Posted on 10/11/2018 5:57:51 PM PDT by marshmallow
If a man wants to serve the Church with Mass, give out Communion, etc., he can be a Deacon.
That provision has already been made.
If you have had the responsibility of raising a family and/or know first hand what it takes to serve the Catholic Church properly as a Priest, you would know there are too many conflicts that arise too often.
“But celibacy, when offered as a voluntary gift to God, is a higher calling. Thus both Jesus and Paul teach.”
Very important point that is not made often enough.
There are practical advantages to a celibate priesthood in situations of persecution, which were demonstrated under the Soviet Union.
To put it bluntly, it's very hard for even a courageous married man to resist when his torturers stop torturing him and start threatening his wife and children.
The scripture says otherwise. The Book of Acts, the Apostles, all contradict this tradition of man. Is it better, yes, so says Paul, if you’ve been given that grace says Christ. However, Christ Himself called at least one married Apostle (who was also a pastor). Go ahead, tinker around and say you’ve know better than He.
You do err, NELSON111, you are not rightly dividing the word of truth, as per Scripture.
Please do your homework before trying to come off as an expert on the Holy Scriptures.
“To put it bluntly, it’s very hard for even a courageous married man to resist when his torturers stop torturing him and start threatening his wife and children.”
Another very good point. And a likely scenario, even in this country.
I’ve generally put it in terms of a conflict between obligations to the Church and to the family, but they way you put it drives home the point much better; harder for others to dispute.
Wait a minute - looking back in the post you reference I said nothing about Scripture, nor did I allude to it.
What exactly are you referring to when you say “Scripture says otherwise” in response to my post?
The Bible mentions Paul’s mother-in-law, but not his wife. There is no indication that his wife was still alive, so no firm conclusion can be made on this point.
It's funny, for the first few centuries, it worked just fine for many in ministry...didn't it? To deny that is to deny history. Some were married. Some, like Paul and Barnabas, were not. Pope Siricius was married with children and then he sinned by abandoning his family so he could become a pope. He then tried to force that type of life on many...but it didn't take. Damasus allowed marriage...but said priests couldn't have sex with their wives. History is not your friend on this issue. What man has done is taken something God made...and ordained...and screwed it up. What man has done is taken something scripture makes CLEAR: A calling by God-in which SOME have been granted grace to remain unmarried (Paul) and some have not (Peter)...and made ALL abide by something unnatural. THIS is history and scripture. It is clear. 1 Timothy 4:1-4...."who forbid marriage"...and now we see the consequences of that action.
If you cannot see this, I cannot help you. It is very clear. Read 1 Timothy 3. Read Titus 1. I have done my homework. Thanks. Nelson111-MDiv, Th.M., Th.D.
First things first. Clean out the sodomites and we can talk.
Jesus is the only Priest we need.
Hebrews 7:11
Now if perfection was through the Levitical priesthood (for on the basis of it the people received the Law), what further need was there for another priest to arise according to the order of Melchizedek, and not be designated according to the order of Aaron?
16 And the eleven disciples went into Galilee, unto the mountain where Jesus had appointed them. 17 And seeing them they adored: but some doubted. 18 And Jesus coming, spoke to them, saying: All power is given to me in heaven and in earth. 19 Going therefore, teach ye all nations; baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. 20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world.
Both the Catholic and protestant Churches are based on what some one other than Jesus or his apostles said.
What did Jesus say about appointing Bishops or priests? what did Peter or John say?
Mathew 20
24 The other ten followers heard this. They were angry with the two brothers. 25 Jesus called them to Him and said, “You know how the kings of the nations show their power to the people. Important leaders use their power over the people.
26 It must not be that way with you. But whoever wants to be great among you, let him care for you. 27 Whoever wants to be first among you, let him be your servant. 28 For the Son of Man came not to be cared for. He came to care for others. He came to give His life so that many could be bought by His blood and made free from the punishment of sin.”
Jesus did not appoint any one to be preist, Bishop or Pope.
He also did not appoint any one to be Reverand, Doctor or professor.
I don’t see any indication you understand what rightly dividing the Word of Truth means. You continue to miss the mark in that area.
In addition, you are either not reading my posts or are not comprehending what I am saying. I asked you to explain where I cited Scripture to support my position.
Instead of addressing that, you go on an emotionally-driven rant; nonstop diatribe to counter a point I did not even try to make!
Not that it matters but Peter may have been married at one time but there is no evidence he was married when answering the call by our Lord. Maybe she was already dead. Peter gave up everything he had to become the first Pope, did he not? Maybe he gave up his wife too (if she did not already die). Or maybe she left him already.
If Peter was a married man having physical relations with his wife (or raised a family) while he was Pope, then correct me if I’m wrong (with solid evidence please).
Still, it is a moot point because I never argued that Catholic Priests are prohibited to marry by virtue of the Holy Scriptures. But I did indicate that there are sound, practical reasons why they should not.
I believe 1 Corinthians 10 says that “All things are lawful, but all things are not expedient; all things are not edifying.”
That, my sister, is the basis for my position (with regard to Scripture), in addition to extensive personal experience as well.
Thank you for engaging me in this meaningful dialogue.
Of course you don’t cite scripture. That’s the point. It means nothing to you, apparently. Men’s words 1000 years later carry more weight. Me? I will listen to Paul and Christ.
Okay, now you’re being foolish.
I just gave you 1 Corinthians. I pointed out it is the basis (largely) for my point in the beginning.
As I stated previously, either you are not reading my responses to you, or you simply cannot comprehend the message.
Maybe you’re just a babe in Christ, having been fed only the milk thus far. But take heart because the meat will come in due time.
And when it does you’ll experience a deeper, more meaningful understanding of what it means to pick up your cross daily and follow Christ.
I think it’s best to just end it here, so good luck on your journey and focus on our Apostle Paul’s Epistles. Jesus didn’t appear to him on the road to Damascus for nothing.
I wish you well.
my point was that the Belgium bishop is trying to “reform” the church and this is just one item in the agenda.
and that agenda goes way beyond allowing married men to become priests: think of the collapse of the Episcopal church and you see what I mean.
The fact that the church in Belgium is essentially dead is the real problem.
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.