Any way to save the Catholic Church in Europe?

  • Thread starter Thread starter FranciscoN2001
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Your comment about birth control mis-states the Church’s position. The Church promotes family planning, and is very strong that the couple use one of the approved methods, such as STM, and it is up to the couple to determine how many children they have.

STM and other NFP methods were taught to illiterate Hindus in India by Mother Theresa and her order, and the success rate there has been similar to the success rate in China, which has also adopted NFP as one of the means of controlling pregnancies - in the 97% to 99% rate. It is simply a myth that anyone not using the Pill or other contraceptive devices will have huge families, or as my mother used to say, “one very rainy Tuesday” (and I have 3 siblings).

And as to “most deacons”, please provide your sources, or don’t make statements about which you have no proof.
 
otjm said:
Your comment about birth control mis-states the Church’s position. The Church promotes family planning, and is very strong that the couple use one of the approved methods, such as STM, and it is up to the couple to determine how many children they have.

STM and other NFP methods were taught to illiterate Hindus in India by Mother Theresa and her order, and the success rate there has been similar to the success rate in China, which has also adopted NFP as one of the means of controlling pregnancies - in the 97% to 99% rate. It is simply a myth that anyone not using the Pill or other contraceptive devices will have huge families, or as my mother used to say, “one very rainy Tuesday” (and I have 3 siblings).

And as to “most deacons”, please provide your sources, or don’t make statements about which you have no proof.
Click to expand...
Ok, thank you for being more precise regarding my birth control statement. However, my point was simply this: many married priests have lots of kids. So I would imagine that married priests (when compared to Protestant ministers) would most likely have many children. And that they (priest and/or wife) might feel some pressure to have many kids.

My point really is that if married priests become the norm, many Parishes would have to pay a family wage to the priests and shouldn’t be shocked if they have to support large priestly families.

In regards to “most Deacons” - I guess I should have said “many Deacons.” However, “most” is what my pastor said. He wasn’t knocking what Deacons do… and is very appreciative. However, he simply points out that most Deacons cannot have the same evening and weekend ministry as busy parish Priests (esp the pastors). This is because the Perm Deacons typically have more responsibilities at home, since the celibate priest doesn’t usually have a wife, kids, grandkids, etc.

We often don’t realize how busy a priest is. And he’s able to do so much because he’s single. A married priest (and a married deacon) simply can’t do as much as an active, celibate priest.

It’s not a knock against the married man, but that’s the main reason for celibacy: so the priest can be dedicate all of their energy to the parish and parishenors. Any married deacon or time priest who dedicates that must time to the parish is going to have an unhappy wife and an unhealthy marriage.

I pray I’m making sense
 
Last edited:
phil19034 said:
If we mean allowing Married men to become priests (for example: allowing select Permanent Deacons to become priests) than that’s 1 thing.
Click to expand...
That would be highly problematic. If they had vocations as permanent deacons that would mean they didn’t have vocations as laymen – or priests. Permanent deacons would be one of the last places to look for vocations to the priesthood.
 
Last edited:
Ostiarius said:
40.png
phil19034:
If we mean allowing Married men to become priests (for example: allowing select Permanent Deacons to become priests) than that’s 1 thing.
Click to expand...
That would be highly problematic. If they had vocations as permanent deacons that would mean they didn’t have vocations as laymen – or priests. Permanent deacons would be one of the last places to look for vocations to the priesthood.
Click to expand...
No, it doesn’t mean that at all.

Do all permanent deacons have a calling to the priesthood. No, they don’t.

However, are there some Permanent Deacons who would make good priests and perhaps missed their calling to the priesthood as younger men? Yes.

Again, it’s NOT all of them. I usually use the word “select married men” or “select permanent Deacons”

Also, married men cannot realistically go though the same Seminary program as celibate priests. A traditional seminarian doesn’t have time for a wife. Going to a catholic seminary isn’t like going to grad school.

An entirely new formation program would have to be created for married men.

My GUESS, is that a the Church could use a formation program similar to the permanent deaconate one.

However, the easiest thing to do would for married men who want to become priests to go though the existing diaconate program, then spend a number of years as a deacon first, and then if he has proven himself & truly has a calling- then one last year of formation before priestly ordination.

BTW - let’s remember that ALL priest are deacons. But not all deacons are Priests.
 
Last edited:
Permanent deacon and priest are two VERY different vocations. The permanent diaconate is not a consolation for those married men who had vocations as priests.

I too think a formation heavy on praxis and directed independent study in addition to the current seminary formation would be a fine thing. But making some permanent deacons into priests would be highly problematic for if they became priests, that would mean they never really had vocations as permanent deacons.
 
Last edited:
Ostiarius said:
Permanent deacon and priest are two VERY different vocations. The permanent diaconate is not a consolation for those married men who had vocations as priests.
Click to expand...
You are putting words in my mouth. I never said they are the same.

However, if you think there isn’t a single deacon who would make a good priest then you are in conflict with the Church.

Because it’s not unheard of for a permanent deacon to become a priest if his wife dies.

Now, NOT ALL perm deacons who become widowers become Priests. But some do.

Remember: Every single priest is a deacon.

God Bless
 
Last edited:
phil19034 said:
There is NO reason why Ireland can’t import priests from Africa & Asia like some Dioceses in the United States do when they have no vocations. Ireland is a cool destination and nice place to live. It shouldn’t be hard to import Priests there, because living in Ireland is NOT like living in the remote parts of the Amazon.
Click to expand...
One of the issues in Ireland and Northern Ireland is that you are already using married priests (i.e. Anglican converts from the North). In other words the ship has sailed. I once heard a story of a man in the Seminary who was about to be ordained to serve in a specific parish in the Northern Ireland. He got married instead. The parish ended up having an Anglican convert with many children as their priest. This is “awkward” with the history in the North of Ireland.
 
jack63 said:
One of the issues in Ireland and Northern Ireland is that you are already using married priests (i.e. Anglican converts from the North). In other words the ship has sailed . I once heard a story of a man in the Seminary who was about to be ordained to serve in a specific parish in the Northern Ireland. He got married instead. The parish ended up having an Anglican convert with many children as their priest. This is “awkward” with the history in the North of Ireland.
Click to expand...
Ok… but there is also a problem with Seminary logistics.

An Anglican priest who coverts usually only needs 2 years of spiritual formation since they typically have all or most of the academic schooling completed, and usually are already proficient in homiletics.

So the stress on the marriage during the formation years is not as bad.

But a married man entering the seminary to become a priest is looking at 6-8 years. He would need the academic training, spiritual formation, and homiletics.

That can be a serious strain on a marriage. Plus, remember, it’s not the same as a married man working on his masters degree and doctorate.
 
Last edited:
I’m a young Italian Catholic, born and lived in Italy for 20 years and yes, Faith/religion is fading here, the youth doesn’t go to church and there is widespread ignorance about what the church teaches and the Bible. Even the people I know that are believers and go to church never read the Bible. Catechesis is very poor, just an hour or less per week but the worst thing is that religion isn’t teached anymore in the families. There is religion class in school and it isn’t even considered a subject, just an hour of relax, students use it to study other subjects, especially if they have a test the next class. There is this trend among the youth that being against Catholicism and the church is cool as it is being atheist, homosexual and feminist ( they just think feminism is about sustaining abortion and the fact women should be free of having sex at any age. Almost every young woman or teen I know is pro abortion.) You hear blasphemous words being said in public often.
There are still catholic traditions being held in the country like processions but sadly in most cases it’s just customary. At this rate I don’t know what the future of Catholicism will be.
 
Europe does not fit into one neat little box of its own. It is made up of different countries with different historical backgrounds and different cultural influences. It is not like the USA.
In the past couple of weeks there have been two reports in the UK which have made for interesting reading. In one, a YouGov survey sponsored by The Times found that atheism has decreased in Britain with more people now attending church but on an irregular basis and more people identifying as spiritual (something the Church could build). In another it was found that Millennials are on the increase at High Anglican traditional services (‘smells and bells’, Prayer Book, etc).
Speaking from personal experience only when I’ve been to various countries across Europe the churches with high attendance almost always have traditional style liturgy (not just EF but also OF) and/or exceptionally good music. Another factor was provision of a daily Mass at a sensible time - I.e. one that allowed workers to attend and not too late to take out of family time.
Maybe this gives a clue as to what may bring people back to the Church, however, it will take more than that. Trust has to be rebuilt - the abuse scandal in Ireland has really rocked that country and the double standards of clergy in other parts of Europe have led to significant damage.
 
In some dioceses, it also means studying a year in Rome before returning to the diocese for the “year” as deacon before priestly ordination. It is not a simple task to move a family to Rome for a year or even the husband/future priest studying in Rome and the rest of the family in a different country.
 
HeDa said:
In some dioceses, it also means studying a year in Rome before returning to the diocese for the “year” as deacon before priestly ordination. It is not a simple task to move a family to Rome for a year or even the husband/future priest studying in Rome and the rest of the family in a different country.
Click to expand...
We have to remember, however, that while the Orthodox choose to ordain married men they still have celibate priests (never married or widowers), and they choose from among the celibate men when they make bishops. In other words, there would still be unmarried priests to send to Rome, if the requirement for celibacy were lifted. After all, even if celibacy were not required for Holy Orders, it would undoubtedly still be required by religious orders such as the Jesuits, Dominicans, Franciscans and (of course!) the Benedictines.

Of the nearly 39 thousand priests in the US, for instance, nearly 12 thousand belong to religious orders. As of 2014, there were nearly 50 thousand vowed religious sisters and over four thousand vowed religious brothers living in the US. The religious sisters and brothers obviously did not embrace the evangelical counsels because doing so was required for Holy Orders.
(source: http://www.usccb.org/about/public-affairs/backgrounders/clergy-religious.cfm)

I would argue that the difference between Church teaching and actual behavior is not unique to the Irish. To the extent that it is, I would have to think that correcting for a history of crushing poverty, obvious injustice and contempt for the poor as somehow responsible for their plight (which is another “excused because entrenched” disconnect between what the Gospel teaches and how Christians actually behave) explains some of it.
 
Last edited:
Scott84 said:
Russia
Click to expand...
Do you have any idea how insane the idea of the Russian Orthodox Church coming into communion with Rome is right now?

The ROC is the most hardline anti-Catholic of the 15 Orthodox Churches.

I’ve got a better chance of marrying Ivanka Trump in my lifetime than the ROC reuniting with Rome.
 
AlNg said:
I agree. I don’t see why a married man should be forbidden to be a priest.
Click to expand...
@AlNg I’m with you 100% my friend. There is no legitimate reason why there cannot be a regular married Roman clergy.

All the excuses and arguments against it usually boil down to finances… But the Orthodox married clergy seem to he able to survive just fine. If they can, why can’t we?

The fact is people who are simply uncomfortable with the idea of married Roman Catholic priests come up with all sorts of excuses as to why it can’t be done.

Oh and Al, I have to say… You used to be pretty staunchly anti-Catholic. Your posts over the last few months seem to show you warming up quite a bit to us Catholics… I’m glad to see that.
 
I think the decision to stay Catholic begins in each of our own hearts, and I think that no one knows what the future holds.

Just 2 random thoughts.
 
PetraG said:
ordain married men they still have celibate priests (never married or widowers), and they choose from among the celibate men when they make bishops.
Click to expand...
Oh absolutely…

Instituting a married Roman priesthood would absolutely NOT mean doing away with the celibate clergy.

In fact, I’d say the celibate Roman clergy should remain the norm, and the married Roman clergy would be the extraordinary Roman clergy.
 
PetraG said:
I would argue that the difference between Church teaching and actual behavior is not unique to the Irish. To the extent that it is, I would have to think that correcting for a history of crushing poverty, obvious injustice and contempt for the poor as somehow responsible for their plight (which is another “excused because entrenched” disconnect between what the Gospel teaches and how Christians actually behave) explains some of it.
Click to expand...
Ok…I agree with this. Yes in the 1800’s to 1970’s Ireland experienced terrible poverty. It was a third world country.

I get frustrated when the Ireland of the past is held up as an Oasis of Catholicism. There are some authors (e.g. Martin Malachi…I hope he is at peace) that wanted to return to that. Then I think of the Taum Children. Hundreds of children of unwed mothers buried in unmarked graves from 1925 and 1961.


The thing about Taum is this. Every child with a fair amount of Irish ancestry knew about Taum…it didn’t matter if they lived in the US. Everybody knew. They didn’t know specifically where it was or that it was in Taum, but they knew such a place existed. It was literally the boogie man story for Irish children. I heard it repeated several times growing up. This type of thing lasts a long time in the psyche of a country and its people. For Catholicism to flourish in Ireland at least, this needs to be overcome.
 
Last edited:
jack63 said:
This type of thing lasts a long time in the psyche of a country and its people. For Catholicism to flourish in Ireland at least, this needs to be overcome.
Click to expand...
Very true. I get frustrated with people who believe that Americans with slavery in their family history (or the assumption of slavery projected onto them because of their appearance) ought to be “over” the after-effects.
It doesn’t work like that.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top