Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Married man becomes Maine's newest Catholic priest {Ecumenical}
WGME 13 ^ | 25 June 2012 | APNews Now

Posted on 06/26/2012 3:50:51 AM PDT by Cronos

Maine's newest Roman Catholic priest has a wife and four grown children.

Sixty-two-year-old David Affleck of York was ordained this month under a 1980 papal provision that allows former married Episcopal clergy to become priests in the Catholic church.

When ordained at Portland's Cathedral of the Immaculate Conception, Affleck became only the third married man to join the Catholic priesthood in Maine since the 1980 papal provision. He is now the only married Catholic priest.

Church officials say only a handful of former married Episcopal clergy are ordained as Catholic priests in the U.S. each year.

Affleck tells the Portland Press Herald (http://bit.ly/MjtWA5) he left the Episcopal church and joined the Catholic ranks about five years ago.


TOPICS: Catholic; Current Events
KEYWORDS: celibacy; maine
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-61 next last

1 posted on 06/26/2012 3:50:55 AM PDT by Cronos
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Cronos
I don't know if I agree with this. Slippery slope?

I even have an Uncle in NJ and my hometown Priest both have grown children, 4 and 7 respectively, but they became Priests after their wives passed away. And even then it's difficult because of all of their church duties in addition to spending Holiday time with their family, etc. The hometown Priest spent Christmas with his family last year, and they brought someone else in to cover. I think that was fair as he hadn't spent actual Christmas day with his Children and Grandchildren in quite some time.

I'm not going to argue the whole “Priests should be allowed to marry!” now, but if some are, for whatever reason (used to be Episcopal) it makes you wonder what other tenets are “negotiable” in the long term, which makes me a little nervous, steadfastness in the face of change is what I like about the Catholic church, then again I can see why the Episcopal wanted to leave the liberalization of his church and he can't just not be married. But couldn't he be something other then a Priest? There are other ways to serve the church where you can still take part in the Mass.

2 posted on 06/26/2012 4:19:58 AM PDT by MacMattico
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MacMattico

It’s difficult for me to understand the general requirement that priests maintain *lifelong* celibacy.And now that there are married priests here (and elsewhere,I assume) that adds to the confusion,IMO.Fewer and fewer men are willing to go without the emotional and physical companionship of a woman,those desires being *completely* normal and,one could certainly say,God given.


3 posted on 06/26/2012 4:35:16 AM PDT by Gay State Conservative (Bill Ayers Was *Not* "Just Some Guy In The Neighborhood")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Gay State Conservative

There are married priests in the Eastern Catholic rites, just not usually found in the Latin rite. The following excerpt from the Catholic Encyclopedia may help:

“Celibacy is the renunciation of marriage implicitly or explicitly made, for the more perfect observance of chastity, by all those who receive the Sacrament of Orders in any of the higher grades. The character of this renunciation, as we shall see, is differently understood in the Eastern and in the Western Church. Speaking, for the moment, only of Western Christendom, the candidates for orders are solemnly warned by the bishop at the beginning of the ceremony regarding the gravity of the obligation which they are incurring. He tells them:

You ought anxiously to consider again and again what sort of a burden this is which you are taking upon you of your own accord. Up to this you are free. You may still, if you choose, turn to the aims and desires of the world (licet vobis pro artitrio ad caecularia vota transire). But if you receive this order (of the subdiaconate) it will no longer be lawful to turn back from your purpose. You will be required to continue in the service of God, and with His assistance to observe chastity and to be bound for ever in the ministrations of the Altar, to serve who is to reign.

By stepping forward despite this warning, when invited to do so, and by co-operating in the rest of the ordination service, the candidate is understood to bind himself equivalently by a vow of chastity. He is henceforth unable to contract a valid marriage, and any serious transgression in the matter of this vow is not only a grievous sin in itself but incurs the additional guilt of sacrilege.

Before turning to the history of this observance it will be convenient to deal in the first place with certain general principles involved. The law of celibacy has repeatedly been made the object of attack, especially of recent years, and it is important at the outset to correct certain prejudices thus created. Although we do not find in the New Testament any indication of celibacy being made compulsory either upon the Apostles or those whom they ordained, we have ample warrant in the language of Our Saviour, and of St. Paul for looking upon virginity as the higher call, and by inference, as the condition befitting those who are set apart for the work of the ministry. In Matthew 19:12, Christ clearly commends those who, “for the sake of the kingdom of God”, have held aloof from the married state, though He adds: “he who can accept it, let him accept it”. St. Paul is even more explicit:

I would that all men were even as myself; but every one hath his proper gift from God .... But I say to the unmarried and to the widows, it is good for them if they so continue, even as I.

And further on:

But I would have you to be without solicitude. He that is without a wife is solicitous for the things that belong to the Lord, how he may please God. But he that is with a wife, is solicitous for the things of the world, how he may please his wife: and he is divided. And the unmarried woman and the virgin thinketh on the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body and spirit. But she that is married thinketh on the things of this world how she may please her husband. And this I speak for your profit, not to cast a snare upon you, but for that which is decent and which may give you power to attend upon the Lord without impediment. (1 Corinthians 7:7-8 and 32-35)

Further, although we grant that the motive here appealed to is in some measure utilitarian, we shall probably be justified in saying that the principle which underlies the Church’s action in enforcing celibacy is not limited to this utilitarian aspect but goes even deeper. From the earliest period the Church was personified and conceived of by her disciples as the Virgin Bride and as the pure Body of Christ, or again as the Virgin Mother (parthenos meter), and it was plainly fitting that this virgin Church should be served by a virgin priesthood. Among Jews and pagans the priesthood was hereditary. Its functions and powers were transmitted by natural generation. But in the Church of Christ, as an antithesis to this, the priestly character was imparted by the Holy Ghost in the Divinely-instituted Sacrament of Orders. Virginity is consequently the special prerogative of the Christian priesthood. Virginity and marriage both holy, but in different ways. The conviction that virginity possesses a higher sanctity and clearer spiritual intuitions, seems to be an instinct planted deep in the heart of man. Even in the Jewish Dispensation where the priest begot children to whom his functions descended, it was nevertheless enjoined that he should observe continence during the period in which he served in the Temple. No doubt a mystical reason of this kind does not appeal to all, but such considerations have always held a prominent place in the thought of the Fathers of the Church; as is seen, for example, in the admonition very commonly addressed to subdeacons of the Middle Ages at the time of their ordination. “With regard to them it has pleased our fathers that they who handle the sacred mysteries should observe the law of continence, as it is written ‘be clean ye who handle the vessels of the Lord?’ “(Maskell, Monumenta Ritualia, II, 242).”
(http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03481a.htm)

Celibacy for the priesthood is a discipline. I’d encourage you to read the linked article in it’s completion for more information. I hope that this helps.


4 posted on 06/26/2012 4:49:23 AM PDT by sayuncledave (et Verbum caro factum est (And the Word was made flesh))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Cronos

The RCC should accept change. There’s nothing wrong with a man taking a wife and serving God at the same time. If anything it removes a sexual stumbling block from his life.


5 posted on 06/26/2012 5:07:58 AM PDT by libdestroyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MacMattico
Again, there is a enormous distinction - ignored by most Americans and the American media - between a married man being ordained (completely valid and licit, with proper permission, in both the Catholic Church and the Orthodox churches) and an ordained man getting married after his ordination - which is illicit in all circumstances and cause for laicization.

The main argument of the "priests should be married" liberals is that they want all the elderly hippie priests who left the ministry, got laicized and got married to be readmitted with full priestly faculties.

That can never happen and would be enormously damaging to any ecumenical discussions with the Orthodox if it did.

This is the opposite circumstance - these are married men becoming Catholic priests, which is the norm in the Eastern Rites of the Catholic Church.

6 posted on 06/26/2012 5:10:40 AM PDT by wideawake
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: libdestroyer
The RCC should accept change.

No, it shouldn't. It has its commission, and that defines its discipline, not fashion.

There’s nothing wrong with a man taking a wife and serving God at the same time.

Until the point where he needs to put his family above his flock.

If anything it removes a sexual stumbling block from his life.

Married pastors violate their marriage vows quite often.

7 posted on 06/26/2012 5:17:34 AM PDT by wideawake
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: libdestroyer

The so-called Roman Catholic Church accepted radical change as a result of Vatican II. As a matter of fact an entire new religion was created as a result of that confab.

The Novus Ordo (as in New (World) Order) is as different as the religion headed by all popes prior to Pope John as night is from day.

It wouldn’t surprise me if in the future married same sex priests would be found in the Novus Ordo. Of course confession and absolution would be out the door as sins committed would outweigh anything good that might be happening.


8 posted on 06/26/2012 5:26:41 AM PDT by IbJensen (If you don't read the newspaper you are uninformed, if you do read the newspaper you are misinformed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: wideawake

I understand the RCC wanting to encourage Priests to remain celibate but married men who wish to serve the Lord in this fashion should be allowed to.

“Married pastors violate their marriage vows quite often.”

That sounds more like an issue with the individual’s level of sanctification more than anything.


9 posted on 06/26/2012 5:27:32 AM PDT by libdestroyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: libdestroyer
The RCC should accept change.

That's a pretty broad statement. What kind of change? Why? Change for change's sake? It's just a silly statement.

There's nothing wrong with a man taking a wife and serving God at the same time.

No one ever said there was. The Church's law regarding priestly celibacy is just that... a changeable law. Even the most right-wing Catholic recognizes that. However, it is a law that has proven to bear much fruit, and it would be unwise to change it based on the experiences of a few years, as compared to the many centuries of experience of fruitfulness. There are many sound and profound theological and practical reasons for it. Read the post just before yours.

If anything it removes a sexual stumbling block from his life.

One fact that people usually ignore when they talk about priestly celibacy is that everyone who is not married is required by Jesus Christ to be celibate. So it is not only priests, but also single people, widows, and widowers, too, who must be celibate. So if you're going to do away with priestly celibacy simply as a way to remove a "sexual stumbling block", then you're on very shaky ground, from a moral theology point of view.

Whether priestly celibacy should continue is a prudential decision of the Church, in the person of the Pope, whoever he may be at any given time in history. We, as Catholics, are part of a hierarchical Church, which means that some people get to make decisions and others must follow them. This is one of those decisions, and I'm comfortable with the fact that I have neither the right nor the responsibility to make that decision. I'll just follow it.

10 posted on 06/26/2012 5:38:43 AM PDT by StonyMan451 (As for me and my household, we will serve the Lord.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Cronos
14 And when Jesus had come into Peter’s house, He saw his wife’s mother lying and sick with a fever.

15 And He touched her hand, and the fever left her, and she arose and ministered unto them.

~Matthew 8:14-15 Even Peter, the so-called "first Pope" of the RCC was married. Why is the RCC shutting out so many men who are interested in serving the Lord through Priesthood?
11 posted on 06/26/2012 5:46:33 AM PDT by libdestroyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: StonyMan451

“So if you’re going to do away with priestly celibacy simply as a way to remove a “sexual stumbling block”, then you’re on very shaky ground, from a moral theology point of view.”

You are correct that every single unmarried individual should be celibate but that’s not what I’m talking about. No one is suggesting that a Priest sleep around with whomever. I’m talking specifically about the option to take a wife.

Regarding the “hierarchical Church,” why is it that Eastern RCC allows for married Priests? I’m not being snarky... I’m really just curious :)


12 posted on 06/26/2012 5:52:22 AM PDT by libdestroyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Gay State Conservative
It’s difficult for me to understand the general requirement that priests maintain *lifelong* celibacy

I'm Catholic and I don't get it either...of course I don't get God punishing nuns who do his work with higher amount of cancer due to them never having kids...Oh that's right it was 7th century men who made these cathotalbinesque idiotic rules...

13 posted on 06/26/2012 6:14:06 AM PDT by trailhkr1 (All you need to know about Zimmerman, innocent = riots, manslaughter = riots, guilty = riots)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Cronos

It’s good enough for defecting Episcopalians but not for the rest?

The Cardinals are on a very, very slippery slope with that pretzel logic. Ending celebacy for the rest would attract a class of more sexually well-adjusted people into the Priesthood, and perhaps end the Church’s long Jerry Sandusky nightmare.

Because if it’s so wrong and against Church teachings, why are they using it to recruit Episcopalians?

Did I just call the Holy Father a hypocrite there??


14 posted on 06/26/2012 6:17:02 AM PDT by Buckeye McFrog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MacMattico
"....but if some are, for whatever reason (used to be Episcopal) it makes you wonder what other tenets are “negotiable” in the long term, which makes me a little nervous, steadfastness in the face of change is what I like about the Catholic church....."

Are you aware that priests were allowed to be married up until the 8th century when the "steadfast" church changed it's rules about it? Read the Bible, especially 1 Corinthians 7:2, 1 Corinthians 9:5 and 1 Timothy 3:1.

15 posted on 06/26/2012 6:36:36 AM PDT by 2nd amendment mama ( www.2asisters.org | Self defense is a basic human right!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: libdestroyer

Apparently, one has to be an Episcopal priest.

Strange logic.


16 posted on 06/26/2012 6:36:48 AM PDT by bonfire
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: MacMattico

Do you self-identify as Roman Catholic, as opposed to Catholic?

For Catholics the concept of married priests is not strange or new. For Roman Catholics perhaps it is strange or new.

We are always Catholic first - Roman Catholic is secondary.

Celibate priests is not dogma and it never has been.


17 posted on 06/26/2012 6:45:11 AM PDT by impimp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: libdestroyer

I can’t speak for the Eastern Catholic churches, but in Orthodoxy, the rule of thumb is that a married man can receive ordination, but an ordained man cannot get married. For this reason, MANY Orthodox seminarians delay their ordinations until they find wives.

Celibacy amongst the general priesthood in the Latin Rite church has not always been a strictly enforced norm. I’m no expert on Roman Catholicism, but I THINK it’s only been an absolute requirement since the 11th century.

In Orthodoxy, married priests are not eligible for elevation to the Episcopacy (they can’t be bishops).


18 posted on 06/26/2012 6:50:57 AM PDT by Yudan (Living comes much easier once we admit we're dying.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Buckeye McFrog

“Did I just call the Holy Father a hypocrite there??”

And do not call anyone on earth ‘father,’ for you have one Father, and he is in heaven.
~Matthew 23:9

Guess the RCC just ignored that verse.


19 posted on 06/26/2012 7:07:03 AM PDT by libdestroyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Gay State Conservative

21 of the 22 Churches sui juris which comprise the Catholic Church ordain, as a norm, married men. All 21 have a shortage of Priests. The argument that ordaining married men en masse in the Latin Rite is the panacea to the shortage has been proven to be, at best, a specious one.


20 posted on 06/26/2012 7:15:43 AM PDT by A.A. Cunningham (Barry Soetoro is a Kenyan communist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Yudan

Thanks Yudan. Very interesting.


21 posted on 06/26/2012 7:17:27 AM PDT by libdestroyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: libdestroyer

The Church does not need to change. Christ, the Apostles and St. Paul taught and lived lives of celibacy. The question you should be posing is not why the Church employs the discipline of celibacy for its clergy and religious but why don’t the so called “Bible believers” do the same?


22 posted on 06/26/2012 7:19:47 AM PDT by A.A. Cunningham (Barry Soetoro is a Kenyan communist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: StonyMan451
The Church's law(sic) regarding priestly celibacy is just that...

discipline

However, it is a law(sic)

discipline

everyone who is not married is required by Jesus Christ to be celibate(sic).

chaste not celibate

who must be celibate(sic).

chaste

23 posted on 06/26/2012 7:25:37 AM PDT by A.A. Cunningham (Barry Soetoro is a Kenyan communist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Cronos

***He is now the only married Catholic priest.***

Is this new? I read over thirty years ago of married Episcopal priests who became Catholic priests.


24 posted on 06/26/2012 7:27:14 AM PDT by Ruy Dias de Bivar (I LIKE ART! Click my name. See my web page.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: trailhkr1
I don't get it either

Understatement of the day.

25 posted on 06/26/2012 7:47:06 AM PDT by A.A. Cunningham (Barry Soetoro is a Kenyan communist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Gay State Conservative

**It’s difficult for me to understand the general requirement that priests maintain *lifelong* celibacy.**

Nothing is difficult when one decided to dedicate his life ENTIRELY to God.

Sure there are bumps in the road just like a vocation to be married. But it’s not difficult once the decision is made.


26 posted on 06/26/2012 7:52:27 AM PDT by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Gay State Conservative

The seminaries are overflowing since they got cleaned up, so your argument about fewer and fewer men choosing the priesthood doesn’t hold water in my opinion.


27 posted on 06/26/2012 7:53:41 AM PDT by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Buckeye McFrog
It’s good enough for defecting Episcopalians but not for the rest?

You quite obviously do not know that these defecting Episcopalians must agree, prior to ordination, that if their spouse precedes them in death they must then adopt the discipline of celibacy for the remainder of their life.

Ending celebacy(sic) for the rest would attract a class of more sexually well-adjusted people into the Priesthood,

Like these paragons of virtue?

perhaps end the Church’s long Jerry Sandusky nightmare.

Sandusky is married. Michael Jackson was married, twice. Try again.

Did I just call the Holy Father a hypocrite there??

Where ignorance is bliss, tis' folly to be wise.

28 posted on 06/26/2012 7:53:56 AM PDT by A.A. Cunningham (Barry Soetoro is a Kenyan communist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: A.A. Cunningham

“The Church does not need to change. Christ, the Apostles and St. Paul taught and lived lives of celibacy. The question you should be posing is not why the Church employs the discipline of celibacy for its clergy and religious but why don’t the so called “Bible believers” do the same?”

The Bible is clear on the point that celibacy is a good thing, but not a required thing. There’s nothing wrong with EITHER life choice. That’s my point.

But if RCC doctrine overrides the Bible...


29 posted on 06/26/2012 7:59:26 AM PDT by libdestroyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: 2nd amendment mama
Are you aware that priests were allowed to be married up until the 8th century when the "steadfast" church changed it's rules about it?

Nice try at revisionist history. Married men could be ordained but they were required to adopt the discipline of lex continentiae - total continence - with regard to a conjugal life with their spouse. Once ordained a single Priest has never been allowed to then marry. Suggest you brush up on Canons XXVII and XXXIII of the Council of Elvira, 295-302 AD, for starters.

Read the Bible, especially 1 Corinthians 7:2, 1 Corinthians 9:5 and 1 Timothy 3:1.

While you are reading the Bible, providing it isn't a heavily edited and abridged version of the original, pay close attention to Matthew 19:12, Matthew 19:27-30, Luke 18:28-32, 1 Corinthians 7:7-8 and 1 Corinthians 7:32-35.

Once you've done that and you have a desire not to come across as a fool opining on a topic you obviously know little about, read the following:

Although it's rather dry; which will probably turn you off, and you'll be unable to comprehend a lot of it, like Scripture, you should make an earnest attempt to engage in some much needed edification.

30 posted on 06/26/2012 8:05:15 AM PDT by A.A. Cunningham (Barry Soetoro is a Kenyan communist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: libdestroyer

You ask “Regarding the “hierarchical Church,” why is it that Eastern RCC allows for married Priests? I’m not being snarky... I’m really just curious :)”

Frankly, I don’t know. I certainly have no issue with it. I suspect it has a lot to do with their culture and different theological perspective, but I couldnt say with any degree of certainty.


31 posted on 06/26/2012 8:22:51 AM PDT by StonyMan451 (As for me and my household, we will serve the Lord.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: libdestroyer
Linguistic literalists like you treat Scripture like a smorgasbord, almost always failing to discern the literal from the figurative.

"And think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham for our father. For I tell you that God is able of these stones to raise up children to Abraham." Matthew 3:9

"Honour thy father and thy mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself." Matthew 19:19

"If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple." Luke 14:26

"Who said: Ye men, brethren, and fathers, hear. The God of glory appeared to our father Abraham, when he was in Mesopotamia, before he dwelt in Charan." Acts 7:2

"And when he had given him leave, Paul standing on the stairs, beckoned with his hand to the people. And a great silence being made, he spoke unto them in the Hebrew tongue, saying: MEN, brethren, and fathers, hear ye the account which I now give unto you." Acts 21:40-22:1

"Therefore is it of faith, that according to grace the promise might be firm to all the seed; not to that only which is of the law, but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham, who is the father of us all, (As it is written: I have made thee a father of many nations,) before God, whom he believed, who quickeneth the dead; and calleth those things that are not, as those that are." Romans 4:16-17

"I write not these things to confound you; but I admonish you as my dearest children. For if you have ten thousand instructors in Christ, yet not many fathers. For in Christ Jesus, by the gospel, I have begotten you." 1 Corinthians 4:14-15

"As you know in what manner, entreating and comforting you, (as a father doth his children,)" 1 Thessalonians 2:11

"To Timothy, his beloved son in faith. Grace, mercy, and peace from God the Father, and from Christ Jesus our Lord." 1 Timothy 1:2

"To Titus my beloved son, according to the common faith, grace and peace from God the Father, and from Christ Jesus our Savior." Titus 1:4

"I beseech thee for my son, whom I have begotten in my bands, Onesimus," Philemon 1:10

"Persevere under discipline. God dealeth with you as with His sons; for what son is there, whom the father doth not correct? But if you be without chastisement, whereof all are made partakers, then are you bastards, and not sons. Moreover we have had fathers of our flesh, for instructors, and we reverenced them: shall we not much more obey the Father of spirits, and live?" Hebrews 12:7-9

"I write unto you, fathers, because you have known Him, who is from the beginning. I write unto you, young men, because you have overcome the wicked one." 1 John 2:13

Here are two more which you conveniently ignore as well:

"Understanding this first, that no prophecy of scripture is made by private interpretation. For prophecy came not by the will of man at any time: but the holy men of God spoke, inspired by the Holy Ghost." 2 Peter 1:20-21

"And account the longsuffering of our Lord, salvation; as also our most dear brother Paul, according to the wisdom given him, hath written to you: As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are certain things hard to be understood, which the unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, to their own destruction." 2 Peter 3:15-16

32 posted on 06/26/2012 8:28:30 AM PDT by A.A. Cunningham (Barry Soetoro is a Kenyan communist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: A.A. Cunningham
Here are two more which you conveniently ignore as well:

This Religion Forum thread is labeled "ecumenical" meaning NO antagonism is tolerable. Also, reading minds is a form of "making it personal."

Discuss the issues all you want, but do not make it personal.

33 posted on 06/26/2012 8:38:38 AM PDT by Religion Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: libdestroyer
Celibacy is a higher calling in the emulation of the life of Christ and His instruction to give up everything to serve God.

""

There’s nothing wrong with EITHER life choice.

Indeed, make a choice but you want to have your cake and eat it to. The Apostles gave up everything to follow Christ, just as Scripture teaches. Who are you willing to shortchange, God or your spouse and family?

But if RCC doctrine overrides the Bible...

You're obtuse. Celibacy is a discipline, not a doctrine. The discipline of celibacy for the clergy is highly praised by Christ and St. Paul in Scripture. It's very apparent that your own personal doctrine is the one that overrides Scripture.

34 posted on 06/26/2012 8:39:56 AM PDT by A.A. Cunningham (Barry Soetoro is a Kenyan communist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: libdestroyer
St. Peter was married at one time, his wife is never mentioned in Scripture. You've quite obviously never read Clement of Alexandria's The Stromata and what St. Peter had to say about marriage.

Here's a few passages from Scripture that you most likely have never read or if you have you conveniently choose to ignore.

"Who said to them: All men take not this word, but they to whom it is given. For there are eunuchs, who were born so from their mother's womb: and there are eunuchs, who were made so by men: and there are eunuchs, who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven. He that can take, let him take it." Matthew 19:11-12

"Then Peter answering, said to him: Behold we have left all things, and have followed Thee: what therefore shall we have? And Jesus said to them: Amen, I say to you, that you, who have followed Me, in the regeneration, when the Son of man shall sit on the seat of His majesty, you also shall sit on twelve seats judging the twelve tribes of Israel. And every one that hath left house, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands for My name's sake, shall receive an hundredfold, and shall possess life everlasting. And many that are first, shall be last: and the last shall be first." Matthew 19:27-30

"Then Peter said: Behold, we have left all things, and have followed Thee. Who said to them: Amen, I say to you, there is no man that hath left house, or parents, or brethren, or wife, or children, for the kingdom of God's sake, Who shall not receive much more in this present time, and in the world to come life everlasting." Luke 18:28-30

"For I would that all men were even as myself: but every one hath his proper gift from God; one after this manner, and another after that. But I say to the unmarried, and to the widows: It is good for them if they so continue, even as I." 1 Corinthians 7:7-8

"But I would have you to be without solicitude. He that is without a wife, is solicitous for the things that belong to the Lord, how he may please God. But he that is with a wife, is solicitous for the things of the world, how he may please his wife: and he is divided. And the unmarried woman and the virgin thinketh on the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body and in spirit. But she that is married thinketh on the things of the world, how she may please her husband. And this I speak for your profit: not to cast a snare upon you; but for that which is decent, and which may give you power to attend upon the Lord, without impediment." 1 Corinthians 7:32-35

Why is the RCC shutting out so many men who are interested in serving the Lord through Priesthood?

Number one, no man has a right to be ordained to the Priesthood:

"You have not chosen Me: but I have chosen you; and have appointed you, that you should go, and should bring forth fruit; and your fruit should remain: that whatsoever you shall ask of the Father in My name, He may give it you." John 15:16

Married men have many ways in which they may serve the Church. You seem to have a very poor grasp of what the life of a Priest entails.

35 posted on 06/26/2012 8:43:07 AM PDT by A.A. Cunningham (Barry Soetoro is a Kenyan communist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: A.A. Cunningham

The scripture you gave me refers to literal fathers. My issue is calling someone a “Holy Father.” I could use the “smorgasbord” argument to those in the RCC too. Maybe it’s best not to attack me on those grounds.


36 posted on 06/26/2012 8:43:54 AM PDT by libdestroyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Religion Moderator
Pointing out a fact is not "making it personal".

Why do you continually act as an apologist for those who pick and choose what Scripture actually says as opposed to what they conveniently pick and choose it says?

but do not make it personal.

Don't allow people to lie and claim that the Church ignores Scripture when it is quite clear that She does not and do not chastise those of us who defend the truth.

37 posted on 06/26/2012 8:45:56 AM PDT by A.A. Cunningham (Barry Soetoro is a Kenyan communist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: A.A. Cunningham
Number one, no man has a right to be ordained to the Priesthood: "You have not chosen Me: but I have chosen you; and have appointed you, that you should go, and should bring forth fruit; and your fruit should remain: that whatsoever you shall ask of the Father in My name, He may give it you." John 15:16
First of all, that verse is regarding divine election/irresistible grace (which the RCC doesn't believe in) not priesthood. Also, the Bible makes it clear that all Christans are priests. All are saints. "You too are living stones, built as an edifice of spirit, into a holy priesthood, offering spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ" (I Peter 2:5) "You, however, are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people he claims for his own to proclaim the glorious works of the One who called you from darkness into his marvelous light" (I Peter 2:9) We are able to ALL serve as priests under Christ (the High Priest in the order of Melchizedek). Because of His sacrifice we no longer need a mediator. We need no "ordained" man to forgive our sins as they have already been forgiven.
38 posted on 06/26/2012 8:50:54 AM PDT by libdestroyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: A.A. Cunningham
From Dictionary.com: chaste
chaste   /tʃeɪst/ Show Spelled[cheyst]adjective, chast·er, chast·est.  
1. refraining from sexual intercourse that is regarded as contrary to morality or religion; virtuous. 

From Dictionary.com: cel·i·ba·cy   /ˈsɛləbəsi/ [sel-uh-buh-see] noun

1. abstention from sexual relations. 

All people, especially Christians, are called to chastity. Within the married state, sexual intercourse is chaste. Outside marriage, all people are called to celibacy.

39 posted on 06/26/2012 8:54:08 AM PDT by StonyMan451 (As for me and my household, we will serve the Lord.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: A.A. Cunningham
Celibacy for priests in the Latin rite is, in fact, a law. It is promulgated in the Code of Canon Law. See Canon 277 § 1: Clerics are obliged to observe perfect and perpetual continence for the sake of the kingdom of heaven and therefore are bound to celibacy which is a special gift of God by which sacred ministers can adhere more easily to Christ with an undivided heart and are able to dedicate themselves more freely to the service of God and humanity.

So it is both a law and a discipline.

And Barry Soetoro is, in fact a Kenyan communist! ;-)

40 posted on 06/26/2012 9:02:04 AM PDT by StonyMan451 (As for me and my household, we will serve the Lord.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: A.A. Cunningham; Religion Moderator
Pointing out a fact is not "making it personal"
"It's very apparent that your own personal doctrine is the one that overrides Scripture."

"You're obtuse"

"Once you've done that and you have a desire not to come across as a fool opining on a topic you obviously know little about..."

"you should make an earnest attempt to engage in some much needed edification"
41 posted on 06/26/2012 9:02:42 AM PDT by libdestroyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: A.A. Cunningham
Only on "open" Religion Forum threads are you welcome to condemn generally belief groups who you believe are dishonest concerning your belief group - but even there it is never tolerable to make those accusations personal towards another Freeper.

On RF "ecumenical" threads, the guideline is even more strict: do not antagonize other Freepers.

If you cannot or will not comply with the Religion Forum guidelines for "ecumenical" RF threads, then leave this thread.

42 posted on 06/26/2012 9:17:27 AM PDT by Religion Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: libdestroyer

You wrote:

“Guess the RCC just ignored that verse.”

What do you call your biological father?


43 posted on 06/26/2012 2:48:11 PM PDT by vladimir998
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: 2nd amendment mama
I am quite aware of that. That doesn't mean I want to change 1200 years of tradition in the church. Why not just willy nilly change and ignore the constitution? It's only a couple of a hundred years old. Oh yeah, we are doing that now, with disastrous results.
44 posted on 06/26/2012 5:24:06 PM PDT by MacMattico
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Gay State Conservative

Actually, worldwide the number of Priests has increased. It’s just we Western countries that our losing our religion.


45 posted on 06/26/2012 5:26:22 PM PDT by MacMattico
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: wideawake

The article is not talking about the Eastern Rites, but the RCC. Are you saying the RCC has to change because others do it differently? No, how about married Episcopals go join the Eastern Rite churches.

WHEN you get married shouldn’t determine whether you can be a Priest with a wife or not in the RCC. That kind of defeats the purpose, doesn’t it?


46 posted on 06/26/2012 5:34:20 PM PDT by MacMattico
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: impimp

The article was about the RCC, so yes, that is what I was talking about. Don’t call it dogma if you don’t wish, but it is a 1200 year tradition that every Priest I’ve run into wholeheartedly agrees with.


47 posted on 06/26/2012 5:42:00 PM PDT by MacMattico
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: bonfire
As my Priest told me, some of the other (non RC) rites and conservative Episcopals are looking for a place to go after being driven away from their own churches by a liberal agenda. He tells me they may serve but don't go looking for a married bishop, cardinal or Pope anytime soon.
48 posted on 06/26/2012 5:51:07 PM PDT by MacMattico
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: MacMattico

My FRiend, I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. I read the article and it does not mention RCC. It mentions Catholic, but not Roman Catholic Church.

If you don’t know the difference the internet explains everything.


49 posted on 06/26/2012 6:07:45 PM PDT by impimp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: MacMattico

You are apparently unaware that the Roman Catholic Church has multiple rites and that priests in the Eastern Rites are just as Roman Catholic as their leader, Pope Benedict. There are numerous Eastern Rite Roman Catholics in the USA, including conservative columnist George Weigel.


50 posted on 06/26/2012 6:08:32 PM PDT by wideawake
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-61 next 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