Love Children

[Paddington]

[quote name='StThomasMore' post='1134355' date='Dec 4 2006, 01:05 AM']
Because Adam sinned, God the Son was made man. Do we hate that God the Son was made man? Of course no, but we do hate Adam's sin.
[/quote]

Is that a dogma? I wonder because the Eastern Orthodox often say that God the Son would have come to earth anyways out of love. That gets into the whole legal view of the cross. Or non-legal view.


[quote name='Extra ecclesiam nulla salus' post='1134400' date='Dec 4 2006, 02:12 AM']
that doesn't say that illegitimate children can be priests
[/quote]

Please post evidence if you think "illegitimate children" can not be priests. I badly want to see it. Others might not like it. Please do it anyways. Please with sugar on top. And cream. And syrup. Etc.

[Extra ecclesiam nulla salus]

[quote name='Paddington' post='1184926' date='Feb 4 2007, 10:42 PM']
Is that a dogma? I wonder because the Eastern Orthodox often say that God the Son would have come to earth anyways out of love. That gets into the whole legal view of the cross. Or non-legal view.
Please post evidence if you think "illegitimate children" can not be priests. I badly want to see it. Others might not like it. Please do it anyways. Please with sugar on top. And cream. And syrup. Etc.
[/quote]


It is dogma.



your evidence:
[quote]
There are two classes of impediments: perpetual impediments, called irregularities, and simple impediments, which are temporary. Irregularities can further be subdivided into those arising from some defect, and those arising from a delict (i.e., a canonical crime). Irregularities are established by the Church and make it illicit (i.e., illegal) for a person to receive or exercise Orders, but they do not render the Orders invalid. Irregularities are legislated to protect the dignity of the ministry and are not, in themselves, punishments for anything. The manual points out that many irregularities are contracted through no guilt on anyone's part. Under the 1917 Code, irregularity prohibited not just ordination, but even first tonsure, the hair-clipping that officially marked one as marked for ministry.

[b]First, let's look at the irregularities of defect. 1) Illegitimate birth: bastards, even when their status is not public, are irregular and can't be ordained;[/b] 2) Defect of body: those missing a thumb or index finger (which must hold the Host), those totally blind, the mute, incomprehensible mumblers or studderers, those with perilously trembling hands (who might drop the chalice), those who cannot tolerate any alcohol, those whose appearance would move the crowd to horror or derision, such as the severely deformed or hunchbacked; 3) Defect in the mind: those who are or have been epileptic, those who are or have been insane, those possessed by demons; 4) Defect of sacrament: those who have been legitimately married (and widowed) more than once; 5) Defect of reputation (infamy for their deeds): A) Ipso facto, those who have publicly joined a non-Catholic sect, who have desecrated the Eucharist, who have violated a tomb or cadaver, who have laid violent hands on the Roman Pontiff or a Cardinal or a Papal Legate, who have fought or sponsored a duel, who have attempted marriage while validly married to someone else, laymen lawfully convicted of a crime against the Sixth Commandment with a minor under 16, or of rape, or of sodomy, or of incest, or of pimping, clerics lawfully convicted of these or other sexual crimes; B) By sentence of a judge, irregularity for infamy arises for any cleric who has commited a crime against the Sixth Commandment with a minor under 16, or adultery, rape, bestiality, sodomy, pimping, or incest in the first degree; 6) Defect of gentleness: baptized judges who pronounce a death sentence, once the sentence is carried out, and baptized executioners and their assistants who have participated in an execution.[/quote]

from the dappled things blog (written by a priest)


more evidence

[quote] 1. Irregularities Due to Defect

828. Irregularities due to defect are seven in number:



I. Illegitimacy, whether public or occult, unless the illegitimate has been legitimized or has made solemn profession (c. 984, n. I).


[b]
Illegitimacy is considered a bar to the clerical state, since such persons bear the stigma of their parents and in many cases they imitate their unchaste conduct. [/b]Legitimate children are those conceived or born in true or at least putative wedlock, unless at the time of conception the parents were forbidden the use of marriage previously contracted by reason of solemn profession or reception of major Orders (c. 1114). Children who are born at least six months after the date of marriage or within ten months from the dissolution of conjugal life are presumed legitimate (co 1115, § 2). Similarly in accordance with the principle: "The father of a child is considered he who appears to be such by lawful marriage “: children born during wedlock are presumed legitimate, even though they may be born of an adulterous union, unless there are evident signs to the contrary (ibid. § I).



This irregularity ceases a) by legitimate dispensation, b) by legitimization through a subsequent marriage (c. 1II6 sq.), but only natural children of the parents may be legitimized in this way; c) by solemn religious profession.[/quote]

Handbook of Moral Theology, Dominic M. Prümmer, O.P. 1957

[catholicinsd]

[quote]Illegitimate birth: bastards, even when their status is not public, are irregular and can't be ordained[/quote]
Irregular? Hell no.

Who wrote that, Sam?

[Extra ecclesiam nulla salus]

[quote name='catholicinsd' post='1184956' date='Feb 4 2007, 11:24 PM']
Irregular? Hell no.

Who wrote that, Sam?
[/quote]


well it is in the 1917 Code of Canon Law and that was written by the priest on Dappled things, Fr. Jim Tucker.

[catholicinsd]

And being unchaste isn't genetic.

This still isn't enforced by Rome is it?

[Extra ecclesiam nulla salus]

[quote name='catholicinsd' post='1184974' date='Feb 4 2007, 11:36 PM']
And being unchaste isn't genetic.

This still isn't enforced by Rome is it?
[/quote]

first of all, its not claiming genetics, it is claiming upbringing.

i doubt it. But i still think it is the law.

[catholicinsd]

Well, looks like I should talk to my VD.

[Extra ecclesiam nulla salus]

[quote name='catholicinsd' post='1184996' date='Feb 4 2007, 11:55 PM']
Well, looks like I should talk to my VD.
[/quote]

you should probably write to Rome, just to be safe.

There is a dispensation ,if it comes to that, that can be given.

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='catholicinsd' post='1184901' date='Feb 4 2007, 10:10 PM']
So here we have a paradox: God planned all life- correct? God did not plan for sin- correct? So did He plan the love children or not?
[/quote]


It would depend on what you mean by "plan for." God created all life, God uses sin to create good, but He did not create sin. The parents of "love children" do in fact sin, the sin of fornication, yet God uses that sinful act to create a good, you, your soul.

God uses sin for good all the time, what Christ did for us is the perfect example.

[catholicinsd]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' post='1185114' date='Feb 4 2007, 11:58 PM']
It would depend on what you mean by "plan for." God created all life, God uses sin to create good, but He did not create sin. The parents of "love children" do in fact sin, the sin of fornication, yet God uses that sinful act to create a good, you, your soul.

God uses sin for good all the time, what Christ did for us is the perfect example.
[/quote]


Yes, but did God Almighty plan them?

[SJRod55]

Becoming a member of Opus Dei has nothing to do with your 'pedigree.' It has all to do with your personal relationship with God.

As for the child being to blame for the sinner of their fathers (or mothers) this is so totally wrong. I wrestle each day with what is happening to the boy I am supporting and helping in Ethiopia, a 12 possibly up to 14 year old who was abandoned. His situation has become so 'critical' since I left that I question my initial involvement. yet he has not 'created' his situation. In many ways he has not 'helped' it either and that has contributed to his present issues. However I spent a night emotionally torn trying to decide from 6000 Km away what to do with this child. What the realistic solutions will be. (This could be the subject of another posting, however at this time I am too vunerable to it being looked upon in a frivilous way). I physically hurt when people blame or have expectations of 'guilt' from the innocent child of a parents lack of judgement or mistakes or misfortune. We are not to judge. There is only one Judge and he awaits us all.

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='Paddington' post='1184926' date='Feb 4 2007, 08:42 PM']
Is that a dogma? I wonder because the Eastern Orthodox often say that God the Son would have come to earth anyways out of love. That gets into the whole legal view of the cross. Or non-legal view.
Please post evidence if you think "illegitimate children" can not be priests. I badly want to see it. Others might not like it. Please do it anyways. Please with sugar on top. And cream. And syrup. Etc.
[/quote]

[quote name='Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma by L. Ott'] The Son of God became man in order to redeem men. (De fide.)[/quote]

Yes, but did God Almighty plan them?

[quote name='The Catechism of Pope St. Pius X']12 Q. Why does not God prevent sin?
A. God does not prevent sin, because even from the very abuse man makes of the liberty with which He is endowed, God knows how to bring forth good and to make His mercy or His justice become more and more resplendent.[/quote]

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='catholicinsd' post='1185181' date='Feb 5 2007, 02:33 AM']
Yes, but did God Almighty plan them?
[/quote]


Again what do you mean by "plan"? God created these children, God created you, creation takes plan, or thought, will to create. Did God plan for the parents sin? Or did God plan for any sin? I would say in a sense He did "plan for" sin. Something like two men playing Chess, in this we have God vs the Devil or Man. God plans for the oppointent moves, but He does not cause His oppointents moves, sin. God would know all of His oppointents moves before he or she made them. But God would not be the author of that move. And with our free will, God would even know every move we could choose to make. God plans for every eventuality, in the end He always wins.

Of course God planned for you to exist, you would not otherwise exist if He did not. Yet that would not make the sin of your parents right. God simply used that sin, to create something good. A soul.

[Paddington]

StThomasMore,

This quote
"The Son of God became man in order to redeem men."
Does not answer the question that I tried to ask.
The question I tried to ask is..."Is it dogma that the Son of God would not have become man if mankind did not sin?"
Mankind sinning means that the Son of God becomes man to redeem them.
Mankind not sinning could mean that the Son of God becomes man for a different reason.
That is what I was getting at.

Peace,
Paddington

[Anomaly]

[quote name='catholicinsd' post='1185181' date='Feb 5 2007, 02:33 AM']
Yes, but did God Almighty plan them?
[/quote]Not if they were males. If God planned male 'love children', He would direct His Church to allow them to become priests. Love children are fundamentally an abomination and so seperated from God's grace, the males can never become a priest.

Isn't the real question not if God planned them, but does God love them? My answer would be Yes!