Bridal investiture as monotheletism

A mother-superior writes to OnePeterFive. She explains why the investiture is a bridal ceremony. Subhâna'llâhi.

From this blog's perspective, celibacy is harmful - but better than some alternatives. It follows that a celibate calling can exist but, where so, should be a term of office. We don't want our priests to end their terms like this guy.

In addition to the convent being a temporary stint, the investiture is not a Sacrament. Jesus had likely heard of the Vestals in Rome and certainly knew of the men-only commune down river at Qumran. The Gospels don't record what he said of them.

Jesus did talk of the marriage commitment, and used that as metaphor for the next world. Sometimes polygamously. Does this Church accept plural-marriage? Of course not. That is why however useful is Scriptural extrapolation as a tool it is a dangerous one. A misreading of one or more gospels becomes a misunderstanding of the Gospel. We don't want our church to end up like this one.

The encratites of old used to teach that the marriage to Christ was the superior marriage, over marriage on Earth. It ended with Earthly marriage being rather neglected. I propose this as a marital Arianism. What I see in bridal investiture is an opposite that turns out the same way. Instead of subordination we have confusion. By my analogy instead of Arianism we have monotheletism. The nature of marriage is confused and, by it, mutually polluted.

As for Catherine of Siena: I'll just point out, as delicately as I can, that the people the Church has canonised as saints weren't always right in life. When this mystic called the Pope back to Rome from Avignon, she called the wrong Pope. That Pope couldn't keep the capitol in Rome and, when he died, as happened soon, it broke the Church. For another three decades two Popes reigned.