Thinking about mjpb's comments about how the celebacy thing was brought in got me thinking about a couple of verses and then searching for comment on them. I came across an intereting article on married couples and stuff around abstaing for a period (considering those priests who stayed married but did not have sex with their wives) http://www.settingcaptivesfree.com/home/90-day_fast.php

I'm still thinking about how the ones that divorced wives fited with the divorce criteria. Presumably they did not remarry so maybe they did not commit adultery but they left their ex's in a difficult position.

R0bert

Once again I'd like to Thank You all
for your inputs into this discussion.
It has definitely been an interesting
one.

I feel that the way Catholics respond
to contemporary challenges will depend on
which part of the theological
spectrum they inhabit.

We all need to get beyond stereotypes
as Dr Collins points out, "and recognise
the sincerity and contribution to the rich
fabric of the Church of all Catholics, with
different attitudes to our own, even if we
personally don't agree with their specific emphasis."

The reason why Dr Collins stresses this is because
he has, "so often been told by Catholics who disagree
with him to 'get out and found you own church if you
don't accept the doctrines and rules of the club.'
Such people believe that their very narrow definition
of Catholicism is the only one that is valid:
everyone else is a 'heretic' and beyond the pale."
Attitudes such as those of course don't
achieve anything constructive.

It is important for people to get to know
each other and exchange ideas, and one of our
greatest strengths in Australia is our tendency to
"live and let live."

I believe that we can reach a common ground -
and I believe that we will.

Anyway, Thanks once again,
and All The Best,

Personally, I think they should be allowed to marry. Most other priests,pastors,rabbi's etc.are aloowed to marry. There is so much controversy regarding the fact that the reason they do those 'ahem' things is because they have chosen to be priests and stay celibate.

Robert,

"I'm still thinking about how the ones that divorced wives ...Presumably they did not remarry so maybe they did not commit adultery ..."

Did any divorce? I would have think that they weren't able to. As pedantic as it sounds separating without divorce is normally theologically distinguished from divorce.

Foxy,

"so often been told by Catholics who disagree with him to 'get out and found you own church if you don't accept the doctrines and rules of the club.'

Have you considered that it suggests something about him that he attracts such comments particularly when he quotes Robinson who is too liberal for liberal Catholic Bishops? I note your comment and would like to provide some comments in an interview from someone who considers the Catholic Church dangerously (possibly terminally) out of step with worldly values but discussing Pell (even comparing with Collins) comments thusly about whether or not it is constructive:

"Well I should say to start with these are the remarks of a sociologist who’s interested in the current world. I’m not a Catholic and I never have been a Catholic...

Now this is the animal, this is the Catholic church, and it’s a bit like protesting against that is a bit like saying you don’t like lions because they roar or because they eat human beings. That’s the nature of lions. If you don’t like them, you stay away from them. I think at this point, again, viewed as a sociologist from a distance, that someone like George Pell is correct. He is moving into an institution in huge crisis, perhaps terminal crisis in the West. The institution has the logic which I’m talking about, centred on the power of the keys. Unless you follow that particular logic and defend the Pope, defend the key doctrine, take action against priests who are more and more looking like Protestants, or not even Protestants; unless you do that, you’ve lost your institution altogether..."

I've read similar comments by protestants who focus on the "not even Protestants" ie. non Christian aspect.

Married priests served the Church since it was founded until it was banned.Why?
Were the past marriages illegal or wrong?If they werent then why have marriages been made illegal or forbidden since?
It is either right or wrong.
Why are married men admitted to the catholic clergy when they convert to Catholicism later in life? It is either right or wrong? Why the compromise?
socratease

Dear mjpb,

Thank You for giving the quote from the sociologist.

Now, I'll give you one from Father James Kavanaugh,
from his book, "A Modern Priest Looks at His Outdated
Church."

"Catholics do not listen; they have only been taught to
defend. They refuse to question what they have learned
in childhood. They can defend pious superstition with
the same ardor with which they embrace key doctrines of
their faith. They can uphold a Roman ruling with the fire
of a martyr's conviction and ignore it once the bishop
pronouces that Saturday, at midnight, it does not apply.

They can critize non-Catholics as indulgent sinners who
dilute the teachings of Christ. They can ridicule ministers
and rabbis as unworthy prophets or frauds, laugh at the
ceremonies of non-Catholic sects, condemn the vagueness
of other moral teachings without recognizing the rigidity
of their own. Catholics can attack the non-Catholic's
stand on birth control as "selfish compromise" and their
position on divorce as "moral chaos." No one escapes our
wrath or righteous condemnation. Our papers attack the
divorces of people without knowing the circumstances of
their private lives. Catholic leaders can question their
moral fitness for office, and defend with fervour an
alcoholic bishop or a greedy priest. They can scorn welfare
programs which attempt to solve a problem without upholding
the moral opinions of the Church..."

There's much more but I won't list everything here.

And you're right, the Church under Pell will remain
unchangeable.

I agree with Father Kavanagh:

For many of us it helps to look forward to the day when
the Church will have abandoned its arrogance, when it will
not offer its Catholic code to force the conscience of the
world. When it will practice compassion, not exclusion,
when there will be no "non-Catholics", there will be only
persons, struggling to be honest with themselves.
Then we can call others "brother," or "sister," not Jew,
or Protestant or non-Catholic, and hope that they will
forgive our narrowness and call us, "Brother" or "Sister,"
too.