Married RCC Priests?

romishpopishorganist said:
I see--so even though context of the verse is money, we should not assume that there is a general principle being taught there? It is alright to have two or more masters--as long one of them isn't money?

Well, we know for a fact that John the Apostle never married. What is more, we know that he lived to be an old man--well into his 90's.

The Eastern half does. It is only the Western half that has the practice of celibacy.

So? I never read this to mean Paul is ordering that bishops---woops---excuse me----"overseers/elders" is it? I never read this to mean that Paul is ordered anyone who is an......."overseer/elder" to get married or be married.

So what? The RCC has been clear on this. You speak as though this as though you are revealing some big, ginormous secret. "Stop the press! The practice of celibacy in the Western Half of the Church is a human tradition!" Yeah--I KNOW! "Rome" has always been clear on this.

Just becasue something is a human tradition does not entail it is bad.

Yeah it would. There are some calling for this. I would have no problem with it. I too think it would be an excellent idea. We already have married clergy by way of exception. I know some of them. Usually they are former Lutherans and Anglicans.

From a practical standpoint--marriage does not cure child abuse. Married men abuse children. Married women abuse children. All you have to do to prove this is watch the news. How many times do you see stories about abusive teachers in the news?

But--you are right when you say that it may cut down on the the attraction that gay men seem to have for the priesthood.

Yes. Interesting they said that too. Wouldn't you think popes who had mistresses and illegitimate children would be more amenable to the idea of a married clergy? Yet--they held the line.

Yes, John was an apostle.

Interesting you quote First Corinthians 9. Paul was explaining what he had given up for the sake of the Gospel---even though he didn't have to do so.

Thus, all you prove is that priests have the right to get married but for the sake of the Gospel willingly give that up like Paul gave up his rights.
Click to expand...
Yes, celibate priests have been the rule in the west, but that has never been the rule in the east.

The rule there is that married men can be ordained, but once they are ordained they can not marry. That was true for hundreds of years when the Greek Church and was in full communion with Rome. It is still the case for both Eastern Catholics and Orthodox.
 
romishpopishorganist said:
Good. Christ was not married. The priest as the sacramental icon of Christ better points to Christ than someone who is married. See the post of Theophilus.
Click to expand...

No, he doesn't. But God instituted marriage between a husband and wife...and Jesus is God, remember? And He had some things to teach about marriage--didn't He? Plus, isn't the church Jesus' BRIDE?
Atemi said:
Those who read Scripture know that the Messiah is the model of a married man.
Click to expand...

Isn't the Church Jesus' beloved bride?
romishpopishorganist said:
Only for the west. Actually--someone who really wanted to be a priest but be married could join an Eastern Rite, get married, and then get ordained in that Rite.
Click to expand...

The Eastern Rite appears to have more sense than your church does.
romishpopishorganist said:
Hence the "woops" I mean "overseer/elder."
Click to expand...
Sounded sarcastic to me...but glad you corrected yourself, since the only priests in the NT church is our great High Priest, Jesus, and the priesthood of all believers. We don't need your priests.
 
Last edited:
balshan said:
Your point being that the RCC western practices are wrong?
Click to expand...

No, the rules for priests are a question of discipline.

The rules have changed over time, and different rules apply in different parts of the church.

Until recently, Byzantine Catholic bishops in eastern Europe could ordain married men, but those in the US could not. Rome recently changed that rule, to allow the ordination of married men in the US.

It would not surprise me if something similar will happen in the western church. Personally, I think that would be a good thing.

Vatican lifts ban on married priests for Eastern Catholics in diaspora

The Vatican lifted its ban on the ordination of married men to the priesthood in Eastern Catholic churches outside their traditional territories, including the U.S., Canada and Australia.
www.ncronline.org www.ncronline.org
 
Theophilos said:
No, the rules for priests are a question of discipline.

The rules have changed over time, and different rules apply in different parts of the church.

Until recently, Byzantine Catholic bishops in eastern Europe could ordain married men, but those in the US could not. Rome recently changed that rule, to allow the ordination of married men in the US.

It would not surprise me if something similar will happen in the western church. Personally, I think that would be a good thing.

Vatican lifts ban on married priests for Eastern Catholics in diaspora

The Vatican lifted its ban on the ordination of married men to the priesthood in Eastern Catholic churches outside their traditional territories, including the U.S., Canada and Australia.
www.ncronline.org www.ncronline.org
Click to expand...
That is justifying what is wrong
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top