L
Lenten_ashes
Guest
Nope, he was celibate and actually sort of encouraged it for those who are able.
1 Cor 7:7
- Status
1 Cor 7:7
M
Markie_Boy
Guest
I am not saying one must be married to be a bishop or deacon. What I am saying is God’s word permits it - I don’t think it’s OK to forbid it.
Optional for pastors no problem - mandate to forbid??? I don’t see it.
Optional for pastors no problem - mandate to forbid??? I don’t see it.
L
Lenten_ashes
Guest
But do you see the point being made? Paul is actually decreasing the number of wives permitted - outlawing polygamy. And he encourages celibacy if you are able. The Church just took it a step further with this discipline. And she can do that by virtue of her authority. I’d say nobody is being forced into clergy role, so no problemo!
And based on what I am hearing I do believe priests will be allowed to marry within our lifetime. Personally, I’ve always felt you give them a 5 year window to marry once ordained. By that time you know whether or not you can hack celibacy.
A
adamhovey1988
Guest
I feel like I should qualify that the Church already has married priests such as the Anglican ordinariate and Eastern Catholic priests. I do not agree that we should dispense the role of celibacy in the west because we’re not prepared for it the reason that Eastern priests are allowed to be married is because it is part of the culture it’s not part of the culture here. I would also like to mention that Pope Francis pointed out that it’s not going to happen while he spoke no you’re free to have your opinion on clerical celibacy is not a dogma and the fact we have married priests but I think it’s a good idea.
I
in_servitude
Guest
This concern you have - is it still tied to your receiving the Eucharist? You are saying that unless you see the bible spelling out the forbidding of marriage to the ordained, then you can’t join the Church because you can’t say, “Amen,” to the Body of Christ?
If that is your concern, can you please let me know how that is a valid concern?
L
Lenten_ashes
Guest
Markie knows there are Anglican and Eastern priests who are married. And I think fact, alone, refutes the argument that the Church is doing something against scripture.
My problem is with the vetting process. It’s difficult to tell who can or cant hack it…or who “burns” as Paul describes it. People will lie and put on acts during the vetting process, unfortunately…
Even if only 2% of our priests are abusing kids that is 2% too many and it needs to be worked on, imo. And because the Church is so large in size that 2% looks awfully inflated to your typical Baptist reading his morning paper. Believe me, I’ve had to hear all the attacks on the Church over the scandals and what not.
J
jcrichton
Guest
Hi!
I concur. Any percentage is too high; however what is not being observed is that the cases involved, for the most part (at least from the news in the US), very old accusations and that similar cases, which were much more current, did not get the news coverage that the Catholic cases got.
In retrospect, the Church has seen that “things as usual” (following society’s norm) does not work for those who claim to represent God; it is quite Scriptural that the Church be held to a higher standard since she is the deposit of Faith.
However, linking the sex abuse scandal to Priest’s celibacy is flawed since sex abuse cases involve both married and unmarried as well as male and female.
Further, due to the predominant number of male victims (at least in the Catholic cases), I would venture to state that it is not a simple case of celibacy but rather of deviant sexuality–as case study I offer the acts of that old Priest that, while in the midst of the scandal, appropriated his parish’s moneys to ventured into Canada seeking a male prostitute. His “burning” was not because of celibacy but because he desired a man.
I cannot fault the Church for the ignorance of who’s “burning” for whom–yet, we know that errors were made in both putting a stop to the offenders and following the cultural norm (playing the shuffling game).
Merry Christmas!
Maran atha!
Angel
M
Markie_Boy
Guest
Yes - I know the other churches have their scandals too, so no stones to be thrown there.
And thanks Lenten Ashes, yes, familiar that there are married priests.
My questions go deeper than this one, but this one to me is so clear - scripture says let bishops be married if they choose - the church says you choose, be a bishop or married, not both.
I don’t think I’ll get anyone to agree with me on that one here. And I get there is a difference between discipline and dogma - but I wouldn’t want either to contradict scripture.
The underlying issue for me is, if they will go against scripture here, what else do I have to look for.
And thanks Lenten Ashes, yes, familiar that there are married priests.
My questions go deeper than this one, but this one to me is so clear - scripture says let bishops be married if they choose - the church says you choose, be a bishop or married, not both.
I don’t think I’ll get anyone to agree with me on that one here. And I get there is a difference between discipline and dogma - but I wouldn’t want either to contradict scripture.
The underlying issue for me is, if they will go against scripture here, what else do I have to look for.
L
Lenten_ashes
Guest
Right, and the homosexual inclinations is something that is actually part of the vetting process. If you admit to being attracted to men you are likely not going to accepted and will not be ordained - but, people lie.
And I agree to a certain extent that you cant blame it on celibacy but I do think we likely see a decrease in these cases if these men are allowed to act out a normal human function of sexuality. And that is why in a previous post i mentioned that i personally think a 5 year window should be granted to the newly ordained. During that early process a person will know whether or not he can hack the celibate life, imo.
I had a close family member who was molested by a MARRIED Baptist youth minister - yet ***still ***have to defend the scandals of the Catholic Church with my own fundamentalists family members. They still cant see that this is not a total Catholic problem, it’s a human being problem. People have tunnel vision and see what they want to see.
L
Lenten_ashes
Guest
Markie are they really going against scripture or*** your*** interpretation of scripture since there are married priests in the Church?
Do you also have a problem with other disciplines like don’t eat meat on Fridays? Afterall, the scriptures also says:
ALL things are lawful…I can loosely intrepret this as I can technically do anything and who is the Church tell me since they are going against scripture, according to my own interpretation…
I
in_servitude
Guest
I have not seen this text in scripture. Can you please point to where it says, “let bishops be married if they choose”? I do not believe that you will find that text in scripture.
I’ve seen many lengthy commentaries that all support the Church’s position on this. You stating a contrary position is not likely to influence me to consider a different answer. But, if you could engage in the conversation, that might influence some to consider the validity of an argument that you might put forward.
I notice the irony of stating that the Catholic Church goes against scripture, the bible being a collection of books pulled together through the Catholic Tradition.
You are probably going to a church of some sort today. Do they permit women to speak? If so, then I presume this is a problem for you.
M
Markie_Boy
Guest
I attend a Catholic parish. Women read but do not preach.
“scripture says let bishops be married if they choose” - I chose to paraphrase it this way, actually referring to 1 Tim 3:2, as everyone wants to keep saying a person has the choice to be married and not a priest, or a un-married and a priest.
The way I read it, I see a bishop is the one who can choose - and the choice does not eliminate him from being a bishop.
“scripture says let bishops be married if they choose” - I chose to paraphrase it this way, actually referring to 1 Tim 3:2, as everyone wants to keep saying a person has the choice to be married and not a priest, or a un-married and a priest.
The way I read it, I see a bishop is the one who can choose - and the choice does not eliminate him from being a bishop.
M
MarkInOregon
Guest
When you say Scripture says “let bishops be married if they choose” you’re putting your particular spin on it. In 1 Timothy 3 you find a list of minimum qualifications for being ordained a bishop, at that time, and one of those is that you cannot be ordained a bishop if you’ve been married more than once–that’s really all the Scripture says–it doesn’t really say what you claim it says ie. “let them marry if they choose”. The passage says nothing about the Churches authority to bind it’s ministers to a higher standard.
This isn’t a doctrine it is a discipline. You’re looking at this one instance of a bishop of the Church exercising the Churches power of binding and loosing to set a discipline and saying that future Church bishops do not have the power of binding and loosing to revise this discipline to fit the needs of the Church in their time. You’re treating it like a doctrine rather than a discipline.
The peace of Christ,
Mark
I
in_servitude
Guest
What is your position on permitting women to speak given 1Cor 14:33-35?
Since permitting women to speak in church goes directly against scripture, even in this matter of discipline, is this aspect a concern for you? If not, then why is it only about the priest issue?
Okay - so it sounds like you agree that scripture doesn’t actually say “let bishops be married if they choose.” But, there does not appear to be a way to twist Paul’s words to say that it is allowed for women to speak in church. You’ll note that it isn’t about the preaching, either. They have to wait until they get home to ask their husbands a question. They can’t ask their husbands while they are in the church.
If two different people read something in scripture, they are likely to understand the text differently. That is because we have different experiences. Lucky for us, God has provided us something firm to to stand upon rather than be left adrift in our disagreements: Petros.
M
Markie_Boy
Guest
So why does the Church allow women to read???
I
in_servitude
Guest
Does it matter? You will probably see several well formed and logical answers. But, whatever is explained in this regard will still go against what was written there in 1Cor. You have stated that you don’t want to belong to a church that goes against scripture, so I do suspect that any amount of explaining will not be satisfactory.
T
Tomdstone
Guest
IMHO, I think that what is written in Scripture does matter and should not be dismissed.
I
in_servitude
Guest
I asked the question to Markie Boy in the context of this thread. As I understand Markie Boy, there is a concern if there is any deviation in discipline from statements made in scripture.
It would be a strawman argument to suggest that I am dismissing scripture.
M
Markie_Boy
Guest
I didn’t take it that way - therefore did not respond. I took it as - you won’t listen to anything anyway - so I didn’t reply.
Done with this thread, un-subscribing to it.
I
in_servitude
Guest
I’ve responded to your statements. The fact is that I have listened, and I explored the implications if the Church did in fact follow my understanding your logic that statements in scripture should drive discipline.I’m making this comment in the hopes that you decide to revisit the thread.
- Status