CathInfo.com

Benedict IX was a sodomite as St Peter Damian declared. Pope Victor III stated he was the vilest man in history. we should not dismiss these things as coming from protestants when a Saint said the same thing. Popes are not infallible in all their actions, to not accept that a handful of popes were as bad as their contemporaries said is rubbish. yes some of these things were calumnies from protestants but many were not

Cardinal Pietro Parolin, the Vatican’s Secretary of State, delivered the concluding address at a recent conference on clerical celibacy as a pathway to freedom.

Speaking at Pontifical Gregorian University on February 6, Cardinal Parolin said that celibacy, far from being an “inhuman” demand, allows a priest to serve the Lord with a “free and undivided heart,” configures him in a special way to Christ, and leaves him more free for his priestly mission.

Other speakers at the conference included Cardinal Marc Ouellet, the prefect of the Congregation for Bishops, and Archbishop Joël Mercier, the secretary of the Congregation for the Clergy.

http://www.catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=27448

By the way, it's ONE GUY who keeps posting all the pro-married-priests propaganda. He is one of those can't-really-call-him-Trad's who opted to go Eastern Rite even though his family isn't from that part of the world, not at all.

Instead of going to chapels outside the Conciliar Church structure (SSPX, SSPV, CMRI, Independent, sedevacantist), or even within the Conciliar Church structure (Indult, FSSP, ICK), a few Catholics decide to change their nation/race and pretend they're oriental Catholics.

I don't see how that's a solution -- I don't have any personal experience with the Eastern Rites, but I've heard they were ALL touched by Vatican II. Maybe some aren't as bad as others, but they all fall short of going to a Tridentine Rite Mass somewhere in the West.

Anyhow, my point is that his propaganda is stupid. His long post about all the bad popes "all unmarried" tries to suggest that if they had been allowed to marry, they might not have had problems with purity.

He also claims that because we had a few bad popes who had concubines and other illicit partners, that it constitutes a sort of "tradition" of non-celibacy in the West. Give me a break! They flaunted morality and the rules. They don't count!

Celibacy in the West goes back almost to the very beginning. There is a reason for that. Trying to "turn back the clock" is always disastrous in the case of the Catholic Church, and in fact it has a name: archaeologism. Just look at Vatican II.

My example is: Penicillin used to be awesome for killing infections -- in 1900. But if a doctor prescribed the original dosage of Penicillin today for every infection, his patients wouldn't improve. 2016 is not 1900. Bugs have gotten stronger since then.

Likewise, until you wake up and (for some reason) your calendar reads "50" instead of "2016", we're not going to roll back the clocks on clerical celibacy.

In fact, I don't think there is any evidence that any priest, bishop or pope FATHERED CHILDREN (to put it delicately) while possessing the sacred character of the priesthood. If he had a wife, they either separated or lived as brother and sister.

Allowing married men to be ordained and having protestant style "married man ministers" are two completely different things.

Also recall how the pious American indian tribes used to discern how much more the Jesuits loved them and were devoted to them...because they didn't have families. They saw protestant ministers and decided they were working "part time" to convert them, whereas the Catholic priests were 100% wholly devoted to spreading the Faith, putting their money where their mouth was.

This is just ONE of the many reasons the Church required its priests to be single.