Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Lion in Winter
The reason Priests are not married is because they are expected to work in near poverty and they don't get to keep any estate unless they brought it with them to begin with.
All assets stay with the people and pass on to serve the next set of people.

Non Catholics who are married and are ministers do not have their faith providing them with real estate and buildings to operate out of. They often have a sink or swim situation on their own, so if they marry, that estate can go to the family, or if there is a divorce there are assets.

With a priest, they would always have their family in poverty and that isn't fair to a wife and kids to do that. Nothing belongs to a priest, so if there is a divorce, how would kids and a wife get support?

Too complicated to have priests married IMO.

25 posted on 06/11/2006 2:23:36 PM PDT by A CA Guy (God Bless America, God bless and keep safe our fighting men and women.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies ]


To: A CA Guy

"The reason Priests are not married is because they are expected to work in near poverty and they don't get to keep any estate unless they brought it with them to begin with.
All assets stay with the people and pass on to serve the next set of people."

Diocesan priests, my friend, take no vow of poverty. They are free to amass fortunes and some have, quite legitimately.


37 posted on 06/11/2006 5:05:09 PM PDT by Kolokotronis (Christ is Risen, and you, o death, are annihilated!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies ]

To: A CA Guy; Kolokotronis; Lion in Winter

Was Peter a married man?


41 posted on 06/11/2006 5:57:31 PM PDT by FormerLib ("...the past ten years in Kosovo will be replayed here in what some call Aztlan.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies ]

To: A CA Guy
If children can understand and comprehend the Gospel as presented in Scripture, then I doubt that its all that complicated (unless one makes it so). Furthermore, Scripture was written in simple colloquial and contemporary idiom easily understood by the uneducated everyman of the time; a college degree (nor a legal or scholarly mind) not being required to interpret it.

I Tim 3:2 & Tit 1:6 are pretty much clear on the issue concerning married Elders of an assembly of like-minded believers. The English translation "Bishop" translated out of the Greek Episkope and Episkopos, the same Greek being rendered "overseeer" in Acts 20:28.

Moreover, I Tim 3:12 is quite clear respecting marital status of a Bishop's (Elder) assistant: Deacon. And both the qualifications for the only two Scripturally defined offices are given admonishment concerning their households: "ruling their children and their houses well" (I Tim 3:4b & 3:12b). Its extremely illogical to infer an absolute restrictive sense to the meanging of these passages.

The phrase "husband of one wife" does not mean that the Bishop (overseer/Elder) or Deacon was never married, else this would exclude a remarried widower, nor does it exclude from holding office those who've never been married. In Romans 7:1-3, Paul placed no restriction upon a widower to remarry; the restriction being that one seeking an office of the church should not be married to more than one woman simultaneously (and there would definitely be issues concerning that regarding divorcees).

The total context speaks of the exemplary moral conduct required of those who hold an office in the church.

46 posted on 06/12/2006 11:23:49 AM PDT by raygun
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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