P
PJM
Guest
That is correct for all of the reasons articulated in MY previous post
- Status
G
guanophore
Guest
No. Not that I ever heard or saw.
G
guanophore
Guest
Yes.
Modest, non-distracting. Reverent. We are there for worship, not a fashion show.
P
praxising
Guest
india ia a hotbed of new priests. Should be very spiritual folk coming out of that culture.
P
praxising
Guest
I live in a beach community. There is a - they call it a “chapel” it’s not open all the time, but it has a dedicated pastor and local congregation. But mostly it serves the tourist trade in this heavily Catholic area when that part of the city explodes in population during the summer. They often come to Mass ready for the beach in swimwear, but with their beach robes (whatever those are called,) over them, in their flip flops.If you know of any church that allows swimwear in the temple, let me know, I might want to visit.
I wasn’t being disingenuous about the dress code, I just cannot remember which of the Eastern or other rite churches I was going to go explore. It wasn’t Sunday, I was looking for an office or someone who could help me with information, found no open doors but one into the church which had a sign affixed that said no women wearing pants was allowed to enter. <—see that period? Okey-dokey, no prob.
I have been to a Parish (RCC) office where you enter the building to be confronted by one person behind a counter with be bulletproof glass. Behind them, a wall and a door you had to enter a security code to go through. In a suburb. A nice suburb.
That’s what Jesus wanted, to have as many barriers as possible erected to discourage the seekers and faithful. How many great and holy mean have we lost to the priesthood because of required celibacy?
Now I have to go argue about infallibility with someone. There’s no reason related to faith and morals that RCC priests should not marry. That’s my opinion for the thread. And they will, I hope, sooner than later.
God bless you all abundantly, Peace of Christ be with you.
P
placido
Guest
Then you are not called to be a priest in the Roman Rite.
T
Tantum_ergo
Guest
Actually, there is a reason. It is called "obedience to authority’. It’s called "belief in the Holy Spirit’.
It IS a Discipline. It CAN change. IF the Holy Spirit wills, it WILL change.
But --and I don’t think you quite get this-- IF it DOES change, dear friend, that will NOT mean that for the period the Church required celibacy that the Church was WRONG. It was not.
How many ‘great and holy MARRIED men’ do you really think that God was calling to HIS Holy Catholic Church knowing that HE HIMSELF had decreed that the Church needed CELIBATE PRIESTS? (this being due to the fact that Christ had given His Church the power to ‘bind and loose’)
Do you really think that the Catholic Church was spitting in the face of God and DENYING people some RIGHT?
T
Tantum_ergo
Guest
Praixing, I have NO idea why you made an emotional little barrage about how in ONE Church there is a ‘bulletproof glass’ and how Jesus would not have wanted all these barriers’ (rather heavily sarcastically). . .
What on EARTH does that have to do with the idea of priests marrying?
Unless you’re trying to imply that because in ONE CHURCH there is a bulletproof barrier for protection of people, that this is somehow a barrier to CHRIST and how the Church’s ‘denial’ of married priests is another example of a barrier. . .
A bulletproof barrier is NOT ‘keeping people from Christ’. And a celibate clergy is not denying married men some “RIGHT” to be priests.
What on EARTH does that have to do with the idea of priests marrying?
Unless you’re trying to imply that because in ONE CHURCH there is a bulletproof barrier for protection of people, that this is somehow a barrier to CHRIST and how the Church’s ‘denial’ of married priests is another example of a barrier. . .
A bulletproof barrier is NOT ‘keeping people from Christ’. And a celibate clergy is not denying married men some “RIGHT” to be priests.
R
rinnie
Guest
Exactly, when a Priest is called to the Roman Rite he makes an oath to God. When you make an Oath you are to honor that oath till death.
It would be lik marrying in the RCC and say I promise to love honor and obey in sickness and in health till something better comes along.(gotta keep my options open
)
P
pat_helensburgh
Guest
the Anglican Priests who are married who are now Catholic Priests - still married of course, will be the wedge on this issue.
For now we do have married Catholic Priests, in one part of the world only!
agree or not that is what is as we speak.
it seems likely some of the disciples did have wife’s & the reasons why the church doesn’t allow married priests are well canvassed in this discussion & others, yet we should reflect for a moment that the Holy Catholic Church is not a dead religion, it is not held captive 2000 years in the past, we respond to God today, as God’s people in this point of time.
We have always held knowledge & learning as a response to God with many fine Catholic schools & universities in all parts of the world. Go back only one or two generations & these institutions were the realm of Priests, Brothers & Sisters, yet now we have many teachers, coordinator’s, headmasters who are laity.
If not for the change many schools simply would of closed or restricted their intake of students due to the shortage of available priests & nuns.
we did what we needed to do to ensure Gods word was available to all not restricted due to earthly logistical problems.
I have been so inspired with the knowledge, faith & wisdom of our beloved Pope Benedict & i have no doubt he is well aware of the demographics of the Priesthood, the dwindling numbers in different parts of the world & with the married former Anglican Catholic Priests setting a precedent i humbly predict a change of Dogma within a generation.
For now we do have married Catholic Priests, in one part of the world only!
agree or not that is what is as we speak.
it seems likely some of the disciples did have wife’s & the reasons why the church doesn’t allow married priests are well canvassed in this discussion & others, yet we should reflect for a moment that the Holy Catholic Church is not a dead religion, it is not held captive 2000 years in the past, we respond to God today, as God’s people in this point of time.
We have always held knowledge & learning as a response to God with many fine Catholic schools & universities in all parts of the world. Go back only one or two generations & these institutions were the realm of Priests, Brothers & Sisters, yet now we have many teachers, coordinator’s, headmasters who are laity.
If not for the change many schools simply would of closed or restricted their intake of students due to the shortage of available priests & nuns.
we did what we needed to do to ensure Gods word was available to all not restricted due to earthly logistical problems.
I have been so inspired with the knowledge, faith & wisdom of our beloved Pope Benedict & i have no doubt he is well aware of the demographics of the Priesthood, the dwindling numbers in different parts of the world & with the married former Anglican Catholic Priests setting a precedent i humbly predict a change of Dogma within a generation.
A
Anna10
Guest
Well our Lord Jesus will accept us in his church whatever we were wearing, it is only about how we pray, and what we do for each other.
But, it is also nice to respect the house of God by putting a decent, reserved clothes.
God Bless
Anna
But, it is also nice to respect the house of God by putting a decent, reserved clothes.
God Bless
Anna
C
ConstantineTG
Guest
Diocesan priests do not make an Oath to God to remain celibate. They make a promise, and it doesn’t carry the same weight as a vow. Although breaking a promise is a serious offense, its not a serious sin as breaking a vow.Exactly, when a Priest is called to the Roman Rite he makes an oath to God. When you make an Oath you are to honor that oath till death.
It would be lik marrying in the RCC and say I promise to love honor and obey in sickness and in health till something better comes along.(gotta keep my options open
R
rinnie
Guest
ALL ordained ministers of the Latin Church with the exception of permanent deacons are normally chosen from among men who live a celebate life and who intend to remain CELIBATE for the Sake of the Kingdom. Called to CONSECRATE themselves with the undivided heart to the Lord and to the affairs of the Lord they give themselves entirely to God and to men. CCC 1579
A Sacrament is an Oath.
W
willwhite1951
Guest
Celibacy was way before the Church adopted this as a way of life.
11 lateran council is a good place to end up.
Mostly men must Imitate Jesus Christ completely, to be married to mother Church,24/7 day or night…it use to be priests had to abstain the night before xelebrating mass or else take the chance of excommunication then later it was to difficult to seperate your heart as i went thru with a new bride. when you give your entire heart to christ and their is nothing left for a spouse. Giving to GOD in completeness this is why i believe men must be celebant and not marry. YOU CAN study for days and not get an answer… a man made rule not of Christ Jesus…deciples were married and had to leave families to follow jesus. COME FOLLOW ME AND BE A FISHER OF MEN!
11 lateran council is a good place to end up.
Mostly men must Imitate Jesus Christ completely, to be married to mother Church,24/7 day or night…it use to be priests had to abstain the night before xelebrating mass or else take the chance of excommunication then later it was to difficult to seperate your heart as i went thru with a new bride. when you give your entire heart to christ and their is nothing left for a spouse. Giving to GOD in completeness this is why i believe men must be celebant and not marry. YOU CAN study for days and not get an answer… a man made rule not of Christ Jesus…deciples were married and had to leave families to follow jesus. COME FOLLOW ME AND BE A FISHER OF MEN!
H
hn160
Guest
The prohibition of the marriage of priest is a man-made law by the Roman Catholic Church. This is what the Augsburg Confession has to say:
XXIII. The Marriage of Priests
1 There has been common complaint concerning priests who have not been continent. 2 On this account Pope Pius is reported to have said that there were some reasons why priests were forbidden to marry but that there are now far weightier reasons why this right should be restored. Platina writes to this effect.3 3 Since priests among us desired to avoid such open scandals, they took wives and taught that it was lawful for them to contract matrimony. 4 In the first place, this was done because Paul says, “Because of the temptation to immorality each man should have his own wife” 7
10 It is also evident that in the ancient church priests were married men. 11 Paul said (tr-63) that a married man should be chosen to be bishop (1 Tim. 3:2), 12 and not until four hundred years ago were priests in Germany compelled by force to live in celibacy.4 In fact, they offered such resistance that the archbishop of Mayence,5 when about to publish the Roman pontiff’s edict on this matter, was almost killed by the enraged priests in an uprising. 13 In such a harsh manner was the edict carried out that not only were future marriages prohibited but existing marriages were also dissolved, although this was contrary to all laws, divine and human, and contrary even to the canons, both those made by the popes and those made by the most celebrated councils.6
14 Inasmuch as the world is growing old and man’s nature is becoming weaker, it is also well to take precautions against the introduction into Germany of more vices.
15 Besides, God instituted marriage to be a remedy against human infirmity. 16 The canons themselves state that in later times the old rigor should be relaxed now and then on account of man’s weakness, and it is devoutly to be desired that this be done in the case of sacerdotal marriage. 17 And it seems that the churches will soon be lacking in pastors if marriage continues to be forbidden.
18 Although the commandment of God is in force, although the custom of the church is well known, and although impure celibacy causes many scandals, adulteries, and other crimes which deserve the punishments of just magistrates, yet it is a marvelous thing that nowhere is greater cruelty exercised than in opposition to the marriage of priests. 19 God has commanded that marriage be held in honor. 20 The laws of all well-ordered states, even among the heathen, have adorned marriage with the greatest praise. 21 But now men, and even priests, are cruelly put to death, contrary to the intent of the canons, for no other cause than marriage. 22 To prohibit marriage is called a doctrine of demons by Paul in 1 Tim. 4:3. 23 This can be readily understood now that the prohibition of marriage is maintained by means of such penalties.
(tr-65) 24 Just as no human law can nullify a command of God, so no vow can do so. 25 Accordingly Cyprian advised that women who did not keep the chastity which they had promised should marry. His words in the first book of his letters, Epistle XI, are these: “If they are unwilling or unable to persevere, it is better for them to marry than to fall into the fire through their lusts; at least they should give no offense to their brothers and sisters.”
26 The canons show some consideration toward those who have made vows before attaining a proper age, and as a rule vows used to be so made in former times.
XXIII. The Marriage of Priests
1 There has been common complaint concerning priests who have not been continent. 2 On this account Pope Pius is reported to have said that there were some reasons why priests were forbidden to marry but that there are now far weightier reasons why this right should be restored. Platina writes to this effect.3 3 Since priests among us desired to avoid such open scandals, they took wives and taught that it was lawful for them to contract matrimony. 4 In the first place, this was done because Paul says, “Because of the temptation to immorality each man should have his own wife” 7
10 It is also evident that in the ancient church priests were married men. 11 Paul said (tr-63) that a married man should be chosen to be bishop (1 Tim. 3:2), 12 and not until four hundred years ago were priests in Germany compelled by force to live in celibacy.4 In fact, they offered such resistance that the archbishop of Mayence,5 when about to publish the Roman pontiff’s edict on this matter, was almost killed by the enraged priests in an uprising. 13 In such a harsh manner was the edict carried out that not only were future marriages prohibited but existing marriages were also dissolved, although this was contrary to all laws, divine and human, and contrary even to the canons, both those made by the popes and those made by the most celebrated councils.6
14 Inasmuch as the world is growing old and man’s nature is becoming weaker, it is also well to take precautions against the introduction into Germany of more vices.
15 Besides, God instituted marriage to be a remedy against human infirmity. 16 The canons themselves state that in later times the old rigor should be relaxed now and then on account of man’s weakness, and it is devoutly to be desired that this be done in the case of sacerdotal marriage. 17 And it seems that the churches will soon be lacking in pastors if marriage continues to be forbidden.
18 Although the commandment of God is in force, although the custom of the church is well known, and although impure celibacy causes many scandals, adulteries, and other crimes which deserve the punishments of just magistrates, yet it is a marvelous thing that nowhere is greater cruelty exercised than in opposition to the marriage of priests. 19 God has commanded that marriage be held in honor. 20 The laws of all well-ordered states, even among the heathen, have adorned marriage with the greatest praise. 21 But now men, and even priests, are cruelly put to death, contrary to the intent of the canons, for no other cause than marriage. 22 To prohibit marriage is called a doctrine of demons by Paul in 1 Tim. 4:3. 23 This can be readily understood now that the prohibition of marriage is maintained by means of such penalties.
(tr-65) 24 Just as no human law can nullify a command of God, so no vow can do so. 25 Accordingly Cyprian advised that women who did not keep the chastity which they had promised should marry. His words in the first book of his letters, Epistle XI, are these: “If they are unwilling or unable to persevere, it is better for them to marry than to fall into the fire through their lusts; at least they should give no offense to their brothers and sisters.”
26 The canons show some consideration toward those who have made vows before attaining a proper age, and as a rule vows used to be so made in former times.
C
ConstantineTG
Guest
The prohibition of marriage of priests is a teaching by St. Paul in his Epistles. What the Roman Church has prohibited is the ordination of married men. Eastern Churches still ordain married men.
G
guanophore
Guest
This is not entirely accurate, hn. The custom of priests being married to the Bride of Christ began with the Apostles, and has been practiced everywhere from ancient times.
In the East, persons are received into the priesthood even if they are married, but once they are ordained, they are expected to remain married only to the Bride of Christ. This is also true for deacons both East and West.
The custom of the Latin Church choosing from among those called to celibacy for the priesthood comes from the desire to correct abuses of the clerical office. The church learned in the early centuries that the powerful gift of celibacy is preferred in the duty of priesthood. This appreciation came out of the monastic period of the Church, before the “Roman” Church developed any such “law”.
A person who is unable to maintain continence and is so prone to such temptation to immorality is not considered a good candidate for priesthood.
This is simply untrue. The Church has never, nor does she now, “compel by force” anyone to live in celibacy. During the preparation for priesthood, the candidate is in a long process of discernment, not only about whether one is called to celibacy, but to the priesthood as well (as there are some who are called to celibacy but not ordained life). Each person freely takes the vows of becoming the spouse of the Bride of Christ.
So the unholy reaction of the priests in rage should be used to determine the pastoral needs of the Church?
Certainly there have been many poor implementations of the doctrine of the faith through the years. Christians have even killed one another, thinking they were serving God. An abuse in living the faith does not invalidate a valid discipline of the Church. Celibacy of the priesthood is such a discipline, even if it has not always been taught and practiced properly.
This is also a falsehood. Man’s nature is not “growing weaker”. On the contrary, Christ’s intention for mankind is that we become most fully human, and Christlike in our natures. Theosis is the goal of mankind, not "weakness’. This statement reflects Luther’s own expereinces, but not the gospel.
I do agree, however, that vices should not be introduced to Germany, or anywhere else. Abandoning one’s vows made to God and the Church would be such a vice.
G
guanophore
Guest
This is also a falsehood. This is not the reason God instituted marriage.
Luther is misusing the instruction on relaxing the rigors to enable sexual license.
This is as much an inaccurate myth today as it was 500 years ago.
What he seems to be saying is that failure to keep one’s vows to the Church will be ameliorated by taking more vows to a wife and family. What makes anyone think that a faithless man will become faithful by abandoning one set of vows for another?
The reasonm that societies “adorn marriage with the greatest praise” is BECAUSE of the teaching of the Church.
It is regrettable that anyone is put to death for faithlessness in one’s vows, but it is also inaccurate to say it is “for no other reason”. A person who has abandoned one’s vows and is disobedient to one’s bishop is not fit for ministry. In our modern society, we would not inflict the death penalty on such a person, but neither would they be permitted to serve in ministry.
This is more falsehood, as the Church does not prohibit marriage. Rather, marriage is encouraged, and fornication is prohibited. The right of the Church to choose from among those called to celibacy does not prohibit marriage to anyone.
So, when a person freely takes a vow to espouse the bride of Christ, this is ok to nullify? What kind of sense does this make? It is not even logical.
This is absolutly true. Any ordained person who is unwilling or unable to persevere in their vows, and has been set afire by their lusts is clearly not fit for ministry. They need to be removed from active service for a time of prayer, healing, and discernment, or discharge completely from the duty of priesthood, at which time they may marry and pursue the lust that has apparently overtaken them.
G
guanophore
Guest
I don’t think this statement can be supported Scripturally.
The Apsotles never prohibited marriage in any way, shape, or form.
And this is a discipline, not a prohibition. There are plenty of married priests in the Latin Rite as well, and the number is growing as our separated brethren cross the Tiber with their wives.
C
ConstantineTG
Guest
[BIBLEDRB]1 Corinthians 7:25-28[/BIBLEDRB]
Semantics. Prohibition means something cannot be done. The discipline calls for ordination of celibate men. Therefore there is a prohibition on ordination of married men. There are exceptions, but of course we’re discussing the norm here.And this is a discipline, not a prohibition. There are plenty of married priests in the Latin Rite as well, and the number is growing as our separated brethren cross the Tiber with their wives.
- Status