Posted on 10/29/2003 8:59:36 AM PST by american colleen
I'm not fighting anything.
He's a hero to some--he doesn't allow altar girls.
All true--and he's a real gentleman, besides.
What makes Sinky think that B. WANTS a larger Diocese--with problems?
Amen brother!
If you get a chance, watch tonight's "EWTN Live" show on rerun or the Internet. It concerned catechisis over the last 30 or so years and gave stats of the belief system of younger "Catholics" - the legacy of the progressives. Very sobering.
Good point. B. doesn't appear to be career driven and maybe he is content saving souls in his corner of the world.
I live life in "poll mode" a lot. I make it a point to ask priests and nuns what they think about Bruskewicz and the ranges go from a wrinkled nose/distaste to flat out insults from the progressives and from the few orthodox priests I know (don't personally know any orthodox nuns) they respond with a smile and admiration.
Talk about Phariseeical,he even has the cemetary business wrapped up here in Phoenix,partnering with our ex-bishop. And then those family crypts he is selling at his coffee shop/water processing plant,or whatever it is."Woe to him".
Good article on Loverde and the altarboy girl issue in this WaPo article. Seems CTA is pressuring him big time but the priests in his diocese are conservative - plenty of them, too!
Bishop Loverde had altarboy girls in his last diocese but if he implements them in Arlington he will be doing it against the wishes of most of his priests. And CTA and the feminazis are not happy. Bet Loverde will cave.
Ya but he's been there for quite a while longer than his monument has been there.
Just a minister, and he could actually start in a storefront, a trailer, the basement of another Church, even a tent. If they don't grow though they tend to fold.
Traditionally, there were none in non-white neighborhoods, but they are expanding now into them in a serious way. There was an article on them in the Enquirer over the summer, and my memory is somewhat vague, but they clearly have turned a leaf and gone for areas they traditionally eshewed.
The Southern Baptists have the same attendance problem the Catholics have - less than 1/3 of those on the roles are in the pews on any Sunday
Yes, but at least they don't have the problems with priests the RCC has been having of late. Granted, that's only in a small number of parishes, but that's not the impression many get from the media.
Heh, heh. Maybe so, maybe so. It's probably my impression, and I could very well be wrong, that the right is far more intransigent. The left seems motivated by charity, and right intentions, the right only by sentimentalism.
You might also be interested in the writings of Paul VI. I had always written him off as the progressive pope others have claimed him to be, but have recently discovered how very orthodox he was.I also think many of the change agents will end up going over to some mainstream denominations,who have gone out into the world,or more accurately,been absorbed by the world.
Which is a heck of a lot more honest than claiming that they are the true Catholic Church.
You gotta come and visit my fair state of Massachusetts and spend some time at one of Boston College's "The Church in the 21st Century" symposiums. The left is not motivated by charity and right intentions except in their own minds. They are all about power and who is gonna have it.
The trads are so overrepresented on FR that you'd think you'd be bumping into them all over the place when you walk down your street. I don't know one trad in real life.
And me, I am motivated by charity, right intentions and sentimentalism, of course ;-)
No thanks. If ever I go east of the Mississippi, again, I intend to cross the Atlantic as well. Blue America terrifies me.
I pose this question of who gives,because it is one facet of charity.You may or may not know,I am very curious and ask questions of people all the time. Because of what I have learned over the years,I believe that the traditional Catholics do give more to the parish and parish organizations and ventures.The others talk a better talk but I am of the opinion they don't walk the talk.
With regards another aspect of charity,that agape or at least filios (think I've mixed up Greek and Latin)portion,I am convinced that the interpretation of love(charity) among most catholics leans toward eros.We forgive others for everything they have done to others,and we forgive ourselves and we feel good about it all.But so often we forget the voiceless,faceless ones;for example,parents,who reported abuses,and relived indignities on their children only to find fr.foof,celebrating the mass on the other side of town,surrounded by a gaggle of geese who adore him.And when called on it,perhaps some action is taken by the bishop. But then the parish rallies around fr.foof,who has always been so compassionate and caring.And the bottom line is charity is withdrawn from those that need it most and bestowed on others who the giver prefers to please.
Many Catholics have lost the concept of justice,without which,there can be no mercy. Mercy's just an empty word that puffs up the person who thinks he has shown it,usually to someone who has not hurt him,but another. AC's funny barb about turning over the baby to the the non-celibate homosexual to me is the perfect example of the "charity" of the left in action.After all we would not want the happy couple to feel they weren't good enough to have a family,would we? That would not be charitable at all.
It's like everyone is reacting,when the Church tells us everything is forgiven that is taken to mean,and quite logically,every thing is permitted.St.Chuck,I am sorry that you had to be the recipient of my meandering mind blurbs,but you must have triggered something up there. Good night.
Hmmm. Did a better Yahoo search and found that the CARA 60%-decline statistics do exclude minor seminarians.
Nationwide shortage of new priests troubles church
Monday, July 1, 2002
In 1965, there were 8,325 graduate-level Catholic seminarians in the country. By 1995, that number plunged by more than 60 percent, to an all-time low of 3,172, according to the Center for Applied Research in the Apostolate at Georgetown University. [emphasis mine]
We all know the numbers and we all know that there is a dearth of priests in some areas. But this does not address why there is NOT a dearth of priests in the more orthodox dioceses and why there IS a dearth of priests in the progressive dioceses - which is the topic of this thread.
82 posted on 10/29/2003 6:43 PM PST by american colleen
Excuse me, but I thought the topic of this thread was “So, is there a priest shortage?” which Fr. Kowalski seems to answer in the negative, arguing that 1) there has only been a “fairly small decline” in the number of US priests, because he is counting only from 1991 to 2001; 2) that worldwide the number of priests has increased from 1990 to 2000 (although he admits it is slower than the growth rate of the worldwide Catholic population); and 3) in the US some bishops have better vocation numbers than others (he won’t come out and say it, but he implies that the conservative bishops have the better performance records).
My posts #60, 64 & 74 addressed only point #1, and the overall implication there is no crisis (“So, is there a priest shortage? It is fairly common for the press, Catholic or secular, to report about a shortage of Catholic priests that is usually described as a crisis for the Church.”), because I think his time frame is too narrow, and he does not address the "greying of the clergy" issue.
Please look at the sources you are using! My gosh! CNN and a website which extolls the virtues of RENT-A-PRIEST?!?
77 posted on 10/29/2003 6:29 PM PST by american colleen
But my real concern is that you find yourself in the company of liberal, modernist, progressive Amchurchians.
91 posted on 10/29/2003 7:00 PM PST by saradippity
Well, as Sinkspur points out, the source of the stats is neither CNN nor an anti-celibacy website, but the Center of Applied Research in the Apostolate. My initial Yahoo search pulled up those two sites and they had quotable paragraphs comparing the 1960s to the late 1990s / early 2000s.
And I ignore the “you find yourself in the company of” ad hominem because my mother always taught me that the argument “your evidence must be wrong because I disagree with your interpretation” is fallacious.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.