Going back to male servers?

[TimothyH]

Contraception AND a much more highly educated society (ie, you don’t have to become a priest to go to college anymore). Blaming contraception gets us nowhere in this argument because the fact is that, at least in the modern world, we are not going to go back to 1957 and stay there. Instead of throwing out old, and quite frankly, trite, excuses, let’s find a way to encourage young men to serve in this time period. Girl alter servers are not the reason that young men are not entering seminaries.

If Catholics stopped using contraception, the vocation floodgates would open.

Monasteries would be opening everywhere. There would be so many vocations that children would have to enter minor seminaries at 6th grade in order to even be considered for the priesthood. There would be Franciscian friars and Dominican sisters walking in every neighborhood and teaching in every parish, school and university in the world. Porn addiction would stop. Abortion would stop. There wouldn’t be a protestant Church or non-Christian religion able to withstand the Catholic Church and her teaching. The Eastern and Western Churches would unite faster than you can say the Nicene Creed. Terrorists wouldn’t be able to touch. The Jehovah’s Witnesses would be the first thing to crumble.

If Catholics really care about the Church enough to lament lack of vocations to the priesthood, maybe they should begin actually living like Christ teaches through that same Church.

-Tim-

 

[Corki]

If Catholics stopped using contraception, the vocation floodgates would open.

Monasteries would be opening everywhere. There would be so many vocations that children would have to enter minor seminaries at 6th grade in order to even be considered for the priesthood. There would be Franciscian friars and Dominican sisters walking in every neighborhood and teaching in every parish, school and university in the world. Porn addiction would stop. Abortion would stop. There wouldn’t be a protestant Church or non-Christian religion able to withstand the Catholic Church and her teaching. The Eastern and Western Churches would unite faster than you can say the Nicene Creed. Terrorists wouldn’t be able to touch. The Jehovah’s Witnesses would be the first thing to crumble.

-Tim-

That’s a nice dream. But the drop in priestly and religious vocations started long before there was wide-spread contraception use by Catholics. While I have the utmost respect for the monastic traditions, having more men in monasteries isn’t going to affect most of us who would rather have more diocisan priests and priests teaching in schools and colleges.

Family size is just one of the pressures on young men.

Not to mention that the East-West divisions and the birth of the Jehovah’s witnesses happened during a time when contraception was condemned by all major religions.

 

[felsguy]

No, what you are proposing is the logical fallacy called Affirming the Consequent. I’m not falling for that one.

Wasn’t intending for you to “fall” for anything. Let me try again.

I took your statement “Co-ed activities with boys are highly unlikely to encourage religious vocations for women” to mean you were saying that coed activities for young people are detrimental to the acceptance of religious vocations. I was asking, albeit in less than clear fashion, if indeed that was accurate and then stated my disagreement.

I see now that it was presumptious of me to state my disagreement with first asking you to clarify your statement and for that I apologize.

 

[minkymurph]

If Catholics stopped using contraception, the vocation floodgates would open.

Monasteries would be opening everywhere. There would be so many vocations that children would have to enter minor seminaries at 6th grade in order to even be considered for the priesthood. There would be Franciscian friars and Dominican sisters walking in every neighborhood and teaching in every parish, school and university in the world. Porn addiction would stop. Abortion would stop. There wouldn’t be a protestant Church or non-Christian religion able to withstand the Catholic Church and her teaching. The Eastern and Western Churches would unite faster than you can say the Nicene Creed. Terrorists wouldn’t be able to touch. The Jehovah’s Witnesses would be the first thing to crumble.

If Catholics really care about the Church enough to lament lack of vocations to the priesthood, maybe they should begin actually living like Christ teaches through that same Church.

-Tim-

I don’t understand why you think all this would happen if Catholics stopped using contraception.

 

[severus68]

Conversely, are you suggesting that they would be highly likely to discourage religious vocations for women? That would be insulting to the thousands of young women who, having had healthy interactions with young men, chose to enter and remain in religious life.

Likewise it would be insulting to say the same about priests and brothers. I would even go so far as to say that not having such healthy coed activities with the opposite sex is what has led to many of the problems in the recent past.

Agreed.

 

[severus68]

If Catholics stopped using contraception, the vocation floodgates would open.

Monasteries would be opening everywhere. There would be so many vocations that children would have to enter minor seminaries at 6th grade in order to even be considered for the priesthood. There would be Franciscian friars and Dominican sisters walking in every neighborhood and teaching in every parish, school and university in the world. Porn addiction would stop. Abortion would stop. There wouldn’t be a protestant Church or non-Christian religion able to withstand the Catholic Church and her teaching. The Eastern and Western Churches would unite faster than you can say the Nicene Creed. Terrorists wouldn’t be able to touch. The Jehovah’s Witnesses would be the first thing to crumble.

If Catholics really care about the Church enough to lament lack of vocations to the priesthood, maybe they should begin actually living like Christ teaches through that same Church.

-Tim-

All this would happen if there was no contraception? How ? I really do not see the logic in this?

 

[minkymurph]

Conversely, are you suggesting that they would be highly likely to discourage religious vocations for women? That would be insulting to the thousands of young women who, having had healthy interactions with young men, chose to enter and remain in religious life.

Likewise it would be insulting to say the same about priests and brothers. I would even go so far as to say that not having such healthy coed activities with the opposite sex is what has led to many of the problems in the recent past.

I would agree that not having healthy, coed activities with the opposite sex can lead to problems. Engaging with members of the opposite sex in a healthy, respectful manner is something that needs to be taught. The ‘avoidance’ technique and segregating children at a young age are not a methods of teaching this. It If this teaching does not begin when children are young, it opens the door to the very real possibility they will grow into adults with a view of sexuality and members of the opposite sex that is not healthy and respectful because of ignorance.

 

[Corki]

I took your statement “Co-ed activities with boys are highly unlikely to encourage religious vocations for women” to mean you were saying that coed activities for young people are detrimental to the acceptance of religious vocations. I was asking, albeit in less than clear fashion, if indeed that was accurate and then stated my disagreement.

The OP is about a parish in the US. These are not boys and girls who live somewhere where their lives are separated by gender. There are lots of activities that are co-ed, in the Church and in the schools and in the community. All. of those co-ed activities are important to develop healthy attituded toward the opposite sex.

However, none of those co-ed activities are going to directly address vocations. Every activity does not have to be co-ed in order for a young person to develop a healthy attitude toward the opposite sex. There are many, many messages that are best delivered to youth when they are with their own gender alone. In fact, the Church requires that some messages not be delived to youth in mixed-sex settings such as teaching on human sexuality.

You aren’t going to be very effective with a message of priestly vocations in a co-ed group. If you want to get a bunch of boys to think positively about life in the priesthood, you are going to be more effective if they are with other boys and men when you address it.

The goal here isn’t some gender equality quota. The goal is vocations to the priesthood. The question is how best to do that. Some people, such as those in the diocese of Phoenix, favor a multi-faceted approach that includes altar serving. Some people, such as those arguing against alter boys, favor a more limited approach that does not include altar serving. Neither approach is wrong; they are just different approaches.

 

[Corki]

I would agree that not having healthy, coed activities with the opposite sex can lead to problems. Engaging with members of the opposite sex in a healthy, respectful manner is something that needs to be taught. The ‘avoidance’ technique and segregating children at a young age are not a methods of teaching this. It If this teaching does not begin when children are young, it opens the door to the very real possibility they will grow into adults with a view of sexuality and members of the opposite sex that is not healthy and respectful because of ignorance.

Complete separation of the sexes can certainly lead to problems. But so can an environment where there are not opportunitie for boys to be with just boys and for girls to be with just girls.

 

[minkymurph]

Complete separation of the sexes can certainly lead to problems. But so can an environment where there are not opportunitie for boys to be with just boys and for girls to be with just girls.

True. However, boys and girls have ample opportunities just to be with boys or just to be with girls, and serving at the altar should not be seen as a means of giving boys the opportunity just to be with boys. To my knowledge, that is not the purpose of serving at the altar - to create an environment were boys can just be with boys.

I’d like to come back to a couple of other questions I asked.

Is the sole purpose of serving at the altar to encourage the vocation of priesthood? Should it serve no other purpose?

And - while boys with certain disabilities could enter the priesthood on the basis of their gender, realistically the never will. Therefore, should boys with certain disabilities be permitted to serve at the altar? Is it fair to let them knowing they will never become a priest irrespective of the fact they are male?

 

[Corki]

True. However, boys and girls have ample opportunities just to be with boys or just to be with girls

As a mother of boys, I would say that there are not “ample” opportunities for boys to be with just boys. Outside of sports, there are actually very few such oportunities.

and serving at the altar should not be seen as a means of giving boys the opportunity just to be with boys.

Why not?

To my knowledge, that is not the purpose of serving at the altar - to create an environment were boys can just be with boys.

Now you are confusing “purpose” and “means”. (see below)

I’d like to come back to a couple of other questions I asked.

Is the sole purpose of serving at the altar to encourage the vocation of priesthood?

No. The primary purpose of serving at the altar is to assist the priest in celebrating the Mass.

Should it serve no other purpose?

Of course it should serve other purposes. But the Church places a special responsibility on the development of boys. Part of that development is altar serving. ** Part **of the process of encouraging vocations comes from the time actually spent at the altar but also from the associations formed with the other boys.

It is altogether laudable to maintain the noble custom by which boys or youths, customarily termed servers, provide service of the altar after the manner of acolytes, and receive catechesis regarding their function in accordance with their power of comprehension.[119] Nor should it be forgotten that a great number of sacred ministers over the course of the centuries have come from among boys such as these.[120] Associations for them, including also the participation and assistance of their parents, should be established or promoted, and in such a way greater pastoral care will be provided for the ministers.

RS

The purpose of altar serving is NOT however, to give children a chance to participate or to give them a “job” to do at Mass.

And - while boys with certain disabilities could enter the priesthood on the basis of their gender, realistically the never will. Therefore, should boys with certain disabilities be permitted to serve at the altar?

If they are able to perform the duties of altar serving, they should be allowed.

Is it fair to let them knowing they will never become a priest irrespective of the fact they are male

Of course not. Not anymore than to let a boy who “knows” he wants to be married be a server or for a married man to be an adult server.

Altar serving is not a stepping stone or “entry level job” on the path to priesthood. It is an environment that has historically been shown to foster priestly vocations. That’s not its sole or primary purpose but it is its effect. You can’t separate the purpose from the effect but the effects can carry different weight.

The degree to which that effect (environment) is important to consider is up to the bishop and the pastor. In the case presented in the OP, the bishop decided that, at least in the one Church, the effect was important to consider along with the purpose.

 

[minkymurph]

As a mother of boys, I would say that there are not “ample” opportunities for boys to be with just boys. Outside of sports, there are actually very few such oportunities.

As a mother of boys I would say there are. In fact, I have to create situations were they can interact with girls. I would say that if sports and serving at altar are the only opportunities boys have to just be with boys, there is something seriously amiss.

Why not?

Because you yourself say below it is not the primary purpose of serving at altar.

Now you are confusing “purpose” and “means”. (see below)

To you, perhaps.

No. The primary purpose of serving at the altar is to assist the priest in celebrating the Mass.
Corki;8389260:

If that is the primary purpose, why should girls not assist the priest in celebrating the Mass?
Corki;8389260:

Of course it should serve other purposes.

So if it serves other purposes, why should girls not do it?

But the Church places a special responsibility on the development of boys. Part

of that development is altar serving. ** Part **of the process of encouraging vocations comes from the time actually spent at the altar but also from the associations formed with the other boys.

So does that mean you would say that one purpose of serving at the altar is to give boys the opportunity to interact with each other in the absence of girls?

The purpose of altar serving is NOT however, to give children a chance to participate or to give them a “job” to do at Mass.

I don’t think anyone is suggesting it is.

If they are able to perform the duties of altar serving, they should be allowed.

Then the argument ‘girls should not serve at the altar because they will never become priests’ is invalid. You may not be arguing that, but others have. Therefore, we are left with the, ‘serving at the alter serves a secondary purpose of giving boys the opportunity to hang out together without the girls around’ argument. The counter-argument to that has been presented by another poster - 'serving at the altar shouldn’t be about creating a ‘boys only’ club.

Of course not. Not anymore than to let a boy who “knows” he wants to be married be a server or for a married man to be an adult server.

Then that invalidates the argument that permitting girls to serve at the altar is unfair to them because they are never going to be priests. Again, you may not be arguing that, others have.

Altar serving is not a stepping stone or “entry level job” on the path to priesthood. It is an environment

that has historically been shown to foster priestly vocations. That’s not its sole or primary purpose but it is its effect. You can’t separate the purpose from the effect but the effects can carry different weight.

Then there’s no reason why someone who will never be a priest cannot be an altar server. If you can’t separate purpose and effect then there’s no reason why two purposes and effects can’t happen simultaneously. You yourself have said fostering vocations to the priesthood is not the only purpose being an altar server.

The degree to which that effect (environment) is important to consider is up to the bishop and the pastor. In the case presented in the OP, the bishop decided that, at least in the one Church, the effect was important to consider along with the purpose.

I a particular bishop wants to have all male altar servers in his Parish because he thinks it will foster vocations, that’s up to him, and it’s between him and his parishioners. If his parishioners are happy with that, it’s not for me to interfere. If they are not happy, then it’s up to them what they want to do about it, and my liking it or not liking it won’t make any difference. However, I don’t see why it should go across the board because one bishop decides that’s things are going to be done in his Parish, and I don’t see why we should conclude all male altar servers will foster vocations everywhere.

 

[Corki]

As a mother of boys I would say there are. In fact, I have to create situations were they can interact with girls. I would say that if sports and serving at altar are the only opportunities boys have to just be with boys, there is something seriously amiss.

Since my kids are in a co-ed school, they are in groups of girls and boys together all the time. I think that’s the case for most boys in the US where single sex schools are rarer than they are overseas

Because you yourself say below it is not the primary purpose of serving at altar.

I was responding to your post regarding means. Serving at the altar is not for the primary purpose of developing vocations. But it is one of the means the Church has to do so.

If that is the primary purpose, why should girls not assist the priest in celebrating the Mass?

I never said they shouldn’t. I just said there were good reasons why a Bishop or priest might chose the option of an all-male group of altar servers. For the umpteenth time, it isn’t about the girls.

So if it serves other purposes, why should girls not do it?

Sorry, that question doesn’t make sence in response to my comment.

So does that mean you would say that one purpose of serving at the altar is to give boys the opportunity to interact with each other in the absence of girls?

No, that’s not a purpose of serving. That is a reason why a bishop or priest might chose to have all-boys.

I don’t think anyone is suggesting it is.

Between this thread and the other one on the same news story, there were quite a few people suggesting that.

Then the argument ‘girls should not serve at the altar because they will never become priests’ is invalid.

I agree. I have never made that connection. I have consistently said that this isn’t a discussion about what happens to the girls at all.

You may not be arguing that, but others have. Therefore, we are left with the, ‘serving at the alter serves a secondary purpose of giving boys the opportunity to hang out together without the girls around’ argument.

If giving boys the opportunity to “hang out” together, especially with fathers and clergy, is a good way to encourage vocations, then it is a good reason and a reason the Church endorses.

The counter-argument to that has been presented by another poster - 'serving at the altar shouldn’t be about creating a ‘boys only’ club.

The act of serving itself should not be. However, the associations formed are. See post with RS quote. The Church even encourages international altar boy organizations.

Then that invalidates the argument that permitting girls to serve at the altar is unfair to them because they are never going to be priests.

It’s not about the girls.

Then there’s no reason why someone who will never be a priest cannot be an altar server.

Agreed.

If you can’t separate purpose and effect then there’s no reason why two purposes and effects can’t happen simultaneously.

Ok, but if one of your desired effects is to develop a group of boys, that effect can’t happen simultaneously with a group of boys and girls together.

You yourself have said fostering vocations to the priesthood is not the only purpose being an altar server.

It’s not a purpose at all. It’s a desired effect.

I a particular bishop wants to have all male altar servers in his Parish because he thinks it will foster vocations, that’s up to him, and it’s between him and his parishioners.

It’s up to him and his Bishop. The parishioners don’t get a vote.

If his parishioners are happy with that, it’s not for me to interfere. If they are not happy, then it’s up to them what they want to do about it, and my liking it or not liking it won’t make any difference.

The parishioners liking or not liking it isn’t going to make any difference either.

However, I don’t see why it should go across the board because one bishop decides that’s things are going to be done in his Parish, and I don’t see why we should conclude all male altar servers will foster vocations everywhere

Exactly. That’s why it is left up to the Bishop to decide what is best for his diocese, and if there is an option, for the pastor to decide what is best for his parish.

The Church has said that the tradition of male altar servers is a noble tradition to preserve and

Nor should it be forgotten that a great number of sacred ministers over the course of the centuries have come from among boys such as these

(RS).

Given centuries of experience, if someone wants to argue that sacred ministers are no longer coming from among the ranks of altar boys, they better have some pretty strong evidence to counter the statement by the Vatican.

 

[minkymurph]

If giving boys the opportunity to “hang out” together, especially with fathers and clergy, is a good way to encourage vocations, then it is a good reason and a reason the Church endorses.

Personally I didn’t realize much ‘hanging out’ went on among the altar servers, fathers and clergy before, during or after the Mass. If the Church wants to encourage vocations via ‘hanging out,’ I would say there are situations other than altar serving that would bear greater fruit.

It’s up to him and his Bishop. The parishioners don’t get a vote.
The parishioners liking or not liking it isn’t going to make any difference either.

Yes we’re reminded time and time again the Church is not a democracy and parishioners have no say. However in my experience, bishops and priests sometimes change their minds when attendance at Mass and donations to the Parish drop as a consequence of an unpopular decision.

The Church has said that the tradition of male altar servers is a noble tradition to preserve and (RS).

Not all traditions are bad, but not all are good. Why is the tradition of male altar servers a ‘noble’ one?

Given centuries of experience, if someone wants to argue that sacred ministers are no longer coming from among the ranks of altar boys, they better have some pretty strong evidence to counter the statement by the Vatican.

I don’t know whether they are or not. The only thing I know for sure is they’re not coming at all, and I don’t see how all male altar servers is going to remedy that. Perhaps it’s because the role of altar server as a means of encouraging vocations and giving boys the opportunity to ‘hang out’ with each other, fathers and clergy is overemphasized and consequently, eclipses other ways of encouraging vocations.

 

[Corki]

Personally I didn’t realize much ‘hanging out’ went on among the altar servers, fathers and clergy before, during or after the Mass. If the Church wants to encourage vocations via ‘hanging out,’ I would say there are situations other than altar serving that would bear greater fruit.

If you read the post I linked in post #245, you will see what I mean. That’s pretty close to the ideal as described in Church documents such as RS. I am sure there are other approaches that could be taken as well, but the one described seems to be a very effective one.

Nor is it an “either/or” choice. A diocese could encourage vocations through vibrant programs for altar servers AND other ways too.

Yes we’re reminded time and time again the Church is not a democracy and parishioners have no say. However in my experience, bishops and priests sometimes change their minds when attendance at Mass and donations to the Parish drop as a consequence of an unpopular decision.

Unfortunately, that’s true. Priests and bishops who bow to public pressure and do not have the courage of their convictions seems to be one of the big problems in the Church today.

I attend a parish where almost half of the parishioners decided to “vote with their feet” when a new pastor arrived. They couldn’t stand the idea that he implemented such horribly old-fashioned practices as Confession and daily Mass. They were enraged when he actually mentioned “sin” in a homily and they accused him of financial mismanagement for buying bells to be rung at the consecration. I am not exagerating. Luckily, he did not change his mind in the face of parishioner railing. It took a while but the parish is back up to its old size.

Not all traditions are bad, but not all are good. Why is the tradition of male altar servers a ‘noble’ one?

Well, it was Francis Cardinal Arinze who wrote that. You could ask him.

I think it is a noble tradition because it harks back to a time where there were ranks of men in minor orders, where the Mass was served with precision and reverence. But that’s just my opinion.

I don’t know whether they are or not. The only thing I know for sure is they’re not coming at all, and I don’t see how all male altar servers is going to remedy that. Perhaps it’s because the role of altar server as a means of encouraging vocations and giving boys the opportunity to ‘hang out’ with each other, fathers and clergy is overemphasized and consequently, eclipses other ways of encouraging vocations

There has hardly been an over-emphasis on that, at least in my life time. I think that, if anything, that means of encouraging vocations has been under-utilized since there are few parishes, at least in the US that have all-male altar servers.

And there are some seminaries with lots of young men entering. Brenden, the poster whose parish pointed out in #245, reports one or two men **every year **going to seminary just from his one parish. (it’s not a huge parish either) And since virtually all the boys of age are altar servers there, it would be safe to say that all of those seminarians were altar servers.

It’s something that works, maybe not all the time and maybe not in every parish. But it does work.

 

[stayinthelight]

Yes. Young boys are immature. Even adolescents would react, to an extent, the same way. I myself am an adolescent.

I think the use of altar girls is one of the reasons that has led to a decline in priestly vocations. When girls volunteer for serving at the altar, boys, whether out of immaturity or something else, don’t volunteer nearly as much, unless they’re voluntold by their parents or something. When boys don’t serve at the altar, they’re missing a critical step in making the decision to become a priest. If a boy is on the edge and he is offered serving at the altar to “try it out” and he actually does it, then that boy may very well go through and become a priest. It’s like job shadowing. However, if the young boy is like “eewie” and doesn’t do it because his sister is doing it, then he loses that experience, an experience that may well, as I said, make him want to become a priest.

This is primarily the concern of the nature of young boys. They don’t want to do things that girls are doing, because either directly or indirectly, it feminizes them in a way. I’d venture to say that, as a male myself, this continues for a male’s entire life, but perhaps lessening a bit with age. Males are concerned with maintaining a manly image. Serving at the altar with girls, in some ways, threatens this image, especially for young boys. Now we can argue that this is just pride and blah blah blah, but the fact of the matter is that we aren’t going to change the nature of young boys by arguing about it.

Therefore, I stand by my opinion that the institution of altar girls is one of the reasons that there has been a drop in priestly vocations, because, through their own nature, it makes boys not want to do it, depriving them of the one experience they can have of doing some of the things the priest does.

You’re an adolescent?

I had to write a comment to tell you how impressed I am by your maturity. I don’t even know where to start. God has blessed you.

I’ve read several of your comments, and it’s so encouraging to know that young men like you are the future. I want to offer my sincere thanks.

May God bless you always.

 

[felsguy]

I attend a parish where **almost half of the parishioners decided to “vote with their feet” **when a new pastor arrived. **They couldn’t stand **the idea that he implemented such horribly old-fashioned practices as Confession and daily Mass. **They were enraged **when he actually mentioned “sin” in a homily and they accused him of financial mismanagement for buying bells to be rung at the consecration. .

I find it very, very hard to believe that Confession, daily Mass, the mentioning of sin, and the ringing of bells at the Consecration alone would have this effect in any normal Catholic parish. It must have been a very unusual parish or there must be a lot more to it than just these items.

 

[Corki]

I find it very, very hard to believe that Confession, daily Mass, the mentioning of sin, and the ringing of bells at the Consecration alone would have this effect in any normal Catholic parish. It must have been a very unusual parish or there must be a lot more to it than just these items.

Keep in mind that the previous pastor did not say daily Mass, did not hear Confessions (not even by appointment), had moved the tabernacle to a corner, did not use bells or incense ever and was “personally in favor” of women priests. I happen to live in a neighborhood that is equal distance from my parish and another parish. All of those reasons were given to me by neighbors who left my parish to attend the other one. The big one was Confession. The former priest, who was very likeable personally, had convinced everyone that Confession was old-fashioned. New pastor not only re-instituted regular Confession times but he would work into his homilies why it was important to go to Confession. That really upset those who loved the former pastor.

My point is that, just because there are people that complain about something, even if its a large percentage, that doesn’t make it wrong.

 

[TimothyH]

All this would happen if there was no contraception? How ? I really do not see the logic in this?

Contraception is the root cause of the culture of recreational sex. Widespread availablity and use of contraception is what allows society to see recreational sex as a right like freedom of speech, and as something inherent to our happiness.

And it is the culture of recrational sex on demand which has created a whole host of ills, including porn addiction, aids, fashionable homosexuality, 40% of all children in the US and 70% of black children in the US born into houses without fathers, teen pregnancy, sex on TV, etc. And the culture of recreational sex in the western world, enabled through contraception, is what has caused the demand for abortion to skyrocket.

The Anglican Church began teaching that contraception was not sinful in 1930 and all other Protestant denominations followed suit. The generation which learned that contraception was not a sin grew up and their demand for contraception made it widely available in the 1950’s. The generation that grew up with freely available contraceptives began the “Sexual revoltion” in the 60’s and they in turn demanded abortions and made it legal in the 1970’s. The drop in priestly vocations of which the decline in cultural morals is but a symptom, is inversely proportional to the increase in use of contraception since the 1930’s.

Boys now grow up with freely available porn on the internet. As soon as they are old enough to click a mouse, they see naked women and women in Bikini’s all over the place. They see it on TV too, characters on Nicelodeon and Disney, boys with absolutely no hobbies other than crushing on girls and girls who’s primary concern in life is kissing boys. Mrs Beaver and Ralph Cramden’s wife used to be the ideal. They were hot! Now it has to be Pamela Anderson and bikini babes on Survivor and high school girst walk around the halls with 70% of their bodies exposed. We can’t even get our girls to wear proper clothing at Mass!!!

And boys grow up with this. 25% of American males are addicted to porn. I was one. By the time a boy matures to the point where he may begin feeling a call to discern a vocation to the priesthood, he has been saturated with sex. Addicted probably. Their father’s are likely the same way. And thier uncles and cousins. They have no role models. And priests are guys they see in funny clothes only on Sunday. And priests are all pedophiles anyway, or at least that is what they are told.

The culture of recreational sex has them. The devil owns our young boys. And it is all caused by, facilitated by, contraception. Their father’s have vasectomies. Their mother’s get pills at the gynecologist. Condoms, spermicidal foam and KY jelly is on display at Walmart. They have no extended families, and no one in their lives who are priests, let alone good role models. And even if they do, it likely wont do any good because the devil, through the culture of recreational sex, has a strong hold on them.

How can they be priests!!!??? How can they even begin to feel the call to the priesthood???
They can’t. Girl altar servers my foot! Boys today are saturated with sex. And the only way to end sexual saturation is to stop using contraceptives. Catholics who ought to know better bear not only the brunt of the blame but the moral responsiblity to lead the world in repentance as well.

You all can say that I’m dreaming. You all can say that I’m in fantasy world and that it will never happen. Call me reactionary or stupid or an idiot. I don’t care. I have too much faith in God to care about what you all think of me. God corrected Isreal many times. God killed the nations who sacrificed their children to the god Molech. God demanded the lives of 1.2 million Jews in 70 AD - Jews who did not accept his Son’s teaching. God demanded 622,000 human lives in the US Civil War so that we could end slavery. God can end it. God can do it. One day he is going to become fed up with all the contraception and abortion, and its not gonna be fun for most of us.

I just hope we become like the city of Ninevah before then.

-Tim-

 

[YoungTradCath]

You’re an adolescent?

I had to write a comment to tell you how impressed I am by your maturity. I don’t even know where to start. God has blessed you.

I’ve read several of your comments, and it’s so encouraging to know that young men like you are the future. I want to offer my sincere thanks.

May God bless you always.

Thank you.