Reply With QuoteNaw, you're too old!Any Catholics want to jump in - or all over me?
-Don-
I've read that the real reason Catholic priests aren't allowed to marry goes back to the late Middle Ages, when the Church was trying to prevent priests (who could then marry and have children) from passing on their wealth (often considerable) to their heirs and families rather than keeping it within the Church.
Regardless, the policy seems (to me) to be a really bad idea. I think it is at the root of the Church's past (and current) problems with pederast priests.
It's just not normal for a man, priest or not, to be celibate - all the "holy" stuff about being married to the church notwithstanding. Human urges for sex and intimate personal relationships/companionship are absolutely natural - and to expect any normal man to try to suppress and deny these natural urges and do without for the entire course of his life is like demanding that he go without food.
So, my sense of it is that the policy discourages normal men from becoming Catholic priests. And encourages abnormal men to become Catholic priests - including men who are self-loathing gays.
And kid touchers.
In any other walk of life, people would wonder (rightly so) about a man who never dated or married. But if he's a Catholic priest, people have been conditioned to think it's ok. Father so and so is "married to the Church."
This, in my opinion, lets weirdoes fly under the radar. I'm not saying all or even most Catholic priests are freaks or molesters. Or that anyone (priest or otherwise) who doesn't date or who never marries is a freak or a molester.
I am saying the mandatory celibacy policy of the Catholic priesthood is a perfect "cover" - and an environment that's guaranteed to attract such types.
I think the Church could do itself a huge favor by shit-canning the celibacy thing and allowing priests to marry and have families, if they wish to do so.
Any Catholics want to jump in - or all over me?
Naw, you're too old!Any Catholics want to jump in - or all over me?
-Don-
On the key points, as above, I'm standing side by side with you, Eric. Oops!, I nearly put 'right behind you', Eric. Still I'm not catholic and not a priest so it might have been OK.Originally Posted by Eric wrote, in part
Ken.
Die dulci fruimini!
Ken.
Wolds Bikers, Lincolnshire, England.
They're married to their hand
Mrs Rosey Palm and her four daughters!
Well, at least I'm no longer a target for Father McFeely!
Guy;
Priest are married . They are married to the Church. They are there for the sick,the disabled and for our loved ones that passed on. They council in marriage and everything related to life. Priest are an important part of the Catholic church. We need plenty more too. They do a great service for all in the faith.
Ok, but do the priests of other Christian denominations less effectively minister because they are allowed to marry? I don't think you can make that case without unfairly disparaging a lot of good people.
And: I think I'm right that the ban on marriage/celibacy thing is not in the Bible or an injunction of Jesus, etc. - but rather an injunction of the Church, done to prevent priests from passing on their wealth to the families/heirs rather than the Church. Priests were allowed to marry and have families for the first 1,500 or so years of the Church's existence, right?
Besides, isn't it unrealistic - and asking for problems - to expect any normal human man to go without not just sex but intimate human companionship for his entire life? is it not at odds with normal human nature?
I don't think it's coincidental (and I mean no offense) that the Catholic Church has been uniquely beset by problems with sexual deviant priests.
Eric ,truthfully I agree with you. I think a Priest should get married too. However there are plenty of Priest that are OK with the way things are now. I believe there must be a rigorous screening process to become a Priest,I'm sure there is already. That being said I don't think being married would make a Priest any less valued or effective to serve the congregation. No wonder alot of us didn't become Priest, it's a tough job especially more so not being married. I bet it's very rewarding too,many Parishes love there Priest and all they do.
I thought of a possible solution that might work:
The celibacy/no-marriage rule stands, but you're not eligible to be a priest until age 60.
Most men (ok Ken - not you!) have lost interest in sex by then, or are less interested anyhow. At least, they've had the opportunity to experience it, etc.
This might help weed out the weirdos, too!
Nods graciously.
Ken.
Die dulci fruimini!
Ken.
Wolds Bikers, Lincolnshire, England.
It will help.
I am almost 61. I would say it's just as enjoyable as ever, but done a lot less than when we were in our 20's. It's not a lack of "interest" but just don't get horny as often. But get just as horny after a week or so at age 60 as we did after a day at age 25.
But I assume it will be soon two weeks and then three weeks, etc.
BTW, I hear a guy here was just arrested for child molesting at age 87. It was on the news last night.
So I think it will still happen, but not as often, if they only let them be priests at age 60.
I also think you're right that there will be less weirdos. Nobody will be able to use the church as an excuse to not be married.
So your idea will help a lot, IMO, but there will still be some of it going on.
-Don-
Unlike you, Eric, I can speak with authority on that subject. . . you are WRONG!
Reverting to the subject of this thread, demanding that men suppress a natural function & then putting them in close proximity to young boys is a recipe for disaster; second best (for, I would suggest, the majority) is better than nothing?
A good compromise would be to allow them to f*ck the Nuns. Equality, and all that. Women have needs too.
As an FYI, I don't find same-sex sex a perversion. But I do think abusing children, who really aren't old enough to know what they are doing or consent, to be so. By either sex.
Last edited by Mase; 05-19-2010 at 07:06 PM.
Eh?
Speak fer yerself. I find that with age comes more patience, more appreciation, less of a hurry, less frenzy. Haven't found any less frequency, just more quality.
Perhaps;
A bird in hand is worth two in the bush.
The Pope seems to think it's okay to get it on with little boys as long as nobody tries to marry them.
To see what I mean, see here.
"Moralizing and morals are two entirely different things and are always found in entirely different people."
--Don Herold
-Don Quoteman
Maybe not. It might just be a church leader problem with ANY church. Look at here.
-Don-
Yeah.
It's pretty fucked-up.
I'm not Catholic (or a Christian) but I have the read the Bible - which is supposed to be the "new covenant" and guiding theological text for all Christians - and there's virtually no mention of gays, let alone gay marriage.
The modern Christian (esp. Catholic and evangelical) obsession with gays (over, say, murder or even theft) is odd to say the least.
I have never understood why anyone should be concerned about what other consenting adults of either sex do in private.
As for marriage, as a sacrament of the church, I am more willing to cut slack. I don't agree with the opposition to it, but to my way of thinking, a religion has every right to set forth the "terms and conditions" of being a member of that religion. That includes not allowing gays to marry - as a religious question.
That said, I absolutely support legal recognition of same-sex couples as a civil question.
I can't imagine why anyone would oppose that - and more, don't see how anyone (or any government) could deny that.
This is gonna draw down some fury on me, I know - but my person belief is that anyone who claims to "know" anything about God (including the fundamental question of whether such a being even exists, let alone what he expects us to do), whether our consciousness continues after we die, etc. - at minimum has never learned to reason and at worst has a perceptual/psychological defect of some kind.
Yet we defer respectfully to such people, because they are called priests.
I personally trust such people even less than the run-of-the-mill.
The whole thing strikes me as super fishy...
That's never been an issue. A church can refuse to marry anybody they wish. No reason is even necessary. But when they try to force their nonsense on those who are not a member of that church or religious group, it's way over the line.
But the USA federal government is even worse. Do you know about the so-called DOMA?
-Don-
Posting Permissions
