Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Ratzinger's Responsibility
National Catholic Reporter ^ | March 18, 2010 | Hans Kung

Posted on 03/25/2010 8:19:34 AM PDT by CondoleezzaProtege

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-63 last
To: trisham; Antoninus

Dittos


61 posted on 04/28/2010 11:19:17 AM PDT by Running On Empty ((The three sorriest words: "It's too late"))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus

Amen!


62 posted on 04/28/2010 11:24:06 AM PDT by Lorica
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: A.A. Cunningham
You and the disgraced Kung are both quite mistaken.

Well, I'm sorry to say I'd prefer to rely on the Catholic Encyclopaedia which takes a differing view.

Turning now to the historical development of the present law of celibacy, we must necessarily begin with St. Paul's direction (1 Timothy 3:2, 12, and Titus 1:6) that a bishop or a deacon should be "the husband of one wife". These passages seem fatal to any contention that celibacy was made obligatory upon the clergy from the beginning, but on the other hand, the Apostle's desire that other men might be as himself (1 Corinthians 7:7-8), already quoted) precludes the inference that he wished all ministers of the Gospel to be married. The words beyond doubt mean that the fitting candidate was a man, who, amongst other qualities which St. Paul enunciates as likely to make his authority respected, possessed also such stability of divorce, by remaining faithful to one wife. The direction is therefore restrictive, no injunctive; it excludes men who have married more than once, but it does not impose marriage as a necessary condition. This freedom of choice seems to have lasted during the whole of what we may call, with Vacandard, the first period of the Church's legislation, i.e. down to about the time of Constantine and the Council of Nicaea.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03481a.htm

63 posted on 04/28/2010 6:24:47 PM PDT by Androcles (All your typos are belong to us)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-63 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson