General Chat

My favourite religious building is the Nan Tien Buddhist temple - the largest in the southern hemisphere. It is only about 10 minutes from where I live. It's so peaceful and welcoming to all religions. They hold gentle excercise classes, meditation and have a small restaurant where you can sample true Chinese cooking. The Buddhist monks regularly join in community events such as Walk for Cancer etc. and also join in our local Clean Up Australia days. They are regularly seen shopping and walking lakeside. There were no major complaints when it was announced that it was to be built and is a real asset to our region.

We have several of these Eastern Churches in Vancouver, and in Canada .......... Byzantine, Greek Orthodox, Albanian, etc


The churches, inside and out, are glorious!

Sylvia. Yes, you are right. Celibacy promises were a requirement from 11?? onwards. Joeva suggested it was to do with inheritance going to priest's family rather than church.

But probably many of us are well aware that our family trees (mine being one) include a "celibate" priest. I would imagine that parish priests in England from earliest days till Henry VIII were often married men with families.

SueMaids edited version of post seems to support that. Now to have a read at the whole article she posted :-) :-)

hmmmmmmmmmm


Eastern Catholic churches all recognize the central role of the Bishop of Rome within the College of Bishops and his infallibility when speaking ex cathedra


....... but they don't take any part in the election of the Pope, do they??


They have Patriarchs of the various churches included under the term Easter Catholic.

It is an interesting site :-)

and the Eastern Catholic religions have always been able to marry.

They did not subscribe to the various Councils



but then, they do not owe allegiance to the Pope, do they???

John


I believe you misinterpreted that posting by Joeva


Celibacy was basically enforced in 1139. ......................... but a few priests, probably in remote areas, continue to marry illegally until the mid-16th century ........ when they could persuade another priest to officiate.



That is my reading of that long post ................................

............... and I think if you do read anything about the period from teh 212th century onwards you will find very little about married priests in England or Europe.


Lots of common-law relationships, etc .................. but not legal marriage, in front of the church door.

That's a really interesting site Suemaid thank you.

succinct and informative...

Sue. I don't want to upset Cynthia, of course. I don't want to upset you. I don't want to upset anybody. I come across as preachy, self-opinionated, condescending, sarcastic.

I am none of those things. I just want to contribute if I can say something I feel may be useful from my own experience. I am very sorry if it does not come across right. But I do check and check before I post almost always.

An interesting site which is perhaps relevant to this thread.

http://www.futurechurch.org/fpm/history.htm

Edit - an excerpt.

Myth: All priests take a vow of celibacy.
Fact: Most priests do not take a vow. It is a promise made before the bishop.

Myth: Celibacy is not the reason for the vocation shortage.
Fact: A 1983 survey of Protestant churches shows a surplus of clergy; the Catholic church alone has a shortage.

Myth: Clerical celibacy has been the norm since the Second Lateran Council in 1139.
Fact: Priests and even popes still continued to marry and have children for several hundred years after that date. In fact, the Eastern Catholic Church still has married priests.

In the Latin Church, one may be a married priest if:

•one is a Protestant pastor first; or
•if one is a life-long Catholic but promises never again to have sexual relations with one’s wife.

oh yes ..................


some very good advice



but then Cyn always gives good advice


and it often behoves the rest of us to pay attention!

Agree with Sue.....it's only iffy if it's the contents of a personal message being copied..not a post that is up there for all to see.

Maybe, maybe not. Cynthia posted it, John may have missed it. I'm pretty sure he wouldn't want to upset Cynthia any further.

Don't you think she gave some jolly good advice? I do. It isn't as though this was a private conversation.

Sorry Muffy. Person who posted the excellent post about the background to all of this was Joeva 23 Feb 1823hrs. On this thread. Bit long but well worth a read.

hmmmmmmmmmmmmm



is it really OK to c&p a thread by someone who is unable to comment herself on the appropriateness???


Cyn will be in bed by now.

No John ...long informative posts about religion will not have originated from me......

In case you missed it from the other thread today:


Cynthia

Report

26 Feb 2013 13:46




JOHN.

It is lonely enough for me on these boards when anything of a religious nature crops up but I do enjoy discussing and sharing thoughts with others.


I was pleased that you posted the Christian thread because it made me feel less lonely and I am happy to chat on there.


However, you are antagonizing people left right and centre with some of your comments and, quite honestly, it does not do anything to help things along. In fact, it puts some people more against the faith issues than they already are. Is that what you really want?


I do not agree with the goading which you have been subject to in the past, but could say that you are making things harder for me and I really don't appreciate it.


If you could please THINK before you post or even preview your post first to make sure you are unlikely to offend anyone, I would be very grateful.


Thank you.


I will now return to my small corner.

Gins. Source of the first point is this thread, early on. It ceased in the Council of Trent apparently which was 16th century. It was a very long and very informative post (was it Muffy?)

My earliest known ancestor was a Roman Catholic priest - incumbent of a parish in Worcestershire about 1300AD. My 18x great grandfather in direct paternal line. And he he was obviously a family man as many priests were in UK till the Reformation. All priests and all parish churches then came under the Bishop of Rome the Pope), of course.

As to today, bit of guesswork and reading of Thornbirds. Just feel pretty sure that in remote parts of the world rules are interpreted to suit local conditions. Hope somebody with more knowledge can either confirm they think I am right or not.

Gins posted


"And Catholic priests did marry and have families until less that 500 years ago in UK. And I expect they get married in parts of world today - just don't tell the Pope.


Please, ref your source?"

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



I must admit I was very surprised by this comment.

I was of the understanding that celibacy had been the rule in the Catholic church from around 800 AD, after all Western Catholics had come under the rule of the Pope.

Of course, many of them did live then in common-law relationships, and had children, especially in remote communities.

and we all know that certain Popes had children from common-law relationships ............. witness the Borgias, who also indulged in a little bit of murder, poisoning, and other skulduggery


BUT they were supposed to be celibate!


The Anglican Church is the result of Henry VIII's disagreement with the Pope, who refused to grant Henry a divorce .............

......... but the priests, bishops etc were all celibate at that time.

I’m so pleased you get on with your SiL, despite his religion!

Strange, us Caths!