re: Pope tells bishops not to accept gays into seminary; too much “frociaggine” already

quote:

---

Would you mind pointing out in your post that this photo is fake? Or would you rather promote a harmful Lie?

---

Jesus... Cry more, fig.

quote:

---

Dont think it actually would. You have preachers getting divorced like the members.

Also what happens when there is a conflict between family and church who does the Priest go with?

---

I don't think a priest would up and get a divorce like someone in the laity. They would most likely take the sacrament of marriage very seriously. If there is divorce, then it would probably have to go up to the bishop or whoever oversees the parish to determine who is at fault and whether the priest is allowed to continue his work (this is just speculation on my part as I have no knowledge of Orthodox priests getting divorced).

The Orthodox church has always allowed married priests. It works just fine and the priest's wife plays a huge role in the local church. I don't see why the Catholics can't do the same.

From the OCA website:

quote:

---

Concerning ordination, married men may be ordained to the diaconate and priesthood. However, they must be married only one time to a woman who also has been married only one time. If a man is a widower, he too may be ordained, provided that he has not remarried, and he may not marry after his ordination. The Tradition of the Orthodox Church is that both the priest as well as his wife must have been married only one time—to each other. And this would apply regardless of whether the person is no longer married due to divorce or to widowhood.

There have been a few rare exceptions to this, but I emphasize that in each case it is a “rare” exception, if not an abnormality which is not generally in keeping with the Tradition and canons of the Church.

---

quote:

---

When Calvin, Luther, Zwingli, muntzer, and their fellow travellers turned everyone into the keeper of their own "personal truth", they fundamentally broke the mold for western order which was built on an understanding of external, observed truth. Man became magisterium instead of submitting to it.

---

i couldn't have said it better.

quote:

---

The Catholic Church and Orthodox Churchs are "infallible" in one area only - and that is when promulgating our theological doctrines.

---

This sends prots to the moon lol.
The irony is that they gladly admit that prechristian jews had the full ness of gods law up to the time of Jesus.

But they deny this to the actual church that Jesus founded .

Conclusion of their logic: God was actually more in touch with his people before Jesus came that he is now after revealing the totality of his salvation plan.
It makes no sense.

quote:

---

One of the biggest myths/misconceptions regarding the priesthood today

---

Agree !

Can you imagine the scandal that would ensue when the priests son wins the starting job of the Catholic high football team. lol

Or how do you pay the priest ?
Do you pay the one with 7 kids the same salary as the one with one child??

quote:

---

Let priests get married. It would solve a lot of problems.

Recruit from a broader base of candidates for one.

---

Nope.


People still don't actually understand that the molestation in the church and the movement of priests was mostly the gay clergy doing it. It's still thrown at the Church, but the Church knew it could not say "It was the homosexuals." They would have been destroyed in culture, and still would be today. From Dreher's latest post about this:

quote:

---

In 2002, Richard Sipe, the liberal Catholic sociologist who was the top expert on the sexual behavior of the clergy, told me on the record that gay men should not be admitted to seminary. Sipe’s view was not theological, but sociological: he said that gay cliques formed that not only protected each other — most all such priests were having sex and lots of it — but also protected the minority of such clergy who were molesting minors. The idea was that solidarity required absolute omerta when it came to sexual derring-do. Sipe told me — and wrote this elsewhere — that these gay networks would get their own men into key gatekeeper positions (especially running seminaries), and try to keep out any seminarians they judged as potential threats to their position.

---

That is the truth of the scandal, a truth that has never gotten lip service.

ETA: The Catholic Church, for some reason, followed culture on this one and saw it as an inconvenience, or a minor quirk - not as the disorder it is discussed. When someone's sexuality becomes the core of their identity, these results have a sick rationality to them. A gay priest shouldn't be a "gay priest," he should just be "a priest." The same as a "gay man," isn't really a "gay man," they are just "a man." Who or what he likes bears no consequence to who he is - or it shouldn't. But we let it and encourage it. constantly - across more than just sexuality. It did START with gay acceptance, but that's the slope. Welcome to the slide.

"frociaggine" is a great new word.

(no message)

quote:

---

An admission that Catholicism was first, and therefore, the church that Jesus established and granted infallibility and indefectability.

---

I admitted no such thing. The Church that Jesus established didn't have a single Pope in Rome because the Church hadn't spread to Rome. The Church that Jesus founded had elders and deacons, not priests, as the officers. The Church that Jesus founded had the word of God as its authority, not traditions of men.

Catholicism was corrupted over time and the Reformation started to cleanse the Church from such corruption and to get back to what Christ had founded.

You bragging about "Catholicism" being first (it was the catholic church, not the Roman Catholic church that was actually first) is akin to Esau bragging about being the firstborn after losing his birthright, or Israel being the firstborn of God after the Gentiles were grafted in. God removed the lampstand from Rome because she rejected the truth.

Rome is not infallible or indefectible and Jesus never taught that she was. You operate under the misguided notion that the Church of Jesus Christ is headquartered in Rome with a stranglehold on the truth. The Church is universal (truly catholic) and has Christ as its head, not the Pope.

quote:

---

One of the most ignorant lies ever told. It simply isn't true. Until VERY recently in history (like, the 1800s and later), the common man, woman, and child couldn't read. If they could read, they read Latin. Then there's the issue of being able to afford a Bible, which in today's dollars would cost the common man, woman, or child thousands of dollars. This is why the Church had to chain the Bibles up inside the churches, not to prevent people from reading it, but to prevent people from stealing something that took years to hand write, and was a prime target for theft due to the monetary value.

The Catholic church did have vernacular translations. It just didn't allow poorly or heretically (is that even a word?) translated Bibles. In such a case, it would burn those Bibles (the proper way to dispose of something considered Holy), and replace with an approved translation in the vernacular. If one such translation didn't exist, the Vatican would create one, but as you admitted, this was often a very long and expensive process prior to the printing press.

---

The whole point of Martin Luther translating the Bible into German was so that the common German could read it. He wasn't targeting only the educated (who also knew Latin).

There's been a long history of censorship of the Bible in the vernacular by Rome. The Synod of Toulouse condemned the Bible to be owned by lay people because of a fear of false and heretical interpretations. The second Council of Tarragona did likewise, prohibiting the possession or reading of the Bible in the vulgar tongue, and by the laity in particular. Only authorized clergy were allowed to own copies in Latin. They even ordered the confiscation and destruction of Bibles. The Council of Trent required all translations to be approved by the church, including imposing strict standards on vernacular translations that made it extremely difficult to produce.

The church of Rome went out of its way to keep people from owning and reading (especially interpreting) the Bible outside of the oversight over the priests. They had strict control over the Bible that forced most Christians into relying entirely on the church for its understanding of the Bible.

quote:

---

Christ specifically prayed that His church have unity. Sounds like the Catholics are doing it right.

---

And yet they didn't have unity even during the Apostolic age when the Apostles were frequently condemning and correcting the congregations for error and disunity within the body. There has never been total unity even when the papal primacy in Rome evolved into being. There have always been divisions and disagreements with only the authority of the church using its might to kill off heretics that allowed for some semblance of unity.

But even with that, I'm sure even you would agree that unity on error is not better than disagreement with truth.