20 Sep 11
Originally posted by Conrau KOnly a Roman Catholic could have such a distorted mind to try to defend
This doesn't at all answer the question I had above. What seems clear is that preceding the 11th century, there was continual push for mandatory clerical celibacy. By the 7th century the episcopate was restricted to either the unmarried or those willing to forego their conjugal rights. It seems that, whenever clerical celibacy actually arose, clerical conti ...[text shortened]... thood to be unmarried. There does not seem to be any sinister, entrepeneurial agenda behind it.
such a rule.
- Joined
- 15 Sep 04
- Moves
- 7051
20 Sep 11
Originally posted by RJHindsWell, I haven't actually defended the discipline of clerical celibacy at all. That would require a detailed look at Scripture and tradition and I am not really interested in apologetics. I am no longer Roman Catholic, or even a theist for that matter. All I am concerned with here are three issues: 1. how clerical celibacy came into existence; 2. the extent of clerical celibacy in the Roman Catholic Church; and 3, whether clerical celibacy is the same as a prohibition of marriage (which the Scriptures condemn).
Only a Roman Catholic could have such a distorted mind to try to defend
such a rule.
20 Sep 11
Originally posted by galveston75But as I said before, only some Christians think that "Bible Teaching" is all there is. The Jews did not exclusively stick to the Bible and nor do many Christians. Before criticizing them for not doing so, you need to justify the practice. You also would do well to find out where this Bible actually came from.
Not a Bible teaching at all and just another "burden" that this church puts on it's members. Something Jesus totally condemned of the religions of his time and that would still apply today.
20 Sep 11
Originally posted by twhiteheadIf a Christian follows Christ then one would follow the Bible. If there were more to the Bible then what we have, then God would see to it that we would get the rest of what is missing and that it would not contradict itself with the Bible that we already have.
But as I said before, only some Christians think that "Bible Teaching" is all there is. The Jews did not exclusively stick to the Bible and nor do many Christians. Before criticizing them for not doing so, you need to justify the practice. You also would do well to find out where this Bible actually came from.
And I do know exactly where the Bible came from as it was authored by God himself and used man to pin it for him.
21 Sep 11
I think it is good, proper and possible to remain celibate until marriage. Peer pressure would be intense but putting it all behind, you'd be a stronger person for it.
Notice I said possible - but let's be real. It's certainly not probable unless you have dominating, watchful parents, or, you are unattractive; in which case you may end up being celibate until marriage whether you choose to or not.
So in the world according to Dasa (Asad?), anyone who engages intimately with another--married or not--is putting sex before God. Well then let's play that theory out all the way. Anyone who eats is putting food before God. According to Dasa, evidently anyone who even so much as breathes is impure and sinful for placing more importance on oxygen than God.
21 Sep 11
Originally posted by galveston75Hilarious. If that's the best you can do, then you have no right criticising Catholics over celibacy.
If a Christian follows Christ then one would follow the Bible. If there were more to the Bible then what we have, then God would see to it that we would get the rest of what is missing and that it would not contradict itself with the Bible that we already have.
And I do know exactly where the Bible came from as it was authored by God himself and used man to pin it for him.
21 Sep 11
Originally posted by sumydidThis thread is about the requirement by the Roman Catholic Church that
I think it is good, proper and possible to remain celibate until marriage. Peer pressure would be intense but putting it all behind, you'd be a stronger person for it.
Notice I said possible - but let's be real. It's certainly not probable unless you have dominating, watchful parents, or, you are unattractive; in which case you may end up being celibate ...[text shortened]... much as breathes is impure and sinful for placing more importance on oxygen than God.
priests must remain celibate to continue as priest in the RCC. Do you
think this is a good rule? Should they be allowed to marry if the promise
to remain celibate?
21 Sep 11
Originally posted by galveston75do you think gods word is only in the bible from the time of adam, there are many more works, than the 66 books, they were put together for our start of knowledge by the r,c, pope, its for you to discover the wide range as god has given us
If a Christian follows Christ then one would follow the Bible. If there were more to the Bible then what we have, then God would see to it that we would get the rest of what is missing and that it would not contradict itself with the Bible that we already have.
And I do know exactly where the Bible came from as it was authored by God himself and used man to pin it for him.
- Joined
- 15 Sep 04
- Moves
- 7051
21 Sep 11
Originally posted by RJHindsThis thread is about the requirement by the Roman Catholic Church that
This thread is about the requirement by the Roman Catholic Church that
priests must remain celibate to continue as priest in the RCC. Do you
think this is a good rule? Should they be allowed to marry if the promise
to remain celibate?
priests must remain celibate to continue as priest in the RCC.
Well, no, this thread was about the vocations crisis that the Catholic Church is facing. The question was whether the abolition of mandatory celibacy would result in a resurgence of priestly vocations.
Should they be allowed to marry if the promise
to remain celibate?
In fact, they can. A married man may decide to enter religious life (that is, taking solemn vows of chastity, poverty and obedience). In that case, provided the wife also chooses to forego her conjugal rights, the married man could take a vow of chastity, specifically of continence.
There seems to be a confusion of terminology here. In canonical terms, celibacy is simply the state of being unmarried. In the above case, the married man who takes solemn vows would still not be celibate. He would actually be continent abstaining from sexual activity with his wife.