to be seen to encourage dissent but rather to end dissent.

As Catholics, especially in order to further the glorious mission of Jesus Christ and His Holy Catholic Church, we are allowed to communicate our opinions to our leadership within the scope of respectful obedience.

My point is that dissent is causing great damage to the glorious mission of Jesus Christ and we need to consder that we may be straining as gnat and swallowing a camel as Jesus expressed it.

This allows the mere opinion that the magisterium may do well to consider married priests but that the magisterium is always to be obeyed.

Hope this helps, poll away!

Greg

 

[The_Barrister]

FAQ:

**The poll can be taken as a hypothetical proposal if the Church were to allow married priests or as a suggestion to the magisterium to allow married priests. **The poll is in no way to be seen to encourage dissent but rather to end dissent.

As Catholics, especially in order to further the glorious mission of Jesus Christ and His Holy Catholic Church, we are allowed to communicate our opinions to our leadership within the scope of respectful obedience.

My point is that dissent is causing great damage to the glorious mission of Jesus Christ and we need to consder that we may be straining as gnat and swallowing a camel as Jesus expressed it.

This allows the mere opinion that the magisterium may do well to consider married priests but that the magisterium is always to be obeyed.

Hope this helps, poll away!

Greg

But you set up a false dichotomy, and therein lies the problem. False choices do not good polls make, but they sure help advance agendas. Or is that agendi?

Whatever. I decline to participate in an effort to spread this agenda through a spurious poll.

 

[Greg_McPherran]

But you set up a false dichotomy

Jesus often made his point using hypothetical scenarios.

The poll makes it clear that I propose married priests as a possibility for the magisterium to consider. Agendas are not bad things nor is this agenda hidden. What matters is whether the agenda is holy or not. The Church has a good agenda (mission).

Again the magisterium is always to be obeyed and that’s part of my point, that the magisterium should be obeyed.

Greg

 

[The_Barrister]

Greg_McPherran:

Jesus often made his point using hypothetical scenarios.

Jesus never used a hypothetical that forced a choice between two wrongs.

I mean no offense, but equating your use of a false-choice hypothetical with Jesus’ theologically correct parables is rather arrogant.

Bad poll. No cookie for you.

 

[Greg_McPherran]

The Barrister:

Jesus never used a hypothetical that forced a choice between two wrongs.

Agreed, and neither am I.

The fact that the poll is hypothetical and that it is not out of the question for the Church magisterium to allow married priests, means that the poll is perfectly legitimate.

The poll is to be taken assuming hypothetically that married priest were allowed. This is a possible hypothetical and therefore is not a false hypothetical. In fact, the poll may advance the mission of Jesus Christ.

It is incorrect to say that a very legitimate and possible hypothetical is false.

 

[The_Barrister]

Grege McPherron’s latest private message to me:

Greg_McPherran:

I reported Apologia100 for being a self-appointed moderator. I will be happy to do the same for you. Take this up with the moderators. I am faithful to the magisterium and I work to end the pathology of dissent to better advance the mission of Jesus Christ. You oppose this!?

I assume everyone reading this can spot the deceptive nature of the post.

 

[Greg_McPherran]

Barrister, that I work to end dissent is presented publicly in previous posts in this thread including the post that introduced the poll. And, indeed you are interfering with my valid use of this bulletin board. Your opinions would better relate to the topic of whether married priests is a good suggestion in light of the poll.

My very first post said:

However, I consider the possibility that the Church could be better served by also allowing faithful and loyal married priests.

Therefore there is no deception on my part.

I like many Catholics seek to end the pathology of dissenting priests. I also think faithfulness of priests is more important than celibacy.

What is wrong with respectfully suggesting the allowance of married priests to the magisterium?

 

[yochumjy]

Greg_McPherran:

Jesus often made his point using hypothetical scenarios.

The poll makes it clear that I propose married priests as a possibility for the magisterium to consider. Agendas are not bad things nor is this agenda hidden. What matters is whether the agenda is holy or not. The Church has a good agenda (mission).

Again the magisterium is always to be obeyed and that’s part of my point, that the magisterium should be obeyed.

Greg, I’m glad you believe that the magisterium is always to be obeyed. But I don’t understand why you have this poll. IF the magisterium says that priests may marry, then they are priests, fine. IF that is the premise of this poll (that the magisterium has allowed all priests to marry), THEN your poll boils down to NOTHING MORE THAN:
Which is better

A Priest who dissents against Church teaching

A Priest who adheres to Church teaching

Does that make sense to have a poll like this?

OR maybe I’m not really understanding what you are trying to bring out here? Is there something about married priest that you think would make them more unified with Church doctrine? Please, feel free to help me understand.

Thanks,

John

 

[Greg_McPherran]

The point of the poll is to consider whether faithfulness to the mission of Christ and His Church magisterium is more important in a priest than whether he is celibate, given the hypothetical that the Church allowed married priests.

The Church can allow married priests if they decide and the decision is theirs to be obeyed.
I also think celibacy is encouraged and is good in general. At the same time I consider that being less restrictive may better serve the Church and the mission of Jesus Christ to end abortion and contraception, overcome selfishness, and establish the kingdom on earth.

Are we not free to respectfully suggest this to the magisterium?

 

[yochumjy]

Greg_McPherran:

The point of the poll is to consider whether faithfulness to the mission of Christ and His Church magisterium is more important in a priest than whether he is celibate.

The Church can allow married priests if they decide and the decision is theirs to be obeyed.
I also think celibacy is encouraged and is good in general. At the same time I consider that being less restrictive may better serve the Church and the mission of Jesus Christ to end abortion and contraception, overcome selfishness, and establish the kingdom on earth.

Are we not free to respectfully suggest this to the magisterium?

Sure, you can respectfully request it, even though others have done so and there has been no budging from the magisterium. It’s not like it’s a new idea that they are not aware of. Some priests and bishops think this way also, but just because it COULD serve Gods kingdom better, doesn’t mean it WOULD. In fact, it would probably serve the Church best to not allow this, as it would appear to the unguided masses that the Church gave in to outside preasure…(that is just a musing of mine, nothing more).

Now back to your poll. It was terribly one sided. Your poll allows for a dissenting celebat or non-dissenting non-celebate. There are two more options which would also occur:
dissenting non-celebate
non-dissenting celebate

And I wonder, would a dissenting non-celebate do more to hurt the church on abortion/contraception than a dissenting celebate? The non-celebate would have more “pull” on sexual issues. Just a thought…

John

 

[Greg_McPherran]

yochumjy:

Sure, you can respectfully request it

Perhaps this poll will show why it is a good consideration for the magisterium.

yochumjy:

Now back to your poll. It was terribly one sided. Your poll allows for a dissenting celebat or non-dissenting non-celebate. There are two more options which would also occur:
dissenting non-celebate
non-dissenting celebate

And I wonder, would a dissenting non-celebate do more to hurt the church on abortion/contraception than a dissenting celebate? The non-celebate would have more “pull” on sexual issues. Just a thought…
John

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

 

[yochumjy]

Greg_McPherran:

Perhaps this poll will show why it is a good consideration for the magisterium.

I don’t think you completely read my last message. This poll does not show anything of the sort, it is terribly one sided, and almost forces a non-dissenting Catholic into YOUR pre-decided answer. You left out two viable choices.

Greg_McPherran:

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.

Yes, and YOU chose the answer, it is silly to have a poll where you force people into your narrow view. BTW, you didn’t say anything about what affects/damage a dissenting married priest might do to the Church on abortion/contraception…

There is more to this than just picking from a larger pool of people, and you disregard this.

John