Posted on 01/03/2002 3:41:25 AM PST by dtom
Too proud even to admit that "leftish" (a non-word with obvious strong and easily understtod meaning that I use all the time with great effect at FR with nary a complaint until today) is actually a clever, humorous, effective and apt way to describe our common ideological enemies.
I think I'll have to save that. ;-) I think I recall being referred to in far worse terms.
Dominus Vobiscum
patent
In the end, that really doesn't matter.
If there are not enough priests to provide the sacraments to the faithful, then the Church must do something to address the problem.
That may mean importing priests from countries with an overabundance of them.
Or it may mean altering the clerical celibacy requirement.
But to deprive the faithful of the sacraments when they don't have to be would be objectively sinful, don't you think?
In this day and age people can drive to Mass within 30 minutes even if half of the parishes in the USA close down tomorrow.
I think the argument that "we are depriving people of the sacraments" is a red herring served up by the very leftish Call To Action hippies.
=====================
BTW, we have 3 priests visiting from Africa to serve various private chapels in Ann Arbor. They are great. Well-formed and no shenanigans at Mass.
The battles within the Catholic Church since Vatican II have been fought over many issues, mostly sexual, but the real conflict has been over the teaching authority of the Magisterium.
Man in his fallen state does not like authority. He prefers to make his own rules. Satans proposal to Adam and Eve will always have resonance: man, rather than God, gets to decide what is right and wrong. But this attempt at a radical human autonomy is bad metaphysics; it ignores the fact that in God "we live and move and have our being." It is also a formula for unhappiness. God is only interested in our own good, both now and in eternity, and this good can be anchored only in objective truths which we ourselves do not create.
But we need an infallible means of knowing these truths, since our intellect and judgment are clouded.
To change the almost ten-century old clerical requirement of celibacy because of short-term, largely phony vocations crisis would be worse.
That would be a disaster for American Catholicism.
That won't happen. The bishops won't stand for it, and I would doubt they would have to.
If celibacy is precious, there will still be men called who will choose that lifestyle.
As you know, there are Episcopalian converts who are married, and are doing well.
Celibacy is not worth closing half the parishes in America. You know that as well as I do.
It's not a requirement.
Episcopalian and Lutheran men have converted to Catholicism, been ordained priests, and remained married.
If, as notwithstanding suggests, half the parishes are closed, and catholics are forced to drive miles to remote parishes, the faithful will have something to say about it, you can be sure.
Again, celibacy is not integral to the priesthood. If it were, we'd send the Episcopalian converts packing tomorrow.
And if the vocation crisis is phony, why are we welcoming these men into the Catholic Church and allowing them to practice?
The outreach to Episcopalians, for example, has more to do with fostering unity than it does with trying to increase the number of priests. Just look at the numbers of married convert priests - too low to even register on the radar.
As to the laity having a say: if theings were to reach the crisis stage, there would be a sudden wave of vocations spawned by catholics who realize they truly need to make the choice of the priesthood attractive to young people. It is all lip service now for many. How many of your parish acquaintances with only one son would be overjoyed to find their son wanted to be a priest? Most such catholics would be very disappointed at such a choice. Lay people such as this ought not be given much credence when it comes to having a say about parish closings or vocations concerns.
But:
In our society, sex-as-recreation is seen as the ultimate goal, and "families" (a partner and one child) are actually utilitarian accoutrements more than organic cells of society or "domestic churches". Celibacy is a bold statement for Christ and against these terribly skewed though predominant cultural views. The sign of contradiction that a celibate priesthood provides is much needed and will be for some time.
Of course it is a requirement- it is a requirement for anyone who is not an Episcopalian or Lutheran clergyman. That means for 99 point something percent of men considering the priesthood it is a requirement.
If, as notwithstanding suggests, half the parishes are closed, and catholics are forced to drive miles to remote parishes, the faithful will have something to say about it, you can be sure.
I think it would be a rather healthy consequence if it comes to that. Furthermore the 'faithful'- I assume you are referring to the laity- are not owed some specific amount of access to the sacraments. They are available as possible. Our failure as a nation to produce priests- should not require the Universal Church- including many nations where there is no vocations crisis to alter the structure of the priesthood.
Again, celibacy is not integral to the priesthood. If it were, we'd send the Episcopalian converts packing tomorrow.
No, it's not integral. But would you not agree that it is preferable?
And if the vocation crisis is phony, why are we welcoming these men into the Catholic Church and allowing them to practice?
Because even if there were no vocations crisis it could be licit to admit these men. However, you are making a mountain out of a molehill- how many of these married men are becoming priests? Hardly any at all.
I am not denying that there is a shortage of vocations- there is. What I am saying is there is a true path to healing this problem that is not being taken- instead we talk about ways in which we can patch up the situation. However if the Church does truly renew itself it doesn't matter how many patches we come up with- they will be useless .
That was supposed to say, 'If the Church doesn't truly renew itself...
Oh, I see.
So you'd be happy attending Mass once a month, with a communion service on the other three Sundays?
Our failure as a nation to produce priests- should not require the Universal Church- including many nations where there is no vocations crisis to alter the structure of the priesthood.
There are few nations where vocations are plentiful. And celibacy is not integral to the structure of the priesthood. Period.
What I am saying is there is a true path to healing this problem that is not being taken- instead we talk about ways in which we can patch up the situation/
And what is that path? Look, it's not skin off my nose. I tried the seminary for several years, and celibacy is not for me. But I would think the Church would want to be able to select the best men available for the ministry. Jesus called married men to be his apostles and disciples. He can do so again.
The American Church has done itself no favors in the way it has handled the pedophilia problem; the media has certainly blown the occurrences out of proportion. Many Catholics I know wouldn't encourage a son to be a priest on a bet; they think the priesthood is a a haven for homosexuals.
You sell these people short. They are good Catholics. However, they're aware of what their sacrifices have helped build and develop.
Let me assure you: if half the parishes closed, the bishops would struggle with the other half, as most of the money would dry up.
That, my friend, is a fact.
It is so wrong that all Latin and Greek has been eliminated, when the Council explicitly disallows such total excising of these sacred languages from the vernacular Mass.
And of course the Johnny Carson Mass that is so prevalent is disgusting. Going to a Tridentine Mass is an eye opener.
I think all parishes should be required to offer one such Tridentine Latin Mass each week on Sunday, one novus ordo Latin Mass eash week on Sunday, and one novus ordo vernacular Mass each week on Sunday. They should be rotated to maximize the exposure people have to all three types of Masses. This should continue for 30 years until the vernacular Mass is done away with and the two Latin Masses are considered standard worldwide.
I wouldn't be happy with it, but I would accept it as a natural consequence of a people being unable to bear the fruit of vocations.
And celibacy is not integral to the structure of the priesthood. Period.
Neither is it incidental. Christ encourages 'eunuchs for the kingdom.' (Matthew 19:12) Also, Paul encourages those who are able to remain celibate to do so as they may more faithfully serve the Church. It may not be necessary for the priesthood- but I would take issue with anyone who would say it is not ideal.
I would think the Church would want to be able to select the best men available for the ministry.
The idea of a vocation is not that the Church selects from a pool those it considers the most promising . The idea is that God calls certain men and the vocation of those men is merely confirmed by the Church. Furthermore, those who God calls are very often the last we would expect- He takes those who are lowly and exalts them.
Our job is not to seek out better candidates- but to create a environment of faith whereby those who have been called will have the courage to respond.
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.