Prove it!

[guanophore]

Paul did not command church leader to be celebate. He did say if the sex drive could not be controled, then they should get married. In fact he said bishops should be the husband of one wife and his children must be ruley.

It is true, he did not command it. He highly recommended it, and if a person was married, it did not prevent him from becoming a bishop, but he had to have his own household in order. However,marriage is not a requirement for a bishop. Polygamy disqualifies on from the bishopric.

• Why does the CC command something that the NT does not command

The catholic church has the authority to command given by Jesus. However, if you are referring to celibacy, this is a gift from God that cannot be “commanded”. God gives gifts whereever He chooses. The Church’s duty is to recognize the gifts and use them properly. The Latin Rite prefers to choose priests from among those who are so gifted, for the benefit of the Church.

• but encourages marriage when celebacy is not possible.

Celibacy is a gift. It is always possible to receive God’s gifts.

• Sure would solve a lot of problems for the CC if they’d let their priest be married: less sexual problems and more priest.

No, Doki, it does not . You clearly have very little understanding of the nature of celibacy, and the problems in the Catholic priesthood. A man who forsakes his vows will be the same faithless man whether he is married, or not.

 

[guanophore]

The Catholic Church has determined it best that priests do not marry. They only accept men that feel the call to a life of celibacy. There is absolutely nothing wrong with this or unbiblical about it.

The 22 Eastern Rites do ordain married priests. This discipline applies primarliy to the Latin Rite. However, even in the East, those who are ordained when they are married are expected to remain single if their spouse leaves, or dies. The fasting disciplines in the Eastern Rites are much stricter (more like those of the early church) and include fasting from relations during certain liturgical periods.

 

[guanophore]

Then why doesn’t it say not to be married then?

Jesus chose some of His Apostles from among the married, yet he taught that those who were called to become eunuchs for the kingdom should accept this gift if it is given to them. He showed an example of how one might live fruitfully as a celibate man.

Paul was celibate, and encouraged everyone to “be as I am”, yet he allowed married persons to become ordained. The value of the celibacy in the priesthood became clear after the monastic traditions started in the third century. Monks who were celibate and spent extraordinary amounts of time alone with God burned with passion for the Church, and the vocation of the priesthood.

 

[guanophore]

-Here’s my problem: the CC requires celebacy for its leaders which, as you have pointed out, is against the teaching of the Bible.

It is not true, Doki, so you can stop hanging onto it as a problem!

The Catholic Church does not require celibacy for it’s leaders. In fact, in the Latin Rite, most leadership in the parishes is provided by married laypersons, and married deacons. The priest is not necessary a “leader”, but presides at liturgy,a nd is the servant of the servants of God.

 

[guanophore]

-So is celebacy are Biblical requirement for church leaders or not?

No, but it is preferred, since the celibate person can focus more of their devotion and energies upon the Kingdom.

If yes, then was Paul incorrect when he said church leaders should be husbands of one wife …?

No, if that were the case, he would disqualify himself, Jesus, and the one to whom he was writing (Timothy). If a person was married, the should not have a series of failed marriages in their wake. If a person cannot work out conflicts with one wife, but abandons them, then how can they be expected to care for God’s church without running away when there is trouble?

If no, then why does the CC require it against the teaching of the Bible?

It is not required.

 

[guanophore]

The Bible requires churches NOT to require celebacy.

No, it does not.

However I also agree that celibacy is not a requirement. If a person is married, though, they need to be focused on their marriage, and their kids.

 

[guanophore]

–
John 14:26 "But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, **whom the Father will send **in My name, He will teach you all things, and **bring to your remembrance **all things **that I said **to you.

This is a promise that was made to the Church. It applies to the Apostles, and those who received the Teaching from them.

By definition, it does not apply to those who are separated from the Apostolic Teaching.

 

[guanophore]

I never said the Bible says he MUST be a married man. The CC says they CANNOT be married which is obviously different than the teaching in the Bible.

No Doki, this is NOT a teaching of the Catholic Church. YOu are misinformed.​

 

[guanophore]

The beauty of Mary and Joseph was that they were ordinary and that God made them special. There’s no sin in being ordinary made special by our Creator.

Indeed, no sin there! However, it would be a great offense to return that which had been sanctified and purified - set aside for sacred purpose, to daily (profane) use. One can understand this by looking at how scandalized the Jews were when the sacred vessels of the temple were treated so by the enemies of God.

 

[guanophore]

Matey? I’m not your “matey.”

Where I come from sir or madam we do not speak to people in the manner that you have here. To discuss our beliefs is one thing. What you did is quite another. To even suggest that another Christian would infer what you about my God as did in your posting (which I will not repeat here) is insulting and degrading.

I have reported you and your posting to the forum moderator and I’ve asked to have my good name removed from this forum.

Well, Jars, nobody here knows your name, so whether or not it has been besmirched is kinda moot, dontcha think?

What was given to you is the logical conclusion of the heresies you suggested. I am relieved you are scandalized by them. This is an appropriate response to the conclusion of your assertions. It is insulting and degrading to suggest the things you have about Mary, the mother of God.

 

[guanophore]

And the way you post it signals a lot to others too.

Yes, I am sure it does. That is why we can really only go by what is posted. One cannot know the heart of another, especially over the internet. I trust your Christmas with your beloved family has been fruitful

 

[guanophore]

who are you to tell tweetymom that NO one has EVER said anything unkind to her…yes they have…many times … do you ever read these. She is a good person stating her beliefes and who are you to call her names or belittle her…If she identifies as a born again Catholic, Praise God…That is like a completed Jew…its great.

I think there have been some unkind posts made to Tweety. She has been consistently confronted here by genuine Catholics for her fraudulent representation of herself.

Yes, she is a good persons stating her beliefs. However, no one has called her names or belittled her.

The representation of herself as “born again” Catholic itself is a denial of the Church Teachings.

It is not something to “praise God” about, nor is it reflective of “completeness”. It is a misrepresentation of herself, and of Catholic teaching. I can’t imagine that God is glorified by such a thing.

 

[guanophore]

You are correct that the Bible doesn’t say, ‘No church is to tell its leader they must be celebate.’ However, can you point to a verse that gives the church the right to demand celebacy of its leaders? I can point to verses that seems to encourage church leaders in their roles as husbands and fathers.

This is the authority Jesus gave to the Church to bind and loose. IT is legislative authority.

However, it is not a “right” but a responsibility, and no one can “demand” a gift of God such as celibacy. The Latin Rite prefers to choose priests from among those so gifted. However, persons who have been previously married are not disallowed. And again, in the Eastern Rites, men are ordained who are validly married.

Many verses have been provided to you that point to the benefits of celibacy. Why do you set these benefits aside?

 

[Dokimas]

So now you’re questioning if Jesus is the ‘new covenant’ ??!

The way you try to read into what I’m saying is so off base, how can I trust anything you say? I simply can’t.

 

[Dokimas]

Please read Jesus’s words the Gospel written by St.Matthew19:12…and these are the type of men that the Church wants for it’s leaders…and you got a problem with that(wanting a church leader to be celbate)… i will be back in 2010 maybe.

Matthew 19:12 “For there are eunuchs who were born thus from their mother’s womb, and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men, and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake. He who is able to accept it, let him accept it.”​

Is this about church leaders? Is it a command by Jesus? The problem I have is with a church demanding celebacy for its church leaders. Why not see what Paul says on the issue in 1 Timothy 4:1-4 about forbidding to marry?

 

[Dokimas]

It is not true, Doki, so you can stop hanging onto it as a problem!

The Catholic Church does not require celibacy for it’s leaders. In fact, in the Latin Rite, most leadership in the parishes is provided by married laypersons, and married deacons. The priest is not necessary a “leader”, but presides at liturgy,a nd is the servant of the servants of God.

I’ll try to be more specific: I’ll use the term priest or bishop or cardinal or pope when I am speaking of the CC demand celebacy of their church leaders.

 

[Dokimas]

No, but it is preferred, since the celibate person can focus more of their devotion and energies upon the Kingdom.

No, if that were the case, he would disqualify himself, Jesus, and the one to whom he was writing (Timothy). If a person was married, the should not have a series of failed marriages in their wake. If a person cannot work out conflicts with one wife, but abandons them, then how can they be expected to care for God’s church without running away when there is trouble?

It is not required.

Then why did the man (I think he was in FL) that was a priest, who fell in love with a women, have to stop being a priest?​

Are you saying that any priest at any time can get married with he so chooses AND remain a priest?​

If not, the CC demands celebacy of its priests, bishops, cardinals and popes

 

[Dokimas]

This is a promise that was made to the Church. It applies to the Apostles, and those who received the Teaching from them.

By definition, it does not apply to those who are separated from the Apostolic Teaching.

Your understanding is very convenient. It rules out any of my understandings (or any other non-catholic Christian) that differs from yours, doesn’t it? Very, very convenient!!!​

 

[Dokimas]

Indeed, no sin there! However, it would be a great offense to return that which had been sanctified and purified - set aside for sacred purpose, to daily (profane) use. One can understand this by looking at how scandalized the Jews were when the sacred vessels of the temple were treated so by the enemies of God.

Sexual relations betwee husbands and wives are NOT daily (profane) use. It is a WONDERFUL gift from God so is sacred. Again, you have very convenient understandings that help justify specific beliefs.

 

[Dokimas]

Well, Jars, nobody here knows your name, so whether or not it has been besmirched is kinda moot, dontcha think?

What was given to you is the logical conclusion of the heresies you suggested. I am relieved you are scandalized by them. This is an appropriate response to the conclusion of your assertions. It is insulting and degrading to suggest the things you have about Mary, the mother of God.

Very convenient beliefs on your part. Becareful you don’t justify beliefs that are dangerously wrong. In this case, these comments about a persons posts/beliefs could be judged wrong. You are aware of what the Lord thinks of wrongly judging.