Socrates,

"Married priests served the Church since it was founded until it was banned.Why?"

It is just a disciplinary rule. Basically it is believed that priests alone find it easier to avoid sex than priests who are with their wives. Atheists just consider any restrictions on sex weird. Protestants believe that the Catholic Church went off track after Constantine legalised Christianity and the Roman persecutions ended. Catholics believe that a sexual continence discipline always existed and celibacy is just a logical way of managing things.

For example, consider Eusebius, early Bishop of Caesaria, Palestine (263-339), who wrote:

"It is appropriate for the teachers and heralds of the true worship of God that they are now free of all the chains of earning a living and daily cares. Indeed, for these men it is now commanded to distance themselves resolutely from marriage so as to devote themselves to a more important matter. Now they are concerned with a holy and not a carnal begetting of descendents. And they have taken upon themselves the begetting, the God-pleasing education, and daily care, not of one or two children, but of an indeterminable number all at once."

Likewise, early Christians Jerome and Synesius both label the situation where a cleric and his wife bear a child as adultery which is otherwise hard to explain. Later it would be documented that sexual continence was required from married clergy and much later celibacy for clergy.

"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?"

Interesting you should put it that way. I know of analogous situations where permission was refused yet a number of Anglicans were allowed. My stereotype of an anglican Minister is an old codger. Many assume that after a certain age people are less likely to have sex. I have wondered if "later in life" was a significant consideration. I haven't encountered any ex-Anglican priests myself nor know the criteria for that situation.

Dear Foxy,

"... refuse to question what they have learned in childhood..."

Tapping into the indoctrinated Christian child rhetoric. As an former atheist child I have a certain immunity from that tactic.

Father James Kavanaugh largely appears to set up a straw man.

"...indulgent sinners ..."

No way!

"They can ridicule ministers and rabbis as unworthy prophets or frauds"

Orthodox Catholics would be more likely to apply such descriptions to Catholic pastors who reject Christianity entirely.

"laugh at the ceremonies of non-Catholic sects"

In this religion even if you disagree with something you are supposed to be charitable.

"condemn the vagueness of other moral teachings without recognizing the rigidity of their own."

Isn't there is recognition that a moral teaching believed to be handed down by God Almighty might be rigid in the sense that people can't abolish it on a whim? Further, ironic criticism considering the Catholic Church is often condemned for developing biblical doctrine.

"No one escapes ..."

Isn't this guy aware of the developing ecumenical relationship with the rest of the Christian family?

...

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

Did I say that? Pre-Vatican II I believe Pell would have been considered quite progressive. Now compared to people who reject the basics of both Catholicism in particular and Christianity in general he is quite theologically conservative.

"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."

Force or is expressing a moral voice just unwelcome? Until recently openly believing in your own religion wasn't considered arrogant. The New Testament makes it clear that 2000 years ago the Apostles operated in a world with similar values to the ones around today. If you are correct it won't happen quickly.

"When it will ..."

Do liberal Catholics struggle so much to relate to protestants due to the extreme secularisation? Orthodox Catholics have already resolved that. My best friend is pentecostal and that is exactly how we address each other.

Dear Socratease,

You may be interested in the following website:

http://www.catholicculture.org/library/view.cfm?recnum=7621

It's an 11 page article entitled, "The Anglican Right,"
by Rev. Dwight Longenecker. He is the author of ten books
on conversion and the Catholic Faith.

He explains the situation about clergymen wanting to become
ordained as Catholic priests, despite the fact that they
are married with
wifes and children. Clergymen who convert to the
Catholic faith, are accepted by Rome, and
are able to be ordained as fully functioning Catholic
priests.

Read the article for yourself.

It may give you the insight you're looking for.

another preist to another to be married if they are male and female ,fair enough,

if they are both blokes , i guess cardinal pell will marry them with all his blessing as he seems to protect the pedophiles of the church as proven not two weeks ago , .

and he still has not told the pope ,

it shouldn't matter what religion you are when you marry ,

but when it becomes a priest with another male priest well that really shows the truth of the chuch of catholic ,

they were raping our children in their church homes , so now they want to marry , is this a outlet for the priest to get away with raping children again

just like when those who were working for the state in their state run institutions of which they were raping the children for their own benifit

stop the cover ups of all the rapes in the church and also in the states instituions

huffnpuff

huffnpuff>"another preist to another to be married if they are male and female ,fair enough,
if they are both blokes , i guess cardinal pell will marry them with all his blessing as he seems to protect the pedophiles of the church as proven not two weeks ago , ."

What are you trying to say about gay people, huffnpuff? You do not support them marrying like everyone else? You think gay people are pedophiles? Both?

Dear mjpb,

I can see that you and I won't be agreeing
on this topic no matter how long and well
we discuss it. We simply view things from
different perspectives.

You accept things as they are.
I question them.

I question the double standards and the
inconsistencies.

And to me the insistance of celibacy of priests is a
major inconsistency.

All The Best