Whatever Dokimas! You cannot accept the fact it is very possible for someone to remain celibate prior to being a priest or as a discipline or simply remaining celibate as a lay person. Do not let your pride hit you on the way out…
Okay, let me not be sarcastic.Whatever Dokimas! You cannot accept the fact it is very possible for someone to remain celibate prior to being a priest or as a discipline or simply remaining celibate as a lay person. Do not let your pride hit you on the way out…
Any comments regarding the above, Dokimas?Celibate, not celebate. I keep misreading it as “celebrate”!
As to your comments, here’s an excerpt from this tract (all bolding is mine):
"In fact, the Catholic Church forbids no one to marry. No one is required to take a vow of celibacy; those who do, do so voluntarily. They “renounce marriage” (Matt. 19:12); no one forbids it to them. Any Catholic who doesn’t wish to take such a vow doesn’t have to, and is almost always free to marry with the Church’s blessing. The Church simply elects candidates for the priesthood (or, in the Eastern rites, for the episcopacy) from among those who voluntarily renounce marriage.
**But is there scriptural precedent for this practice of restricting membership in a group to those who take a voluntary vow of celibacy? Yes. **Paul, writing once again to Timothy, mentions an order of widows pledged not to remarry (1 Tim 5:9-16); in particular advising: “But refuse to enroll younger widows; for when they grow wanton against Christ they desire to marry, and so they incur condemnation for having violated their first pledge” (5:11–12).
This “first pledge” broken by remarriage cannot refer to previous wedding vows, for Paul does not condemn widows for remarrying (cf. Rom. 7:2-3). It can only refer to a vow not to remarry taken by widows enrolled in this group. In effect, they were an early form of women religious—New Testament nuns. The New Testament Church did contain orders with mandatory celibacy, just as the Catholic Church does today.
Such orders are not, then, what Paul meant when he warned against “forbidding to marry.” The real culprits here are the many Gnostic sects through the ages which denounced marriage, sex, and the body as intrinsically evil. Some early heretics fit this description, as did the medieval Albigensians and Catharists (whom, ironically, some anti-Catholic writers admire in ignorance, apparently purely because they happened to have insisted on using their own vernacular translation of the Bible; see the Catholic Answers tract Catholic Inventions)."
Old answer, same dodge.
No except thank you for the post.
I don’t belong to a denomination. End of answer.
Who pastors at your church?
I guess I am not getting it. Are you saying that non denomination churches are leaderless and without a pastor? Just asking
End of answer.
Is there a problem?
I can only assume from you silence that there is a level of scrutiny that you want to avoid:shrug:
You are absolutely right, Doki, and on this point you are in 100% agreement with the Catholic Church.
Reminds me of Moses making concessions for divorce!
This is a good example of the culture of death thinking. It represents a lack of faith, that the man is able to stand because God is able to make him stand. A man who takes a vow of celibacy is no more in a “place where he may fail” than a married man. Indeed, God created us all with sexual feelings. A married man may have sexual feelings for a woman who is not his wife. Is he “in a place where he may fail” because he took marriage vows?
You are absolutely right again Doki! And, again, in 100% agreement with the Catholic Teaching. The Catholic Church teaches that no one should take any kind of vow unless one is called of God to do so.
I am glad that you can realize you are using a double standard, one for the Catholic Church, and another for Protestant. You are correct, using a double standard does paint you into a corner.
It is not the disagreement that is the problem. It is that you will not acknowledge our point of view. I just want to to be able to say “yes, I see how you get that”. Then if we still disagree, and you follow it by saying “but I see it differently” we could move on. But, as it is, since you are unable to articulate the opposing point of view, we have to assume that it bears continued explanation because you have not yet understood, or that you are intractibly stubborn, and refuse to get it.
So you agree with everything I posted?
The Teaching of the Church and the Scripture clearly answer this question. Many are called, but few are chosen. In fact, I would venture that the vast majority of those called to the priesthood don’t answer the call.
He answered this. He said they follow the instructions in Timothy and Titus, and that was all he was going to say, because he knew any more would paint him into a corner.
Your statement “again” makes it clear that you think it is “wrong” for the Catholic Church to choose from among those called to celibacy to serve as priests. It is an indication that you do not recognize the authority of the Church to make this discipline.
Choosing from among those who are called to celibacy to serve as priests does not contradict the bible, either.
Well, they are not separable. Jesus taught by his actions, as well as his words. He said that some people MAKE THEMSELVES eunuchs for the Kingdom, and that if a person is so called, such a person should accept the gift. He modeled with his life how this gift is lived out.
Those who do interpret it “privately” believe they are led by the HS.
This is quite true, which is one reason the CC cannot do such a thing.
'zactly, guanophore.
Do I hear the victim card? Please! Distorting? Since you believe it is FORCED upon men,I asked you tell me who FORCED St.Paul to be celibate and single, if he was not married?
