It's good to be a Melkite
#81
(02-14-2012, 04:20 PM)TrentCath Wrote: Is there any proof for the second claim?

The living proof of married priests today who still have children more than 9 months after they are ordained.
Reply
#82
(02-14-2012, 05:07 PM)Melkite Wrote:
(02-14-2012, 04:20 PM)TrentCath Wrote: Is there any proof for the second claim?

The living proof of married priests today who still have children more than 9 months after they are ordained.

So no proof its licit.
Reply
#83
It would be a violence against the marriage if one were to ask continence from the married priest.

If that's the case, it's better for him not to be married at all.

Reply
#84
(02-14-2012, 05:17 PM)TrentCath Wrote:
(02-14-2012, 05:07 PM)Melkite Wrote:
(02-14-2012, 04:20 PM)TrentCath Wrote: Is there any proof for the second claim?

The living proof of married priests today who still have children more than 9 months after they are ordained.

So no proof its licit.

What do you mean?  Married priests aren't defrocked for remaining married.  I guess what you are looking for is a papal letter confirming that our priests are allowed to do what they have always done?  I'm sure something exists, but I don't know where.

Now that I think about it, probably a better proof would be that there is nothing in the CCEO requiring married priests to remain continent.
Reply
#85
(02-14-2012, 04:11 PM)Silouan Wrote: Well I was certainly under no illusion that you guys were welcoming of anyone not of your particular theological opinion. I'm posting in this thread now in defense of Melkite after you guys have gone on for seven pages now criticizing him and his Church's attempt to return to their ancient practices (which far out date the Latin practice in this case).

1) Cause precedes the effect. Page one is where the Melkite bishop runs down Latin practices and doesn't make a clear argument for why tried and true Latin practices are forcibly to be removed even against the wishes of the faithful and their benefit.

2) Ancient practices are not always superior. Some traditions develop like flowers from seeds or bulbs.  Why go back to the bulb when the flower is available or even still opening to its full blossom? Private confession is far superior to public confession.

 

Reply
#86
(02-14-2012, 05:31 PM)Gerard Wrote:
(02-14-2012, 04:11 PM)Silouan Wrote: Well I was certainly under no illusion that you guys were welcoming of anyone not of your particular theological opinion. I'm posting in this thread now in defense of Melkite after you guys have gone on for seven pages now criticizing him and his Church's attempt to return to their ancient practices (which far out date the Latin practice in this case).

1) Cause precedes the effect. Page one is where the Melkite bishop runs down Latin practices and doesn't make a clear argument for why tried and true Latin practices are forcibly to be removed even against the wishes of the faithful and their benefit.

2) Ancient practices are not always superior. Some traditions develop like flowers from seeds or bulbs.  Why go back to the bulb when the flower is available or even still opening to its full blossom? Private confession is far superior to public confession.

 


But the practices in question did not develop organically in the Eastern Churches. Look at all the fuss about communion in the hand in the Novus Ordo. Communion in the hand was a common practice in the early Church. Fairly quickly it fell out of practice for a number of reasons and not taking communion in the hand was the norm for many, many centuries. Then the practice was reintroduced, much to the consternation of many traditionalist, very artificially in the 20th.

It is the same with the practices Melkite is speaking of. They may have been around for a very long time in the Latin Church but they did not develop naturally from the spiritual traditions of the Eastern Churches. As such they are out of place and should be removed for the spiritual well being of those Churches.
Reply
#87
(02-14-2012, 05:31 PM)Gerard Wrote: 1) Cause precedes the effect. Page one is where the Melkite bishop runs down Latin practices and doesn't make a clear argument for why tried and true Latin practices are forcibly to be removed even against the wishes of the faithful and their benefit.

2) Ancient practices are not always superior. Some traditions develop like flowers from seeds or bulbs.  Why go back to the bulb when the flower is available or even still opening to its full blossom? Private confession is far superior to public confession.

Our traditions are equally tried and true.  One can question whether such a change is beneficial to the faithful or not, but ultimately, in the context of the letter, this is a question of whether one is going to obey their bishop or not.  It's interesting to see in this thread how many Latins will come up with excuses on why it's ok to disobey one's bishop when it's something they don't like, but God forbid anyone suggest disobeying a bishop who would impose Latin practices on unwilling Easterners.
Reply
#88
CITH, as it was introduced after Vatican II, resembled the Protestant communion not the practices of the early church.

It's spiritually harmful because it promotes sacrilege and disbelief in the Real Presence. That has nothing to do with the practice of delaying Holy Communion to infants which is considered "artificial" in Eastern churches simply because it became the norm in the West or because it was not practiced in the East by 1054. We're always coming back to the same argument.
Reply
#89
(02-14-2012, 06:00 PM)Melkite Wrote: but God forbid anyone suggest disobeying a bishop who would impose Latin practices on unwilling Easterners.

I'm sorry to break it up to you but the current wave of delatinisations is actually the imposition of discontinued Eastern practices on unwilling Easterners.
Reply
#90
(02-14-2012, 06:02 PM)Vetus Ordo Wrote:
(02-14-2012, 06:00 PM)Melkite Wrote: but God forbid anyone suggest disobeying a bishop who would impose Latin practices on unwilling Easterners.

I'm sorry to break it up to you but the current wave of delatinisations is actually the imposition of discontinued Eastern practices on unwilling Easterners.

The Society of St Josaphat comes to mind
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)