Should Priests Get Married?

[Nomad]

So you have no examples of writings from between 1600 and 1200 BC?

You claimed that the Pentateuch was orally transmitted before it was written down hundreds of years later. I demonstrated that to be false. Your latest question is relevant to my reply how exactly? And what “writings” are you talking about?

 

[Nomad]

You don't believe small children and infants were baptizes because it doesn't explicitly say that they were.

Oh I said much more than that and you know it. Nice try though.

 

[GodsGrace]

Exactly.
That's why I said that Infant Baptism is not an "assumption" - but a Sacred Apostolic Tradition.

BoL
Nomad is right. We can't assume from the scripture you posted that any infants were baptized.
The apostolic father's came after.

 

[aspen]

You claimed that the Pentateuch was orally transmitted before it was written down hundreds of years later. I demonstrated that to be false. Your latest question is relevant to my reply how exactly? And what “writings” are you talking about?

You used a written document recorded in 500 BC to ‘prove’ the Pentateuch was written by Moses who was alive sometime between 1600 and 1200 BC. You obviously accept the Pentateuch as scripture; why is this oral tradition acceptable and Catholic oral tradition is not acceptable?

You dismiss the writings of the early Church Fathers:

“That's it? I asked to see the "content" of your oral tradition and documented evidence of its transmission from inspired speaker to the present. Your earliest source not only writes toward the end of the second century, which puts him about 100 years after the fact, he doesn't mention baptism in your quote at all. Suffice it to say, your earliest example fails to demonstrate content or evidence of transmission. Oh and btw, Scripture addresses baptism and there's not a single example of paedobaptism throughout.”

The written recording of the Pentateuch was produced 700 to 900 years after it happenned, which, according to you, invalidates the event:

“Inspired oral teaching was certainly valid at the time it was given, but unless it was preserved in writing it passes away with the speaker and his initial audience.”

So again, please explain your reasoning

 

[BreadOfLife]

Oh I said much more than that and you know it. Nice try though.

No, you didn't.

You are saying that since it doesn't explicitly mention small children when it says "entire household" that children weren't baptized.
I showed you that not only are people of EVERY age included in an "entire household" - but that the the ECFs testified that this was taught and handed down by the Apostles.

 

[BreadOfLife]

BoL
Nomad is right. We can't assume from the scripture you posted that any infants were baptized.
The apostolic father's came after.

I'd NOT "assuming" anything.
Scriptures says that the ENTIRE households were baptized, followed by the testimonies of the ECFs.

 

[Nomad]

You used a written document recorded in 500 BC to ‘prove’ the Pentateuch was written by Moses who was alive sometime between 1600 and 1200 BC. You obviously accept the Pentateuch as scripture; why is this oral tradition acceptable and Catholic oral tradition is not acceptable?

My quotes speak for themselves -- including those by Jesus and Paul. Moses wrote during his lifetime and there's no evidence that those writings disappeared and were transmitted orally as you seem to think.

 

[aspen]

My quotes speak for themselves -- including those by Jesus and Paul. Moses wrote during his lifetime and there's no evidence that those writings disappeared and were transmitted orally as you seem to think.

At least you admit your double standard. I appreciate your honesty

 

[Nomad]

At least you admit your double standard. I appreciate your honesty

I admit no such thing. You're confused.

 

[Nomad]

No, you didn't.

You are saying that since it doesn't explicitly mention small children when it says "entire household" that children weren't baptized.
I showed you that not only are people of EVERY age included in an "entire household" - but that the the ECFs testified that this was taught and handed down by the Apostles.

Yes, I did. I said more than that. Lying about what I said doesn't help you save face. It does however serve to damage your credibility. Here's a link to the post in question should anyone care to see what you're leaving out. Should Priests Get Married?

 

[aspen]

I admit no such thing. You're confused.

You accept the Torah

You reject the early church fathers

Based on the time frame between oral and written record

 

[Truth]

Who cares??
I got the same treatment from nuns AND lay teachers.

there was no sexual assault going on.

Well there is a time and a age where we are to begin to have understanding, 12 or 13 yrs of age is a common age where some expect children to gain a higher level of understanding! with that said there are some that are still immature even at 15, OK so if anyone approaches someone under the expected age of understanding with ill intent, then they should be removed from service. now with that said at what age were you when the nuns, and or those in authority slapping you with rulers and pulling hair and such? if you were mature and alder than 12, maybe you had it coming, depending on the infraction, personally I was not as Mature as others at the age of 13, but as I look back I believe that it was because of Physical and mental Abuse at Home + I was the youngest. I can understand keeping order in any school, where children act out, and even try to create problems for whatever reason, there needs to be a line in the sand! Spare The Rod And Spoil The Child!!! this is Scriptural, But those in Authority should have sum what of an of Ability to see who is not Mature, and not resort to any form of Abuse, and by the way Any type of Assault can be a form of Abuse, especially to the Immature

 

[amadeus]

Not every nun was "Atilla the Nun".
There were many who were nice and didn't lay a finger on us.

Corporal punishment was ALSO allowed in the public schools at the time.
It was a different time . . .

I certainly agree with this. In my own experience I never knew a nun who used corporal punishment. On the other hand I had more than one in public school who regularly used the ruler, a leather belt or a leather strap. It was a different time.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Well there is a time and a age where we are to begin to have understanding, 12 or 13 yrs of age is a common age where some expect children to gain a higher level of understanding! with that said there are some that are still immature even at 15, OK so if anyone approaches someone under the expected age of understanding with ill intent, then they should be removed from service. now with that said at what age were you when the nuns, and or those in authority slapping you with rulers and pulling hair and such? if you were mature and alder than 12, maybe you had it coming, depending on the infraction, personally I was not as Mature as others at the age of 13, but as I look back I believe that it was because of Physical and mental Abuse at Home + I was the youngest. I can understand keeping order in any school, where children act out, and even try to create problems for whatever reason, there needs to be a line in the sand! Spare The Rod And Spoil The Child!!! this is Scriptural, But those in Authority should have sum what of an of Ability to see who is not Mature, and not resort to any form of Abuse, and by the way Any type of Assault can be a form of Abuse, especially to the Immature

Well, although I don't hold any grudges against my teachers - you remark is RED should only be reserved for the child's parents and NOT the teachers.
Like I said, however - it was a different time . . .

 

[aspen]

I do not hold grunges against the southern baptist teachers who beat the tar out of the kids in my own elementary classes either - full wooden paddles with holes in them and everything

I certainly do not make assumptions about their relationship with God or the doctrine of Southern baptists

 

[GodsGrace]

Well there is a time and a age where we are to begin to have understanding, 12 or 13 yrs of age is a common age where some expect children to gain a higher level of understanding! with that said there are some that are still immature even at 15, OK so if anyone approaches someone under the expected age of understanding with ill intent, then they should be removed from service. now with that said at what age were you when the nuns, and or those in authority slapping you with rulers and pulling hair and such? if you were mature and alder than 12, maybe you had it coming, depending on the infraction, personally I was not as Mature as others at the age of 13, but as I look back I believe that it was because of Physical and mental Abuse at Home + I was the youngest. I can understand keeping order in any school, where children act out, and even try to create problems for whatever reason, there needs to be a line in the sand! Spare The Rod And Spoil The Child!!! this is Scriptural, But those in Authority should have sum what of an of Ability to see who is not Mature, and not resort to any form of Abuse, and by the way Any type of Assault can be a form of Abuse, especially to the Immature

I go further than you do.
My children were not to be hit by anyone. What right does another have to hit my child?
I myself stopped spanking them at about the age of two.

 

[Truth]

I go further than you do.
My children were not to be hit by anyone. What right does another have to hit my child?
I myself stopped spanking them at about the age of two.

I Agree! My older brother was accused of a wrong, he and another boy had the same first name, so when the teacher called my brother into the office, He the teacher whipped my brother significantly!!! when my dad found out he went Ballistic, and that's when they realized that it wasn't my brother that had committed the wrong. Needless to say the Teacher got a whippen , and then had to Apologize to my brother in Public. My Dad basically told the School, if any of my children do a wrong, you tell Me, and I will deal out the Punishment, nobody lay's a hand on My Children, except Me!

 

[Marymog]

See post no. 62.
Those numbers are for all of italy.
I'm not sure which data you mean. If you mean for the seminary I mentioned, it's closing down because it was built for 300 and only 6 seminarians are there right now. Next year it'll be 5 because one is becoming a Deacon in two weeks so he'll be a priest next year.
It's a shame too,. It's a beautiful bldg in a beautiful spot. Try .seminary Lucca Italy.

Thank you. I assumed you meant Italy. You know what they say about assuming!! ;)

Here is a link to the aforementioned stats I gave: FAQ

I can't find anything about the Seminary in Lucca Italy. The best I could find is a Bed and Breakfast that says it is a former seminary. Can you provide a link to info. you have?

Love....Mary

 

[GodsGrace]

Thank you. I assumed you meant Italy. You know what they say about assuming!! ;)

Here is a link to the aforementioned stats I gave: FAQ

I can't find anything about the Seminary in Lucca Italy. The best I could find is a Bed and Breakfast that says it is a former seminary. Can you provide a link to info. you have?

Love....Mary

Here's the site to the seminary:
SEMINARIO ARCIVESCOVILE DI LUCCA

There's something wrong with the list of serminarians because, for instance, Alex Martinelli has been a priest for about 3 or 4 years now and his name should not be on there.

The pix in the center of the yellow bldg is the seminary.
The first pix is of the Duomo of Lucca, San Martino.
And the last pix is of the chapel in the seminary.

Here is a news article about the seminary closing down because it was built for 300 but only 6 are attending right now. It's in Italian, you may be able to change the language...
Chiude il Seminario a Tre Cancelli - NoiTV

I've been there for conferences when I was doing catechism, it's a very beautiful facility in a beautiful place in Lucca.

 

[Marymog]

Is 1 Co 7:1-7 for priests? No.
Also, I believe we have a different understanding of this scripture. A man should not touch a woman is referring to fornication and Paul is saying that it's better to be married to avoid this.

Hi GG,

I apologize. I always preach about context and I failed to do that in this situation. Passage 1-7 should be in context with passages 32-34. To put it in even more context I would like to quote passage #38: So then, the one who marries his virgin does well; the one who does not marry her will do better. I would also refer you to Matthew 19:9-12 for the whole of scripture on this matter.

You asked the question: Should priest get married?

The simple answer is: Priest CAN'T get married. The biggest thing to remember is that a man chooses to become a priest which means he chooses celibacy. It is not forced upon him. A priest can choose to leave the priesthood if he chooses to get married.....BTW....there are married Catholic priest.

Love...Mary