Why Married Priests??

Hi Vic,

 

The better question would be:  Why not married priests/pastors?

 

Folks go to pastors and priests all the time for counseling.  In Biblical or spiritual counseling; married or not married is irrelevant.   However, if it is for pre-wedding or marital counseling -- that is a horse of another color.

 

How can a man who has never been married, supposedly is still a virgin, and never had any relationship with a woman -- counsel a person or couple on marriage and sexual relationships?

 

Would you hire a person who has never played football, never seen a football, and never seen a football game -- to coach your school football team?   Okay, Auburn would -- but, not Alabama!

 

Would you be comfortable taking yourself, or your child, to a doctor -- who had only book learning; but, had never before treated a patient?   I would not.

 

Book learning is one thing; but, if I need to see an expert -- I want someone who has been in the game before.  And unmarried person does not meet that criteria for marriage counseling.  

 

That is why priest or pastors should be married.   And, it would help alleviate much of the sexual abuse which has come to light in the Roman Catholic church.  True, it has happened in other churches -- but, not even an iota of what has happened in Roman Catholic church.  I do not believe this problem would have grown to such proportions if the priests were allow to marry.

 

Just my opinion, for what it's worth.

 

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

 

Bill

They are quite equipped to counsel a marriage. As the most important component of a marriage (in the Catholic Church) is inviting god into the marriage. The priest counsels on how to keep Christ at the top of the marital hierarchy in order to strengthen the marital bond. I've had wonderful Pre and Peri marital counselling with a celibate priest;-) perhaps they have a different perspective to offer. More objective, unbiased and biblically based. There is a tremendous value in that.

And, a priest has a bride- the bride is the church. The basis behind this is that he is only loyal to God, God's Holy Catholic Church, and has no earthly distraction to being a vicar of Christ on earth.

.

billie, the lie you and upperty tried to push was that the Bible teaches only

the married could be a priest in the catholic church. You said it was a

requirement stated in the Bible. I said it wasn't and gave proof for the

second time. What you are talking about above has nothing to do with the

subject upperty erroneously laid out in the beginning. You have no idea

what you are talking about having never been a religious person, a preacher,

a parent or even a divorced person. I pray I didn't offend anyone with this

quite offering.As I stated before I'll be away for a while attending

sensitivity training.

 

 Jesus and Paul both said it was not a requirement to be married.

 

Wrong, INVICTUS. Allow me to refresh your memory.  I have consistently contended that there is NO scriptural office of PRIEST in the church that Jesus established.  I have also contended consistently that those parts of the New Testament that set forth the qualifications for the scriptural and legitimate office of elder indeed stipulate that a candidate is to be the husband of one wife and the father of believing children and that in, addition, he must have proven that he has a capability for spiritual leadership within his family for "If a man know not how to rule his own household, how shall he take care of the church of God?"

 

That text you quoted earlier from I Corinthians 7 indeed authorizes the option of celibacy by choice for those who can accept it, but the celibacy imposed on priests in the Catholic Church is not of choice, but is levied as a REQUIREMENT.  Paul's instruction clearly does not permit that kind of imposition. He leaves it to the indicidual to choose celibacy or marriage.  Nothing written by  Paul or any of the other writers of the New Testament offers any support for the manmade doctrine of mandatory celibacy of anyone in the church.

Jesus Himself speaks of celibacy in Matthew 19:11-12: "Not all can accept this word, but only those to whom it is granted. Some are incapable of marriage because they were born so; some, because they were made so by others; some, because they have renounced marriage for the sake of the kingdom of God. Whoever can accept this ought to accept it." Again, the emphasis is on the special nature of celibacy, one for which not all men are suited, but one that nevertheless gives glory to "the kingdom of God." Perhaps the best evidence for the scriptural support of celibacy is that Jesus Himself practiced it!

Hi VP,

 

Saying of priests, "They are quite equipped to counsel a marriage" is like saying that a man who has never been on or around a horse -- would make a great jockey.  Really?

 

Would you allow a person who has never been in an operating room -- to operate on your child?

 

Then, why would you allow a man who has never been in a marriage -- to operate on your marriage?

 

Yes, the pastor/priest can counsel on spiritual issues such as putting God first in your home.  But, can he counsel you on marital issues and problems, on handling a rebellious teenagers, and many other issues which come up in a home environment -- one with which he has no familiarity?

 

And, as I mentioned earlier -- if priests were not forced to remain celibate from an early age -- very likely there would have been far less sexual abuse in that church.

 

You say the priest is the bride of Christ.  The Bible tells us that ALL church age believers are the bride of Christ, not just the priests.  Does that mean that everyone should remain celibate?

 

No, my Friend -- there is absolutely nothing to gain from forcing celibacy upon all those men.  But, there IS a great deal to lose.  And, the Roman Catholic church is going through a major sexual abuse problem right now because of the forced celibacy and the danger it poses to young people in the church.   

         

And, we all have heard on the news that one of the first issue on the new Pope's agenda -- is dealing with the report of homosexual priests in the Vatican.   How much is this related to celibacy?

 

Does this type of thing happen in Protestant churches?  Yes, it most certainly does.  But, not to the degree that it happens in the celibate Roman Catholic environment.

 

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

 

Bill

Hi David,

You wrote, "Jesus Himself speaks of celibacy in Matthew 19:11-12:  'Not all can accept this word, but only those to whom it is granted.  Some are incapable of marriage because they were born so; some, because they were made so by others; some, because they have renounced marriage for the sake of the kingdom of God.  Whoever can accept this ought to accept it.'

Again, the emphasis is on the special nature of celibacy, one for which not all men are suited, but one that nevertheless gives glory to 'the kingdom of God.'   Perhaps the best evidence for the scriptural support of celibacy is that Jesus Himself practiced it!"

I am not sure which Bible translation you are quoting.  But, you do seem to have left out a key word -- EUNUCHS.

Looking at the more complete Scripture passage, first, Jesus is talking with His disciple about marriage and divorce, not celibacy.  And His disciples ask Him if it would not be better for a man in such a situation where he cannot live with his wife and, for whatever reason, must divorce -- would it not be better for them to never marry again.  And, Jesus tells them that not all men can accept that life.

Then, He segues into a discussion of men who have been been born eunuch or, as some slaves were, they were made eunuchs by their masters.  Then, He speaks of men who have chosen the life of a eunuch by having themselves castrated.  In the Old Testament days and in the days of Christ -- some men chose to make themselves eunuchs to allow them to work in a master's harem.  I suppose they did this for many reasons; but, one reason was that a royal eunuch lived like a king; he was most often himself wealthy and respected because of his position. The Ethiopian eunuch who met Philip is a good example:

Acts 8:26-28, "But an angel of the Lord spoke to Philip saying, 'Get up and go south to the road that descends from Jerusalem to Gaza.'  (This is a desert road.)  (27) So he got up and went; and there was an Ethiopian eunuch, a court official of Candace, queen of the Ethiopians, who was in charge of all her treasure; and he had come to Jerusalem to worship, (28) and he was returning and sitting in his chariot, and was reading the prophet Isaiah."

 

Looking at the Scripture passage you have quoted, in the NASB translation we read in Matthew 19:8-12, "He said to them, 'Because of your hardness of heart Moses permitted you to divorce your wives; but from the beginning it has not been this way. (9) And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery.'  (10) The disciples said to Him, 'If the relationship of the man with his wife is like this, it is better not to marry.'  (11) But He said to them, 'Not all men can accept this statement, but only those to whom it has been given.  (12) For there are eunuchs who were born that way from their mother's womb; and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men; and there are also eunuchs who made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven.  He who is able to accept this, let him accept it.' "

And, in your Douay-Rheims translation, we find in Matthew 19:8-12, "He saith to them: Because Moses by reason of the hardness of your heart permitted you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so. [9] And I say to you, that whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and he that shall marry her that is put away, committeth adultery. [10] His disciples say unto him: If the case of a man with his wife be so, it is not expedient to marry.  [11] Who said to them: All men take not this word, but they to whom it is given. [12] For there are eunuchs, who were born so from their mother's womb: and there are eunuchs, who were made so by men: and there are eunuchs, who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven. He that can take, let him take it."

And, we find that even in the Latin Vulgate which Jerome translated for the Roman Catholic church:

[12] For there are eunuchs, who were born so from their mother's womb: and there are eunuchs, who were made so by men: and there are eunuchs, who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven. He that can take, let him take it.

Sunt enim eunuchi, qui de matris utero sic nati sunt: et sunt eunuchi, qui facti sunt ab hominibus: et sunt eunuchi, qui seipsos castraverunt propter regnum caelorum.  Qui potest capere capiat.

 

David, from your omission of the word "eunuchs" in this Scripture passage, I assume you are trying to relate the Roman Catholic priests who have celibacy forced upon them -- with the eunuchs who were forced to undergo castration so that they might work in their master's harem.  I would suggest that this is not a good "apples and apples" comparison.

 

Yes, in Matthew 19:12, Jesus does say, "and there are eunuchs, who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven."   While I will not call my Lord and Savior a liar, I will be honest and say that I do not know of any person in the Bible who did this.  Obviously Jesus knows more about the Word of God, and of the people of God, than I will ever know.  

 

But, a possible explanation is that someone, whom I have not yet encountered in the Bible -- did have himself castrated to avoid being tempted to sin.   Yet, once again, we cannot equate this with priests who are forced into celibacy -- unless you are saying the priests have been castrated -- which you and I both know is not true.

Once again, this goes back to the practice of Eisegesis, reading into Scripture preconceived ideas and biases -- instead of reading out of Scripture what is written there, Exegesis.

I still cannot see any Biblical support for forcing celibacy upon priests.  And, I personally feel that this doctrine plays quite a large role in the sexual abuse environment which has become such a problem in the Roman Catholic church.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

No one forces a priest into celibacy.  One understands that if you want to become a priest, then you are voluntarily choosing celibacy, and offering your celibacy as a gift to God. 

The priests I know spend so much time in their ministry, there is almost no time for family. Celibacy is their offering to God.  In their celibacy, they follow Jesus, John the evangelist, Paul, and many others.   

And this doctrine plays a very little role in the sexual abuse environment plaguing the world, not just the Church.  The issue is pedophiles, not celibacy.  And, to a greater extent, the issue is the one that constantly plagues the world, namely SIN!.  But by doing a better job of screening candidates for the priesthood, as the Church does now, The Church will will take care of that problem. 

 

Praised be Jesus forever!!!

 

Hi Nathan,

You tell me, "No one forces a priest into celibacy.  One understands that if you want to become a priest, then you are voluntarily choosing celibacy, and offering your celibacy as a gift to God."

The fact is that a man cannot be a priest, nor a woman a nun -- without taking a vow of celibacy.  What else can that be except forced celibacy?   How many of them would choose to reject celibacy and be married - IF the Vatican did not force this upon them?  Over the years, there has been a lot of effort by priests trying to convince the Vatican to overturn this unBiblical doctrine.

Then, you tell me, "The priests I know spend so much time in their ministry, there is almost no time for family.  Celibacy is their offering to God.  In their celibacy, they follow Jesus, John the evangelist, Paul, and many others."

Peter was married!  That MUST mean that he could NOT have been the first Pope, for Popes are priests first.  Was Peter a married priest?  If so, then why can't other priests be married?   And, most likely Paul had been married also; for this was a criteria for being a Pharisee.  We are not told what happened to his wife; but, he must have had one.

 

And, by the way -- many, many, many pastors spend a great deal of time in their ministries, serving the Lord and fellow believers.  Yet, that does not stop them from having a normal family and sexual life.

Next, you tell me, "And this doctrine plays a very little role in the sexual abuse environment plaguing the world, not just the Church.  The issue is pedophiles, not celibacy.  And, to a greater extent, the issue is the one that constantly plagues the world, namely SIN!.  But by doing a better job of screening candidates for the priesthood, as the Church does now, The Church will will take care of that problem."

This has to be a "tongue in cheek" comment -- or else you are deluding yourself.   Any time you take thousands of young boys/men and tell them to ignore, for life, the sexual desires which God Himself put in them, force them at a young age to attempt to control these natural God-given urges and desires, and tell them to keep their hands out of their pocket -- there will be undesirable consequences.  That undesirable consequence very often manifests itself in child abuse or other unwanted results -- as we have all seen exposed in the Roman Catholic church in the past few years.

In places such as South America and Asian countries which have large Roman Catholic populations -- seeing a priest have a live-in mistress, and children, is a common practice.  This is a known fact; so, why does the Vatican impose celibacy upon them -- and then look the other way at this unhealthy consequence -- while all their parishioners are watching this take place in their parish?

If you knew for a fact that your priest had a live-in mistress and children, by her and other young girls -- could you take part in a worship service he is leading?  Yet, there is no doubt this is happening -- and the Vatican just looks the other way. 

 

Why not just eliminate the celibacy requirement -- and let them have a normal life?

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

Quick question, who was moving priests around enabling them to molest over and over again?  How long has it been going on about a thousand years?   

Quick question, who was moving priests around enabling them to molest over and over again?  How long has it been going on about a thousand years?

 

=========================

The same types that are moving preachers and pastors around for the same crimes?  Vilifying the victims is another thing the preacher/pastors like to do, along with their wonderful congregations.

Celibacy is Church Practice, Not Dogma Matt. 19:11-12 - Jesus says celibacy is a gift from God and whoever can bear it should bear it. Jesus praises and recommends celibacy for full-time ministers in the Church. Because celibacy is a gift from God, those who criticize the Church's practice of celibacy are criticizing God and this wonderful gift He bestows on His chosen ones. Matt. 19:29 - Jesus says that whoever gives up children for the sake of His name will receive a hundred times more and will inherit eternal life. Jesus praises celibacy when it is done for the sake of His kingdom. Matt. 22:30 - Jesus explains that in heaven there are no marriages. To bring about Jesus' kingdom on earth, priests live the heavenly consecration to God by not taking a wife in marriage. This way, priests are able to focus exclusively on the spiritual family, and not have any additional pressures of the biological family (which is for the vocation of marriage). This also makes it easier for priests to be transferred to different parishes where they are most needed without having to worry about the impact of their transfer on wife and children. 1 Cor 7:1 – Paul teaches that it is well for a man not to touch a woman. This is the choice that the Catholic priests of the Roman rite freely make. 1 Cor. 7:7 - Paul also acknowledges that celibacy is a gift from God and wishes that all were celibate like he is. 1 Cor. 7:27 – Paul teaches men that they should not seek marriage. In Paul’s opinion, marriage introduces worldly temptations that can interfere with one’s relationship with God, specifically regarding those who will become full-time ministers in the Church. 1 Cor. 7:32-33, 38 - Paul recommends celibacy for full-time ministers in the Church so that they are able to focus entirely upon God and building up His kingdom. He “who refrains from marriage will do better.” 1 Tim. 3:2 - Paul instructs that bishops must be married only once. Many Protestants use this verse to prove that the Church's celibacy law is in error. But they are mistaken because this verse refers to bishops that were widowers. Paul is instructing that these widowers could not remarry. The verse also refers to those bishops who were currently married. They also could not remarry (in the Catholic Church's Eastern rite, priests are allowed to marry; celibacy is only a disciplinary rule for the clergy of the Roman rite). Therefore, this text has nothing to do with imposing a marriage requirement on becoming a bishop. 1 Tim. 4:3 - in this verse, Paul refers to deceitful doctrines that forbid marriage. Many non-Catholics also use this verse to impugn the Church's practice of celibacy. This is entirely misguided because the Catholic Church (unlike many Protestant churches) exalts marriage to a sacrament. In fact, marriage is elevated to a sacrament, but consecrated virginity is not. The Church declares marriage sacred, covenantal and li***iving. Paul is referring to doctrines that forbid marriage and other goods when done outside the teaching of Christ and for a lessor good. Celibacy is an act of giving up one good (marriage and children) for a greater good (complete spiritual union with God). 1 Tim. 5:9-12 - Paul recommends that older widows take a pledge of celibacy. This was the beginning of women religious orders. 2 Tim. 2:3-4 - Paul instructs his bishop Timothy that no soldier on service gets entangled in civilian pursuits, since his aim his to satisfy the One who enlisted him. Paul is using an analogy to describe the role of the celibate priesthood in the Church. Rev. 14:4 - unlike our sinful world of the flesh, in heaven, those consecrated to virginity are honored. Isaiah 56:3-7 - the eunuchs who keep God's covenant will have a special place in the kingdom of heaven. Jer. 16:1-4 - Jeremiah is told by God not to take a wife or have children.

Hi David,

 

You tell us, "Celibacy is Church Practice, Not Dogma."

 

Are you telling us that a man who goes into the Roman Catholic seminary as a young boy and later becomes a priest -- can choose to get married if he likes and still remain a priest?  What about his "vow of celibacy"?

 

And, if a recent seminary graduate wants to be a priest -- yet, refuses to take this "vow of celibacy" -- can he still become a priest?  We both know the answer to that question is NO.

 

If a priest can choose to get married later -- why have so many left the Roman Catholic church over this issue?

 

A man in the priesthood of the Roman Catholic church can choose to be a priest -- or he can choose to have a normal married life, as ordained by God.  But, he cannot have both.

 

Yes, we know that the Roman Catholic church will bend its rules on celibacy in an attempt to bring Anglicans back into the fold -- but, even that is very unfair to the priests who have been forced to live by the church's celibacy law all their lives.  This is a compromise which is totally unfair to priests who grew up and became priests in the church.  Still they must abide by the church's celibacy laws -- while the new convert Anglican priests do not.   How will that fly?

 

That, to me, is a firm dogma!  Regardless of what you or the church calls it.

 

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

 

Bill

Bill, Men who become priest make the choice knowing it requires a celibate vocation. Otherwise they can become a deacon and get married and have all the sex they want. You write as those some horrible injustice has been placed upon them.

And what difference does it make to you, bill. You've not been called to vocation. Let us Catholics worry about doctrine and practices of our faith. They are I absolutely no consequence to you.

Hi VP and David,

 

David, the point I was making is in response to VP's comment that celibacy is not a church dogma or law.  And, I point out that it is an absolute requirement for any man to become a priest, thus a dogma.

 

And, then, I point out the inconsistency of the Roman Catholic church when it is willing to allow Anglican priests to come into the Roman Catholic church as priests -- but still allow them to be married.  While the other Roman Catholic priests must live under this dogma of celibacy.  That has to be a point of contention one day.

 

VP,  you ask what difference it makes to me what church you follow.  It doesn't.  If you are happy in the Roman Catholic church, God bless you.

 

However, any time you post a teaching or doctrine which I know is not Biblical -- I will refute it.  I do this for the sake of others who might be misled by that erroneous teaching.  I am not trying to convert you -- only being a Berean and testing all teaching against Scripture (Acts 17:11).

 

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

 

Bill

---------------------------------

Please cite a source for the above information. Where did you find it? Did you double check it for validity? Did it come from personal experience? Was it properly researched? Is it biased in any way?  Like you so often aver, one must not blindly follow what one reads on the Internet. One must verify the truth before posting to this forum...

The source of many of Bill's errors is his reliance on the bible alone. Truth can be found in many places. The Church Fathers state that infants were baptized in the early church. It was customary for 3 generations to live together in one house on those days. When an entire household was baptized that included infants. Baptism replaced circumcision, which was done on the eighth day. One must consider all truth, for Jesus is the way, the truth, and the life. Christians did just fine without the Bible. It would do some well to keep that in mind. Praised be Jesus forever!

An article I thought was interesting & related to topic. Sorry for the cut & paste, couldn't get the link to work.  By CBS News, March 2012.

March 12, 2012 10:02 AM

Vatican rule allows some priests to marry

(CBS News) For centuries, the Roman Catholic Church has had a very firm rule - if you're a priest, you can't get married. But there are exceptions to the rule of celibacy.

Married for 30 years, Rev. Doug Grandon has fathered six children and enjoyed a successful career as an Episcopal pastor in the Protestant Church. But in 2003, he realized his calling was to the Catholic Church.

"The Catholic church is the fullest expression of what Jesus meant Christianity to be," Grandon said. "And I wanted to be a part of that."

Pope John Paul II issued a little known edict that said Protestant priests wishing to become Catholic shouldn't break their marriage vows. It took five years of schooling and a blessing from Pope Benedict to make Grandon one of 77 priests in the US who have converted allegiance to the Vatican.

Grandon's wife Lynn was "really angry" when he said he wanted to convert. In giving up his protestant ministry, Grandon took a considerable pay cut. The Catholic Church hasn't quite figured out how much to pay a priest with a family.

It's a good thing Lynn runs the Denver Diocese "Respect Life" office. She's the breadwinner now.

Last June, Grandon joined his new parish, the Church of the Risen Christ. The 45-year-old congregation hosts 3,200 families. Monsignor Ken Leone, the former pastor of the church, says his parish had never heard of anyone like Grandon.

"When they heard about a married priest with a wife and six kids coming, one lady said to me, 'Well, I'll never go to confessional to him. Because don't you know that husbands tell their wives everything?'"

Leone hopes that "we look at the man, we don't look at just the fact that he's married."

So, should all Catholic priests have the option to marry?

"Having married priests like us in the Latin rite allows them to look and see how it would work, if they wanted to change it," Grandon said.

Faith and religion contributor the Rev. Edward Beck told "CBS This Morning" co-hosts Gayle King and Erica Hill it's good that men like Grandon have the option to become a Catholic priest.

"It's pushing the conversation. What we're seeing is, it can work," he said. (Watch Beck's full comments, at left)

Beck, however, said he couldn't do it personally.

"I could not do what I do, in the full capacity that I do it, and be married with children. It would not work. Something would suffer."

"The idea with celibacy is you're single-minded, you're single-hearted," Beck said. "You can really give yourself to your ministry, to God, to what you do."

(Watch Michelle Miller's full report in the video above.)

© 2012 CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved.

 

As far as the child abuse issue - I don't think it's a problem of priests being celibate. I think it's a problem of pediphiles preying on children and hiding behind their authority. It happens in every religion/denomination. Just because a pastor/priest/elder, etc. is married with kids, doesn't exclude him from possibly being a pediphile.  However, it iIS wrong for the church (whatever denomination/religion) to hide the crimes of their pastors/priests/elders, etc. 

I am not Catholic, so I don't have a strong opinion either way about the priests being celibate. 

Hi Nathan,

 

The Bible, His Written Word, is the ONLY book He has given us.  Are you saying that God began a work, the Bible, and then stopped short of completing it?   Or, are you saying that God could not complete His Bible -- so, He needed someone else, a human or humans, to finish His work for Him?

 

Isn't that a rather weak God, if He could not finish the work He began?

 

And, isn't that saying basically what the cult leader, Rev. Sun Myung Moon, said when he told his followers that God sent him and his wife to finish the work that Jesus Christ could not finish?

 

Then, you speak of a family being saved and baptized.  Are you saying that salvation is a "corporate event" rather than an individual decision?  Are we saved in groups -- or as individuals?

 

The Bible says we EACH must choose to follow Christ -- not follow a body of others or a church organization.  NO CHURCH can save anyone.  Each of us must, individually, confess and profess Jesus Christ as our Lord and Savior to be saved.

 

When you make it a "family event" or a "corporate event" so that you can include infant baptism -- you are reading INTO the Bible, Scripture, what IS NOT there.   Keep in mind that we should draw OUT of Scripture the message God has given -- NOT read INTO Scripture what we WANT it to say.

 

Salvation is an individual act, as is baptism.  No one can be saved for us -- and no one can be baptized for us.  We must come face to face with Jesus Christ on our own.

 

When Jesus tells us, in Revelation 3:20, "Behold, I stand at the door and knock; if anyone hears My voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and will dine with him, and he with Me" -- He is speaking to the individual, not a church, a town, or a family -- only the individual  -- anyONE.

 

Sorry, my Friend, in salvation -- there is no Family Plan!

 

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

 

Bill

.

billie, some day in the near future you will realize you've always been wrong.

 

But as the great John Walton once said "too late now liv." 

Hi Vic,

 

Truly, I really appreciate your very indepth, intelligent comments.  When it comes to discussing Biblical issues -- you really do give us food for thought.   Like, can he even spell BIBLE?

 

Bless your little old childish heart!

 

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

 

Bill

--------------

Goodnight daddy, or did he call him pa? No, it was daddy.

.

Goodnight stepkids, goodnight step grandkids, good night dog,

goodnight dorrie.

 

GOODNIGHT BILLIE STEP DADDY, NOW SHUT UP

 

And again, sir you say you are never ugly or hateful- always Christ-like on this forum. You asked me to cite specific examples of when you fail to be Christ's love. Here ya go. No matter how Vic talks to you, a true Christian would still answer in love and not in hate. So there you have cited example #2 in less than 24 hours. You are making this very easy for me!!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

You know vp, billie brings out the worst in me, so I'll restrict my rebuttal

to his lies to a minimum.

 

Everybody knows he's full of hot air.

Hi VP,

 

Does this mean that YOU are NOT a  true Christian -- since most of your comments to me are in a very negative, and very often hateful, tone? 

 

My Friend, we both realize there is love -- and there is "tough love."  If you have children, I am sure that you love your children.   In that love, if you see one of your children doing something which is harmful to itself or to others -- would you correct that child?  Or, would you just say, "Well, I love my child -- so, I will just look the other way and pretend it is not happening"?

 

I believe we both know the answer to that question.  And, since comments from Crusty and Vic are most often childish -- we must view them as spoiled children and give them their dose of castor oil.

 

But, it is all done in love.  Just as I know your comments to me are done in love.  They are, aren't they?   Otherwise, how could you be a Christian?

 

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

 

Bill

 

Yes indeed they are. Love for my church, and love for the Truth. You ASKED me to cite examples of you being nasty or ugly- I'm only obliging your request;-)

And nobody is calling into question your (or my) Christianity - Just pointing out evidence that you are snide and condescending, as per your request. Did you not intend for me to carry through with your request? I thought it was sincere.

Billie boy... You, of all people, questioning Veep's Christianity when the vast majority of your comments are so full of negativity and hatred? None of us is perfect but I see in Veep's postings nothing but love, caring and friendship... She see's a friend in need and reaches out to help. On the other hand, your postings are full of hatred and negativity... You appear to want to drive others away to make room for your negativity... Veep appears as an angel in waiting... You may best be described as a nattering nabob of negativity...

Bill, I think it is very hypocritical of you to call VP's Christianity into question, saying her replies to you are hateful. Your reply to Invictus is dripping with sarcasm & derision.  She simply pointed that out to you.

 

Originally posted by Bill Gray:

March 15, 2013 6:36 PM

---

Thanks, Canade. He asked me to point out if he was ever rude or condescending. As you say, I was doing just that.

Hi Canade and VP,

 

How is it being rude or condescending to ask a person who post the kind of childish comments we get from Vic -- if he can spell BIBLE?   His lack of knowledge of the Bible is self-evident.  All he can do is copy/paste Vatican, or other internet, false teachings, without even understanding what he is copying -- and you say I have no right to refute that?

 

Personally, it is my opinion that most Roman Catholics are either afraid to, or too lazy to, attempt to interpret the Bible for themselves.  So, they allow the Vatican to bully them into believing whatever the Vatican writes.  That is not studying God's Word; that is just following man -- instead of God.

 

But, if you will not attempt to understand the Bible; then, I am not surprised that you cannot understand when I refute Vic's crude, rude, and childish comments.

 

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

 

Bill

Well in a nutshell, that couldn't be further from the truth. It is your opinion that Catholics are too afraid or lazy to interpret the bible for themselves. Absolutely could not be less true. We know the dangers of interpreting ourselves- it leads to things like: 1. Denying the Eucharist. (Even when scripture makes it abundantly clear) 2. OSAS- taking one or two little verses and hanging your salvation on them 3. Refusing to pray for our departed souls. I could go on and on, but let me tell you one thing- there is nothing "lazy" about adhering to sacred scripture AND sacred tradition, and keeping in unity with the church that has remained pretty much the only CONsTaNt for over 2000 years. There is a reason we are catholic(as in universal), the largest Christian church in the world. And trust me, lazy aint no part of it