Ben you seem to be coming from the perspective that the RCC can do no wrong...history teaches us differently though. Even in the Gospels Christs declaring St. Peter as the "rock" is immediately followed by a passage where Peter is possessed by Satan.
It is a fundemental mark of true Christianity, that the true Church can not err. However if we look at it, that would seem rule out *both* the Orthodox and Catholic Churches, for both churches are full of sinners, and always have been. And memebers of both Churches have committed horrible things, but this in no way damages the essential truth that the true Church can not err in matters in faith. Now as to which Church hasn't erred in matters of faith, I'm still figuring that out.
As for Peter, and the passage that you refer to, where you seem to believe it refers to Peter being possessed by Satan.
Firstly, let me tell you what an Orthodox priest (OCA) told me regarding this pasage. He told me that the word Satan comes from the aramic, greek, or hebrew (can't remember which one
) word that means 'adversary". So if we understand that verse correctly, the priest told me, we can only mean it to understand Peter as doing something/ saying something that is the opposite of Chirst's plan and/or will. The passge does not mean that Satan and Peter were one, or that Satan possesed Peter. Rather the verse means Peter, as a human, sinned, he failed, he missed the mark.
Secondly, let give my own opinion here. Even if Peter was possesed by Satan it would not hurt Papal Infalliblity. One can not argue against Papal Infalliblty by attacking individuals who held the office of Pope of Rome. To do this shows ignorance on the part of the attacker. For the dogma of Papal Infallibilty does not state that the Pope can not sin, or even hold heretical opinions. It simply means that he is guided by the HS and prevent from all error, when speaking ex cathedra. Sinfull humans, from the RCC view, can not damage the office of the papacy, popes are not sinless saints, they can be of course, but just because they are a Pope doesn't mean the RCC thinks they can do no wrong.
and the people sitting in the pews what they think of the celibate priesthood and ask them if they think it is a positive thing for the RCC.
I have yet to personally meet a Roman Catholic totally against celibacy as a requirement for the priesthood. In fact, I know many converts to Roman Catholicsm from Orthodoxy who like it because their priest has more time for parishoneers and doesn't have to worry about a family and, in some cases, a secular job.
Celibacy was optional until shortly after the Great Schism with East. Historians generally agrre this was based on earthly money matters more than scripoture or tradition. We have two priests in my family...so this discussion came up quite a bit as I was growing up.
It is true that for the first part of the Christian Church, celibacy was an option for priests, but of course not for monks, who are the backbone of the faith. But this in no way makes it silly or that is shouldn't be a requirement. Celibacy in so many ways, throughout history has strengthed the Catholic priesthood, and produced great saints.
The celibacy requirement is not absolute or uniform. IN parts of Africa RC priests are openly sexually active (but not married)...and if an Anglican priests converts to RC then he can be a married RC priest with kids and everything.....So if a cradle RC wants to be a married RC priest wity kids he can first convert to the Anglican Church, become ordained there and then go back to the RCC. There is such a priest in the Joliet Diocese who is married and has children ....Now if Celibacy is such a deal breaker for the priesthood...this should not be allowed to happen...there should not be one rule for cradle Catholics and another rule for Anglican converts to the RCC where the priesthood is concerned.
The Church makes exceptions. Every rule has an exception. For example is it not a rule in Orthodoxy that a healthy Orthodox Christian observe the Nativity fast? However, my local GOA bishop allows an exception, so that his flock may celebrate Thanksgiving. In the Catholic Church celibacy is the norm for the Roman rite, there are exceptions to this, but this does not change the norm, Pope JPII is clear that it is the norm, and will remain that way.
Some are called to celibacy
I totally agree.
I challenge though to find any celibate adult without children who can honestly claim they have the full appreciation of what it means to bring life into this world and be parent.
I know Orthodox monks who, as spiritual fathers of many souls, know a heck of a lot more about parenting then any couple with 10 kids!
Ben...I see a lot of toeing the company line here with your posts and you strike me as an intelleigent person. In your life is it only when you come to questions about the RCC that you adopt a diiferent set of criteria for analyzing things ... or do you just tend to accpet everything at face value even though it appears hypocritical, unhealthy and in some cases just plain silly?
I do not think celibacy is silly or unhealthy. In many cases and for a good number of individuals it is the healthiest life style possible! I understand your objection to it being a requirment, but I actually think this rules keeps priests in line. I mean my God with how outrages the Church has gotten since Vat II, imagine the divorces, the martial problems, the child raising problems, priests trying to make time for the family and the parish. My God the Catholic Church would have a hundred times more scandals if every priest had a family.
I know you are older than me and times were different when you were growing up.
lol...how old are you? And why do you assume I grew up back in the day?
Ben just because you are Catholic does not mean you are required to check your mind at the door.
Please get to know me. I most surely haven't check my mind out the door. The fact that I am a traditionalist Catholic, and interested in Orthodoxy testifies to that.
This is the USA in the 21 st century -- go ahead question how the RCC is being shepherded. I was a voice alone in the wilderness. Indeed I had to leave before anyone even bothered to listen --
The RCC is in the greatest crisis it has ever been in. This is why I am a traditionalist. Telling me that the RCC is a mess, isn't news to me. I've been there, done that, and bought the T-shirt. I know that the Church is in a HUGE mess, a desperate one.