Split from "A question for some Protestants who try to proselytize Catholics": Are Catholic priests "Forbidden to Marry?"

[PRmerger]

I welcome objections which refute and rebut. I’m referring to the snide comments and condescension. I’m also referring to the comments that twist, misstate, misrepresent what is said.

Stop acting like sharks and it won’t seem like you guys are shark like.

A non-Catholic ought to come to a Catholic forum and expect lots and lots of folks to respond to his objections.

There’s lots of folks here who are really, really good at defending the faith. Scripture, Tradition, and the 2000-year history of the Church are at our disposal, and we’re sharp! (not sharks! ) We’re going to use all the treasures and armory we have. :knight2:

Oh, not to mention we have an infinite source of grace through the Sacraments at our disposal. There is no more intimate way to be united to our Lord than through the Eucharist, in the One Flesh Union, so we’re going to be at an advantage simply because of that.

I’m not exactly bragging…I’m just saying. And all are welcome to join us at this sublime Marriage Feast!

 

[Dokimas]

A non-Catholic ought to come to a Catholic forum and expect lots and lots of folks to respond to his objections.

There’s lots of folks here who are really, really good at defending the faith. Scripture, Tradition, and the 2000-year history of the Church are at our disposal, and we’re sharp! (not sharks! ) We’re going to use all the treasures and armory we have. :knight2:

Oh, not to mention we have an infinite source of grace through the Sacraments at our disposal. There is no more intimate way to be united to our Lord than through the Eucharist, in the One Flesh Union, so we’re going to be at an advantage simply because of that.

I’m not exactly bragging…I’m just saying. And all are welcome to join us at this sublime Marriage Feast!

First of all, it’s not the comments that are just straight forward info anwering wrong statements that I am referring to. That’s not what some here does. It’s the extra comments.

If you all are of one mind, why do so many of you have to ‘climb’ all over anyone with a differing opinion?

Much of this quote indicates that it is impossible for you to receive any comments that disagrees with you because you are convinced only the CC is correct and correct 100% of the time on doctrine, etc. So there is NO argument you can accept.

 

[tqualey]

Hi, Dokimas,

Do I detect just a hint of ‘condescention-phobia’ popping up again. Now that I have addressed this … we can move on! Well, let’s see if your remaing comments can be addressed. Remember, I am still waiting for a straighforward response to my previous posts.

First of all, it’s not the comments that are just straight forward info anwering wrong statements that I am referring to. That’s not what some here does. It’s the extra comments.

Dokimas, when you are given straight forward comments, you respond with such profundities as, “I don’t believe.” Posters have explained Catholic Church doctrine and discipline in a clear and concise manner with scriptural references and links where you can get additional information. From my recollection, you have yet to comment on any of these sites and have never stated you have gone to any.

Yes, there are those pesky ‘extra comments’ to contend with - but, this is a list with spirited posters - not a correspondence course.

If you all are of one mind, why do so many of you have to ‘climb’ all over anyone with a differing opinion?

As I recall, you have been doing a bit of ‘climbing’ yourself. But, this obviously is not a list for the faint of heart! Yep, stiff upper lip and all that! If you persevere… you’ll be able to read the responding comments, laugh at the banter, and come up with a reasoned response. Look at this as an obtainable goal - if you are willing to work at it!

Much of this quote indicates that it is impossible for you to receive any comments that disagrees with you because you are convinced only the CC is correct and correct 100% of the time on doctrine, etc. So there is NO argument you can accept.

Well, Dokimas, you must admit, you have not been especially receptive to actually documenting your positions. I admit you are up against some pretty stiff competition as PR identified. You see, as i appreciate the situation as PR posted. Let me enumeratge PR’s ideas:

** 1. Christ is God. God is All Knowing. God is All Powerful.

2.) Christ came to earth to save mankind from sin - and He founded His Chruch on Peter and promised that the Gates of Hell would not prevail on His Church.

3.) Christ gave Peter authority to bind and lose on heaven and earth whatever he thought necessary.

4.) Christ told a group of Jewish listeners that He required them to eat His Flesh and Blood. Some believed and some didn’t.

5.) Christ spent His last night of freedom with His Apostles at the Last Supper where He gave them His Flesh to eat and Blood to drink and then gave them the authority to repeat this sacred mystery.

6.) Christ died on the cross, rose from the dead, was on earth for 40 days and promised His Spirit to guide His Church when Christ ascended into Heaven.

7,) Christ fulfilled His sacred promise on Petecost Sunday - the birthday of the Catholic Church with the descent of the Holy Spirit and the Giving of His Sacred Gifts.**
I could go on - and re-supply you with all the supporting Scripture - but, you simply reject this with dismissive comments…combined with the traditions of men. Now, if you want sympathetic support for what to us are heresies … you won’t find such on CAF. Would you really expect such?

You may want to re-read previous posts, go to some of the links provided to you, get some ideas and come back with a more thoughtful statement then, “I don’t believe”. Now, ultimately, Faith is a Gift and, either you believe or you don’t. But, it would be helpful to explore your thoughtful responses when you provide them.

God bless

]

 

[PRmerger]

Much of this quote indicates that it is impossible for you to receive any comments that disagrees with you because you are convinced only the CC is correct and correct 100% of the time on doctrine, etc. So there is NO argument you can accept.

Dokimas, if there were a person who kept telling you, “Jesus is not God”, wouldn’t you be 100% certain that this person is wrong? No matter what comment and argument he proposed, you wouldn’t accept it because you are 100% certain that you have this truth: Jesus is God.

Well, that’s what we’re doing here. We are indeed 100% certain that the CC does not forbid priests from marrying.

 

[PRmerger]

I’m the kettle because I’m filled to the brim with knowledge (as opposed to the pot, which just gets hot and spews steam).

LOVE it!

 

[guanophore]

A child follows good advice. You’ve given yourself good advice.

A child should not agree to someone calling a daisy a rose.

A child should not be told to have blind faith.

No one is asking you to have blind faith, Doki. On the contrary, a great deal of information has been shared with you.

You are closed to the information, unlike a humble child, who accepts instruction. None of us expect you to agree with the disciplines of the church. But, if you want to come to CAF and criticize them, we expect you to have an open mind to learn why we have them.

 

[guanophore]

Hi, Dokimas,

Did I just miss something here … or … are you back to your old silly responses…

You were the one who compared yourself to a child trying to learn. It sounds like you were given excellent instruction - and now… you want to stay on CAF and continue to throw up a vague smoke-screen without supporting evidence.

As I appreciate the situation, you have consistently misidentifed and misunderstood Catholic doctrine becasue of your refusal to go to Catholic sites and actually do the research necessary to make an informed comment. It is soooooooooooo much easier to just do things that you have been doing before. So, where is the evidence of any learning or even willingless to learn?

Yes, I realize that even asking the question is going to trigger a condescention-phobic reaction … but … I am willing to take the risk - becaue there is at least a fair chance that you have not even read this far. Here’s a chance to prove me wrong … up for the challenge? Go to any of the Catholic sites you have been given, identify what has been said and then scripturally refute it with something more then, “I don’t believe”. Yeah, I know… this would be a tough task if you actually tried to do it. So, what’s it going to be: continue playing games or really do something of significance?

You are right. He did admit that he stops reading things when he gets to the part where he does not agree. That information shifted my whole concept of who he is, and why he is here.

 

[guanophore]

First of all, it’s not the comments that are just straight forward info anwering wrong statements that I am referring to. That’s not what some here does. It’s the extra comments.

If you all are of one mind, why do so many of you have to ‘climb’ all over anyone with a differing opinion?

Much of this quote indicates that it is impossible for you to receive any comments that disagrees with you because you are convinced only the CC is correct and correct 100% of the time on doctrine, etc. So there is NO argument you can accept.

Sure we can! I can accept your arguement that that the Catholic Church mandates celibacy. I see where you get that. But accepting your conclusions would constitute accepting “a different gospel” from the one we have received from the Apostles. If I run off after such ideas, then I run the risk of being accursed.

So, though I can appreciate your point of view, I am not at liberty to embrace it.

 

[Dokimas]

Dokimas, if there were a person who kept telling you, “Jesus is not God”, wouldn’t you be 100% certain that this person is wrong? No matter what comment and argument he proposed, you wouldn’t accept it because you are 100% certain that you have this truth: Jesus is God.

Well, that’s what we’re doing here. We are indeed 100% certain that the CC does not forbid priests from marrying.

Think about your first paragraph. Have you thought about it this way?? — that it speaks well of my position.

 

[Dokimas]

No one is asking you to have blind faith, Doki. On the contrary, a great deal of information has been shared with you.

You are closed to the information, unlike a humble child, who accepts instruction. None of us expect you to agree with the disciplines of the church. But, if you want to come to CAF and criticize them, we expect you to have an open mind to learn why we have them.

How do you know that it is I who is the child lacking humility?

I’m open to why you believe. Are you open to reasons to believe opposite? Come on, be fair in your analysis.

IMO, it is not me who criticizes.

 

[Dokimas]

You are right. He did admit that he stops reading things when he gets to the part where he does not agree. That information shifted my whole concept of who he is, and why he is here.

I believe what I said was that I stop reading when condescending comments are made.

I will admit if I see the same comments over and over I only skim.

 

[Dokimas]

So, though I can appreciate your point of view, I am not at liberty to embrace it.

The interesting part of this comment is that it’s exactly how I feel about my position in contrast to your beliefs. It’s okay for you to have this position but not me. Is this a double standard?

 

[tqualey]

Hi, Dokimas,

Do you find it amazing that you are generating so little sympathy for your position? Believe it or not - that was not condescending, you have gone through 4 posts and each response was something like, “You do it, why can’t I?” And still, your comments fall to the ground.

So, let me identify a couple of things to you … some will even ring a bell - and then you may be able to see as we see this matter.

How do you know that it is I who is the child lacking humility?

I’m open to why you believe. Are you open to reasons to believe opposite? Come on, be fair in your analysis.

IMO, it is not me who criticizes.

“Child like humility” would thank people for what they gave you, researched the material in such a way as to actually understand the content, and then come back with a response that is supported by more then, “I don’t believe” Notice, Guanophore did not just drop the matter, he gave you several cogent reasons for declining acceptace of your position - this is something that, at least in my opinion, you have consistently failed to do. No one is giving you a ‘pass’ on this - and you are obviously not happy about that. I am amazed at the patience exhibited by the other posters (I am excluding myself from that group) who have repeated over and over again what they expect of you. This is no example of the “Child like humility” you claim to see in yourself. In my view, childishness is closer to the target.

Your so-called ‘openness’ is to anti-Catholic sites that ridicule the Church founded by Christ on Peter. Considering you are on CAF, just what kind of a reception are you really expecting? Your consistent refusal to answer staright forward questions without whining about someone talking down to you has become a real mark of your posts. This is a sad commentary - but, one that, IMO, you have fully earned. Either recognize that your glib and dismissive remarks are getting you no where, or you will see precious few responses to your posts. While I do not know about the other posters, I have found little satisfaction in these responses and will probably just not post to your responses any longer. It simply appears that if you admit to willfully failing the posts of others because they do not meet some kind of personal criteria - you are just wasting our time. My hope is that there are others out on this thread who are reading the material presented and have simply chosen not to post. They can formulate their own opinion - goodness… there have been enough thoughtful and well-researched posts refuting your pevish posts to fill a book!

Unless you actually present material that is equally well-thought-out (and, I have yet to see anything like that on any anti-Catholic site) you will continue to fall short on both content, scripture and context.

God bless

 

[Dokimas]

Hi, Dokimas,

Unless you actually present material that is equally well-thought-out (and, I have yet to see anything like that on any anti-Catholic site) you will continue to fall short on both content, scripture and context.

God bless

To my knowledge, I’ve never been to an anti-catholic website. I’m not anti-catholic.

Just because you don’t accept my understandings and reasons, does that mean it’s not well-thought-out?

 

[jmcrae]

To my knowledge, I’ve never been to an anti-catholic website. I’m not anti-catholic.

Just because you don’t accept my understandings and reasons, does that mean it’s not well-thought-out?

You have not shown any process of logic. There is no “if a+b=c, therefore c-a=b” - all we see is “I disagree” with no reason given. “This is what I think” with no process of logic being shown.

 

[Dokimas]

You have not shown any process of logic. There is no “if a+b=c, therefore c-a=b” - all we see is “I disagree” with no reason given. “This is what I think” with no process of logic being shown.

If you’d go through all my posts on the subject of the CC not allowing priest to get married and remain a priest, repost them, and then we’ll discuss your claims. Unless you do, there’s nothing to discuss with respect to this, your comment.

Anyone can make claims without proof.

 

[jmcrae]

If you’d go through all my posts on the subject of the CC not allowing priest to get married and remain a priest, repost them, and then we’ll discuss your claims. Unless you do, there’s nothing to discuss with respect to this, your comment.

Anyone can make claims without proof.

Right. You keep assuming that anyone should be allowed to be a priest. Not so. We are allowed to pick who we want. The men who become priests are never forced to be celibate. They already chose it, of their own free will, beforehand - long before they could have possibly known that they might be chosen to become a priest.

Not everyone who takes a vow of celibacy becomes a priest. There are many who simply live out the single vocation, without ever being invited to the priesthood.

Also you seem to assume that the priesthood is a job that someone could apply for - you keep talking about married men being “turned down” - how are they “turned down” - they are simply not asked. There is nothing for them to be “turned down” from - there isn’t an application form somewhere that anybody fills out, with someone calling back and saying “Sorry, you didn’t make the cut because you are married.”

That’s not how it works. No one is “turned away.” People are chosen.

 

[Dokimas]

Right. You keep assuming that anyone should be allowed to be a priest. Not so. We are allowed to pick who we want. The men who become priests are never forced to be celibate. They already chose it, of their own free will, beforehand - long before they could have possibly known that they might be chosen to become a priest.

Not everyone who takes a vow of celibacy becomes a priest. There are many who simply live out the single vocation, without ever being invited to the priesthood.

Also you seem to assume that the priesthood is a job that someone could apply for - you keep talking about married men being “turned down” - how are they “turned down” - they are simply not asked. There is nothing for them to be “turned down” from - there isn’t an application form somewhere that anybody fills out, with someone calling back and saying “Sorry, you didn’t make the cut because you are married.”

That’s not how it works. No one is “turned away.” People are chosen.

I don’t believe I’ve said married men are turned down. Actually, haven’t some married men become priests?

Not to be chose is to be turned away.

 

[jmcrae]

I don’t believe I’ve said married men are turned down. Actually, haven’t some married men become priests?

Some have, yes.

Not to be chose is to be turned away.

Unless they would rather be married, instead.

 

[Dokimas]

Some have, yes.

I’m not responsible for what others say.