Obviously, you don’t know the difference between Dogma/Doctrine and Discipline. Celibacy is not a Doctrine, and as I said, someone could think that a Married Clergy is the way to go for Parish Priests. Again, all of the sui juris Eastern Catholic Churches, who are in Full Communion with Rome, have Married parish priests. Monks, Religous Orders and Bishops are celibate. So in the Eastern Church, both celibate and Married Clergy are ordained.
Pope Benedict, as Pope John Paul II, as Pope Paul VI as the Council of Florence in 1442, etc, have worked for the reunion of the Catholic and Orthodox Church. And in case you have not gotten the memo, the Eastern Orthodox Church has Married Priests. At no time has Rome ever stated that the Eastern Orthodox Priesthood is invalid because they have Married Priests. To the contrary, the Catholic Church clearly states that the Eastern Orthodox have “all seven sacraments” just as the Catholic Church as.
So again, nothing regarding Celibacy is “Doctrine” so before you go on a tanget and calling people dissident or heretical for thinking the Church should ordain more married men, you should study the issue of clerical celibacy.
What Holy Mother Church allows is permissable and it is obvious that Rome has “given dispensations of the clerical discipline of celibacy” in the case of former Anglicans who came into full communion with Rome. And again, all 21 of the sui Juris Eastern Catholic Churches [Maronite, Syro-Malakabar, Ukranian-Catholic, have married Priests and as I said before, the Eastern Orthodox do as well.
Now again, I do not believe Catholics should challenge the Pope on the matter of “celibacy” Even though it is not a Doctrine, it is something that Rome maitains is the “norm for Catholic Priests in the Roman Rite” and therefore is to be considered a teaching of the ordinary magesterium but that at the same time does not make it a definitive Doctrine or Dogma such as the Incarnation, Trinity, Paschal Mystery, etc.
au contraire, I do know the difference and can make the distinction, however you are concerning yourself with the wrong person.
I know and accept the primacy of the Pope and respect and practice the faith in its fullest meaning, even though it is extremely difficult.
The gentleman, who I addressed my comments, is emblematic the the Catholics who also “feel” uncomfortable with women not have the right to choose, who “feel” OK about the lapse in Church attendance, about never going to reconciliation, and on and on.
I did not call the gentlemen a dissident or accuse him of being heretical (as you suggest), I merely suggested, being uncomfortable as his is, he would likely be more comfortable being a protestant, particularly as an Episcopalian.
Being that the father and son priests were formerly Episcopalians, I thought the irony was delicious and couldn't resist.
Obviously you missed irony in apologetics school.