Sign after sign after sign...

Degaulle,Kindly show me, exactly, my "Quote" where I said that Priests can't control their sexual urges.. .. Eh!!??

My main point is:
The Vatican Bureaucracy and the bureaucracy of all too many Catholic Dioceses, these past 50 years, is a compendium of scandals .. sex, finance, tens of thousands of departed clergy and hundreds of thousands of departed parishioners, muddled Christian Teaching and ... Fill in the Blank ......'caused in large part by the Lavender Marxist Hi-Jacking of Vatican II and spineless Shepherds that were/are nothing more than Sheep in Sheep's Clothing. Now!! Excuse me but .... anyone who thinks that all is Hunky-Dory in The Catholic Church, USA/EU in particular, is either:

1) Just awakening from a 50 year nap.
2) Been Smokin' Quality Stuff.
3) Living in La-La Land.

THUS THE STORM .... and time for thinking "Outside de Box"!!

GOD SAVE ALL HERE!!

 

Sounds like the jewel in the Crown might need a good bit of polishing after the last few years since his holiness passed on to his reward.

 

CrewDog, just explain what you mean by stating that after the Storm Priests and Nuns will marry and that repressing the sexual leads to perversion?

There is chaos in the Church, only a self-deluded fool could deny that. But we have been there before, as in Arian times. I still would hesitate to describe Her as 'Broken' as this could be interpreted as contradicting Christ's promise that the Gates of Hell would not prevail. I am also confused by your seeming distinguishing between the Catholic Church, which you describe as 'Broken' and some other 'Church of Jesus Christ' which you state is 'sound'. Perhaps you might clarify what exactly you mean?

 

I have a vivid memory from about 15 years ago where a visiting priest preached at Sunday Mass that the Bible was a collection of fables and stories. Thus, it was not to be interpreted as true. I think back to that and if it happened today, I would call the Chancery. But then I was not in the same place spiritually that I am now, but was that what he was taught in the seminary, or was he a freemason plant?

 

Who knows... lay people aren't the only cafeteria Catholics. I went for a 3 day retreat at a Franciscan Monastery where the Priest giving the talk told us Jesus did not die for our sins. Then vehemently supported evolution, and loved Richard Rohr. I booked it out of there at 2:00 am the first night.

 

Everyone is in a different spiritual state. That priest was probably at its lowest point...probably doubting God. But even you were in a different spiritual state. Hopefully, those priest that have those beliefs are gradually dying out.

May Gods Will be Done

 

Yes, we have look at it this way.

 

DeGaulle,
I simply don't know how to make myself any plainer!!?? I guess we just live in different "Dimensions"? Hopefully, we will live to see how it all unfolds ............ I'm guessing ALL HERE will be very surprised at what God's New World for us turns out to be ..... I'm guessing it will be plainer, simpler and happier ... all around!

GOD SAVE ALL HERE!!

PS: My Mission here, it seems, is alerting Friends here to the Clear & Present Dangers that are with us NOW!! I'd guess that 80% of the content on this site, like above, will not matter Diddly-Squat in very short order ... Ya Know!? ... like when lights go out, grocery shelves are bare, sewage is flowing in the streets and drug/sex crazed-n-violent zombies roam the the streets ... like Venezuela ... TODAY!! Might be time to concentrate on more pressing matters ... Eh!!??

 

"I'm betting that after The Storm The Church will have married Priests & Nuns. God made us Human/Sexual and repressing the sexual leads to perversion ... it's not a matter of conjecture as 30 years and counting of Church Sex Scandals demonstrates. I alway express a sigh of relief, these days, when I hear of a Priest or Nun leaving The Church for someone of the opposite sex!"

These are your words.

What authority can priests allowed to marry for being 'unable to repress the sexual' have over lay people who fornicate or commit adultery? Couldn't the laity claim the same excuse? How could such a priest credibly insist that a couple in an 'irregular' situation live as brother and sister? Wouldn't it be taking 'do as I say, not what I do' to breaking point?

Forget your talk of different dimensions. That's about as rational as your Freudian suggestions. Whatever happens during and after the Storm, moral parameters and Catholic doctrines aren't going to change, indeed can't.

 

Earth to DeGaulle and BrianK,

This is a Blog Site where people can state opinions, discuss matters and disagree. As near as I can remember The Cult of Celibacy in The Catholic Church did not begin until the 4th 0r 5th Century. Catholic Doctrine changed then it could, and probably will, change again. With figures ranging from 20-50% of Priests being Gay.... how many not celibate??, ... a figure 7 t0 17 times the general population ... I'd say "Houston we have a problem!!"
Did I not read at this very site, in the past few days, that there is a Gay scandal brewing at a well known Lavender Irish Seminary!!?? ... and another Gay Scandal in full "cover-up mode" by the Archdiocese of NY!?
I'll say again! The Rescue from and post The Storm will be full of surprises ... Methinks!!

GOD SAVE ALL HERE!!

 

Just a point of information, Crewdog, regarding priestly celibacy. A celibate priesthood is a discipline, not doctrine. Discipline can be changed but Doctrine cannot. There are married priests now in Eastern Rite Churches that are in communion with Rome. There are also some married priests who converted from Anglicanism.

Getting rid of celibacy won't sort the infiltration of homosexuals which I suspect is used by some non-celibate heterosexual priests to push for a change in the discipline on celibacy. Married priests have not solved the lack of vocations in the mainline Protestant Churches. Neither has women priests, married homosexual priests, or any other innovation. A change in discipline is not a solution to a lack of faith. Reluctant though I am to repeat rumours, I have heard something along the lines that seminarians have abandoned their vocation because of the gay culture.

Heterosexual priests who fancy making their situations legal in the eyes of the Church ignore the fact that the general rule in the Eastern Rite Churches is that married men can be ordained to the priesthood but priests cannot marry after ordination. There may be some exceptions, but as far as I know that's how it works. Married men cannot be bishops, which would pose something of a problem for the reformers in our priesthood who fancy turning Christ's Church into what they might call a democracy but has the whiff of anarchy about it. Nobody forces anyone to remain in the priesthood. Nothing is stopping non-celibate hetero or homosexual priests from leaving the Church and becoming social workers, teachers or whatever other occupation they think will let them practice and preach what they believe. If they don't believe in what the Church teaches, we all would be better off without them, even if it leaves us with no more than twelve.

You could well be right that after the tribulation (which I'm not sure will happen in our lifetime) priests will be married but married priests certainly isn't a solution to our current crisis.

 

I've edited my first response after some thought. There are two issues here. This homosexuality in the priesthood is an issue that must be addressed. Perhaps the abandonment of priestly celibacy might be a solution, though far from the best one. Perhaps it is the only practicable one. That being the case, I don't agree that if celibacy is to be abandoned the notion should be entertained in the slightest that it is because of some Freudian pseudo-scientific fallacy that men can't control their sexual urges. If that was so, it would deny the concept of sexual sin. Of course, as a counter to this fallacy, voluntary celibacy should remain and receive the honour it deserves.

And who will support the wives and children? Social welfare supports must be opposed as they would compromise the priests.

I assure you, this is a minefield.

 

Surely the minor tribulation (and I also am far from convinced of this 'Storm') will be a consequence of such failures as abandoning the gift of celibacy and not a means of institutionalising such abandonment?

 

Some kind of minor tribulation is here already. I'm not convinced, however, that there will be any direct intervention from Heaven until things get an awful lot worse. I'm thinking in terms of the times of Noah and Lott where God left it until there were only a handful of believers remaining. Weren't there only eight people on the Ark?

I agree with you that a married priesthood would be a minefield. A priest's salary wouldn't be enough to support a family. It would also restrict the Church's option of moving priests to where they're needed. Imagine the outcry over children having to move schools, etc. Further down the road, given the culture we're living in, we would have broken marriages and priests (us) paying alimony, etc., not to mention the hue and cry over the ex-wives and children being required to vacate parish property. A minefield indeed. As if we didn't have enough troubles. Best to cut loose the reformers even if it means starting from scratch. I would close all the seminaries for at least ten years before starting again. With only three Dublin seminarians in Maynooth, it isn't worth the cost of keeping the seminary open. Whatever income the Church receives from the University would easily cover the cost of sending seminarians abroad for their priestly formation. I hope the Irish College in Rome is a good place to send them.

 

http://www.breakingisraelnews.com/72711/fulfillment-dead-sea-prophecy-begun/#yJK7vZaY25A7LOpV.97

 

The single best argument against a wider acceptance of married priests in the Latin Rite is "PKs," preachers kids. Ask them what it's like to be raised in a family where their biological father is more "married" to his congregation than to his wife. Only extremely rarely can a man do both well and virtuously.

 

Aye, that's it in a nutshell. There's going to be no fairytale endings in our lifetimes (or any others). This is a fearful business and we are advised to see to our salvation in 'fear and trembling', not crave wish-fulfilment. I say that only to prepare people for disappointment and disillusionment. Catholics are not on the right side of history, only of Eternity. Actually, that will do.

Maynooth, as you say, should be closed and preferably burnt to the ground.

[Incidentally, I suspect this phrase 'minor' referring to tribulations may be connected more to sequence than scale. The prophesies about it that are approved by the Church indicate there will be nothing second-grade about it-we have probably seen nothing yet].

 

“I am a Christian…so that I do not expect ‘history’ to be anything but a ‘long defeat’ — though it contains (and in a legend may contain more clearly and movingly) some samples or glimpses of final victory.”

― J..R.R. Tolkien

 

Our Creator's intervention in history (almost) finished dead on a Cross. The rest of us don't have the Power to resurrect ourselves, so we can't be complacent we will end well (in this world, at least).

Goodness, I'm a barrel of laughs this evening. Let's all not forget that everything is in Our Lord's hands and that's the best things can conceivably be.

 

And if celebacy becomes optional, it will not be long before the clamour of the liberal left endorses the 'marrige' of homosexual clergy...then adopted children...etc

The mind boggles...