For discussion sake we’ll assume I agree with the RCC in regards the sacrifice of the mass. I don’t see where having a married clergy would interfere with it. As you mentioned the Levitical priests were married and still managed to fulfill their marital duties. Perhaps open it up for deacons to perform or place more ordained priest per parish or not offer it daily. We know from 1 Cor 9:5 the other Apostles had wives as well.



As for the 1 Cor 7. The verses you reference, Paul is speaking by permission and not by commandment. I will agree that going completely celibate is considered a good thing if that’s your gift. But at the same time the verses in my previous post that I quoted from Timothy and Titus are specific to Bishops and also mentions requirements for their wives and children. Now I know some, mainly Baptists that have gone as far as to say you can’t be a pastor unless you are married based off of the those verses. I disagree with that because obviously Paul and Christ speak highly of those that can turn off the need for a husband wife relationship. But I don’t think that translates into a ban on clergy being married because of the passages in Timothy and Titus plus what we know about the other Apostles.


As for Jeremiah. He was told not to take a wife or have kids for specific reason and that reason was.

3 For thus saith the Lord concerning the sons and concerning the daughters that are born in this place, and concerning their mothers that bare them, and concerning their fathers that begat them in this land;

4 They shall die of grievous deaths; they shall not be lamented; neither shall they be buried; but they shall be as dung upon the face of the earth: and they shall be consumed by the sword, and by famine; and their carcases shall be meat for the fowls of heaven, and for the beasts of the earth.


As for Moses. I’m aware there is various rabbinic literature which suggests he went celibate but I don’t see it in the scripture. I’m hesitant to give too much heed to writings from Jewish religious leaders considering they got so much wrong about Christ.





@abnk
1 Tim 5 is dealing with widows specifically and say to let the younger ones marry.  Whereas Timothy 4 is dealing specifically with Bishops and deacons.





@TWIRE
I’ve seen plenty of good married pastors that do a through job at leading the flock. The key is they must have a wife that is 100% on board and understands her role as a wife. It may even be easier having a “help meet” to make sure you can stay focused on the Lord’s work. I’ve seen some good pastor’s wives that make it their mission to make sure their husbands can effectively lead the church.



Again I’m all for someone choosing celibacy but I’m opposed to requiring it. It has nothing to do with this mindset of “if you don’t get married you’ll turn into a gay child molester”. I’m opposed because 1. I don’t find sufficient support from the  scripture to require  it and 2. I think by requiring it you are robbing the body of Christ of being blessed by men that could do a good job and have a major impact on Christianity and you are also robbing those men of a chance to serve the Lord.

On your fist point, it seems to me that not finding sufficient support (i.e.: lacking of a certain level of affirmative proof) is not the same as completely unscriptural (i.e.: opposed to Scripture).  If I misunderstood your terms, please correct me.  If I have understood correctly, then we're one step closer to agreement.

On your second point, that makes sense from a strictly practical view.  Theologically speaking, however, we view the Sacraments of Holy Orders and Holy Matrimony as a vocational bifurcation, the former being the higher of the two.  Both clergy and lay are part of the body of Christ, each group serving in their own way.  I think we would agree that if it is God's will for a man to be a priest, he will be a priest.  We might even say that perhaps the Holy Ghost, in His infinite wisdom, saw fit to guide the Church to implement the ancient discipline of celibacy to filter out those whom he has not chosen for priesthood or conversely to draw those whom He has chosen; especially, since we see in other places in Scripture that celibacy is a higher calling.

On 1 Timothy 5, well, yes, I know it deals specifically with widows since I referred to that chapter.  But why does St. Paul say to let them marry?  Essentially, because they cannot be trusted to remain celibate and they will betray their vows to Christ.  Conversely, he wants those older widows who have no other commitments to pray night and day, not unlike religious orders, which require vows of celibacy.

On 1 Timothy 4, St. Paul, I don't see how St. Paul is dealing specifically with bishops and deacons.  He warns against heresies--heresies that as I mentioned in my previous post existed to an extent and persisted for centuries.  I looked up some protestant sources for their view, most notably the Coffman commentary, and they seem to agree with the Catholic view that it is a warning against heresies.  Where are you getting that it pertains specifically to bishops and deacons?

Yes, and now we have many children that the parish has to support along with the wife of the priest. Soccer practice, scouts, 4-H, illnesses, life skills etc all taking time from the Priest's duties to his parish which can include staying up all night with a dying member. Some of those children will openly rebel to prove that they are no goody two shoes. The stereotype of the preacher's daughter causing scandal didn't materialize out of thin air.

Purely anecdote, but my roommate on my first deployment was the ship's chaplain, a young Southern Baptist, a husband and father.  

He told me that he didn't think that he could be a celibate, but that he appreciated that he could go to the local Navy Catholic chaplain at any time, day or night, if he had a problem because he didn't have to worry if he was interrupting family time.

See quote. @abnk

Having grown up around pastor’s kids. It’s a combo of a few things. They aren’t paying attention to what their kids are doing because they don’t think they can get in trouble. The kids see a holier than thou and hypocritical attitude at home. A lot of churches are teaching a bloodless gospel which is a false gospel and it’s doubtful many of them are actually saved to begin with.

That's fair.

Yup.  It's a discipline supported by scripture, but not an absolute requirement of scripture.

Nothing heard from his bishop. Msgr still has faculties...

He just wanted to meet people where they're at.  Nothing divisive about that.

I get the idea that the hierarchy doesn't want to talk about this. After their poor responses to many previous problems, this might make it look like they are targeting one particular sin. They are hoping that this just fades away.

That is maybe a good PR strategy IF there are no more cases like Msgr B's out there.  What are the chances that there are.  Pillar talked about this in their recent podcast?  This story grew out of an examination of "big data" that showed significant overlap between a phone that was present at a number of Church functions via the G'r app.  How many more might there be?  

This pattern of response cost faith in the Church's hierarchy during the sex abuse scandal. I pray it doesn't do the same here.

For those who think celibacy is the problem, I have a question:

How long do you have to go without sex before you start molesting kids?

No need to be precise. A general timeframe will suffice.

Well said. If this was a straight man with raging hormones issue there are plenty of willing Tinder sluts or even discreet call girls available for a night of mortal sin and vow breaking.

Our ex priest confessed to grooming and molesting troubled 12 yr old boys while he was still in seminary school and continued for decades of priesthood until he was caught. Predators infiltrate fertile hunting grounds under false pretenses and use their title to take advantage of the natural respect, trust, and vulnerability of those within.

This is true, but then doesn't a priest shortage make it easier for infiltrators?  e.g., lower standards and such?

There is at least 1 traditional permanent deacon I know personally who I would love to have as a priest.  He was married before becoming a deacon.  Then again, there is less of a shortage of trad seminarians.

Or do lower standards and expectations cause men to not value the priesthood or to believe that the Church does not value their sacrifice.

De-emphasizing the importance of the role of the priest by clobbering the altar with lay lectors, lay EMHCs, etc makes the priest's role less important.

The USMC never has television ads about going to college or learning how to fix computers.  Their ads are about killing dragons, shooting guns, and storming beaches.  They rarely lack for recruits because, instead of playing down to their audience, the USMC challenges people to determine if they are good enough.

The Church should learn from that; it should emphasize the masculine role of the priesthood.  It should host vocation days and MOST IMPORTANTLY, congregations should pray for vocations.

Yes. A more secularized society (and Church) saw vocations fall out of favor starting in the 60s creating an open door policy with little oversight. Once rogue priests worked their way up into the hierarchy they gave the green light for their progressive queer buddies to enter and cover for each others indiscretions while anyone sincere about their faith was either rejected, dropped out of seminary school, or just ignored their calling after contemplating the reality of the situation in the Church ...creating even more of a priest shortage.

I honestly wouldn't have anything against married priests but ideally they would be older and done raising their families... then again does family drama really ever end?

It's interseting. The Episcopal church has declining vocations as well and they have men, women, married, single, homosexual, straight ordained. I wonder if other liturgical denominations have similar problems,

I think, in addition to devout families (especially fathers) another vocational driver is being a sibling in a large family. I would bet that those to factors account for why traditional and conservative parishes produce most vocations.

The reduction in family size since the pill and women's lib is a big factor. If you have one son and he is your only chance at grandchildren and continuing your lineage it is not likely you would encourage him to become a priest vs having 4 sons where the remaining 3 could carry out that purpose. How many good future priests and nuns were aborted and contracepted away by selfish parents robbing the world of countless Sacraments and evangelization? Jesus knows.

Beyond that I think that there is something about being a sibling in a large family that engenders the type of selflessness and caring for others that being a priest or religious requires.  Big families tend to create big virtues.

Chicken vs egg.  Virtuous families also tend to be big.

You mean sincere beliefs inspire actions that strengthen beliefs in a synergistic cycle?

exactly.  I'm just less poetic.

Good point. Also the older daughters who helped care for the younger siblings got a good taste of motherhood and if they did it cheerfully potential suitors noticed and put a ring on their finger real quick.

You could even say Lex Orandi, Lex Credendi, Lex Vivendi

32 phones in Vatican City using Grindr




https://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2021/07/28/report-extensive-gay-hookup-app-usage-compromises-vatican-security/

I just watched a video on "Meaning of Catholic" Patreon only. He said the Pope Paul VI actually had to make a public statement that he wasn't gay. I did not know this.

His theory was, because Pope Paul VI allowed the sacrilegious changes after Vat.II because he sought "unity" instead of defending the Truth. It effemitized him & the Papacy. He stopped being a father. Setting off the effeminacy of the Catholic Church. He said Pope Paul VI was so terrified of schism, that he forgoed honoring and fighting for Truth.

He made the analogy of a Father not disciplining his 16yo son who is beating is 2yo son, because it would be hard and cause disunity in the family. Which is uncharitable. It allows for the bully to not see the error of there ways and be allowed to learn. Be able to repent, repair, & return to good graces and virtues....... hence the debacle which has transpired in the last 60 yrs.

Like Adam in the Garden of Eden. When a man does not uphold their position in life as God placed them, priest/ prophet/king... the rest falls into chaos.

ETA: messed up Popes name. Fixed it.

"I ain't gay or nothing; I've just been in this truck a long damn time."

Seriously though, what was his source for that?

Let me go and re-watch it. I will try to get a reference. He said it was in front of some conference. I will update.

ETA:
Mr. Flanders doesn't say. I messaged him to see. But I found the items below in a quick search.

Wikipedia: Pope Paul VI

I also screen shot this article from 1974.

Attached File
Attached File
Attached File

Wild.  Thank you for the sources.

Pope Paul VI's ties to Saul Alinsky are more troubling to me than his sexual orientation as are those of Maritain, one of Paul VI's trusted advisors.

Add onto that Alinsky's influence on the Catholic Campaign for Human Development and there are clear signs to the infiltration of the RCC.

Pray the rosary; fast; pray for priests

I used to receive a weekly newspaper in the mail titled: "Christian News." I didn't subscribe to it. The editor received funds from somewhere to blast it out to a mailing list. I received it from the 1980s into the 2010s.

It was all put out by one pastor who used to copy all kinds of bad stuff that was happening in various church bodies. It looked like they took pictures of other newspapers or magazines and simply reprinted them in "Christian News". There was very little original content.

I remember seeing advertisements from roughly the 1970s or 80s encouraging men to consider entering the priesthood. The odd thing was that they were in homosexual magazines. That shocked me because I had never even thought about the fact that there might be homosexual magazines!

It seems reasonable that if one advertises in homosexual magazines that homosexuals might respond.

The video topic I referenced had to do with "Why did Pope Paul VI need to publicly denounce that he wasn't homosexual." Why did it come to this. His hypothesis was because he wasn't acting like a father. Like I said earlier. I honestly don't any reasons other than that. Though it seems like Alinksy-ites & most leftists, tend to often be sexual deviants. He spoke about how, at the time he was speaking with Rockefeller, who was pushing population control which even made it into Humane Vitae.

All this will be in his (Tim Flanders) book coming out in Oct. Called "The City of God vs. The City of Man"

Wow. I belive it though.

In the mid-late 60s, seminaries emptied and priests asked to be laicized.  Previously, the Church did its best to not accept those afflicted with same sex attraction into seminaries.  In the early 1970s, this transitioned to a general guidance that chastity was all that was really important, regardless of attraction and discretion was left to diocesan bishops.  That set the stage for the abuse crisis that reached its peak in the 80s/90s.  

Cardinal Ratzinger was the tool Pope JPII chose to fix the situation and he, as prefect of the CDF and later as Pope BXVI, reinstated the previous rules.

As far as vocations go, there are 3 things are correlated with large number of vocations:  large families, reverent liturgy, and regular prayers for vocations.  If you're in a parish that does those three things well, your parish probably outperforms when it comes to vocations.