If YOU could.change the Catholic Church

  • Thread starter Thread starter PJM
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I would look very hard at ordaining Catholics priests in a new manner to AUGMENT the existing (and retained) seminary formation of chaste men. The differences would include:
  • Open to both single and married males. They could not marry after ordination.
  • Formation via praxis, directed private study and spiritual direction in one’s own parish.
  • Men formed in this manner would not be eligible to be bishops, pastors or administrators. They would be “permanent parochial vicars”, “sacramental ministers” or similar.
  • Their focus would be celebrating the Mass and hearing confessions.
  • The minimum age would be 50, ensuring a long state of praxis.
  • Like many permanent deacons today, they would be responsible for their own housing and living expenses.
I think the Church would benefit enormously from senior men formed in this manner to celebrate Masses and heard confessions.
 
LOL!! You’re trying to control this thread with your cheesy graphic…
 
I definitely agree with this ; more personal especially. I gave testimony sent off to people, Tribunal Judges who never met met. It was frustrating at best.
 
PJM said:
Dear friend in Christ, If YOU could change the Catholic Church; what would you change and WHY?
Click to expand...
Require that both parents - when both are legal guardians - approve the baptism of a child in their custody.
 
REPLY: WOW! Great Post, thank you.

[1] Matt.10: 1 to 4And he called to him his twelve disciples and gave them authority over unclean spirits, to cast them out, and to heal every disease and every infirmity.

The names of the twelve apostles are these: first, Simon, who is called Peter, and Andrew his brother; James the son of Zeb’edee…

Jn 17:17-20 “Sanctify THEM in the truth; thy word is truth. ** As thou didst send me into the world, so I have sent them into the world** And for THEIR sake I consecrate myself, that they also may be consecrated in truth. [NO OTHER FAITH OR RE;IGION CAN MAKE & SUPPORT THE CLAIM THAT Jesus ;God] himself is there warranty of truth on faith & morals] "I do not pray for these only, but also for those who believe in me through their word”

Jn 14:26 “"But the Paraclete, the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things, and bring all things to your mind, whatsoever I shall have said to you.

"Mt 28:19-20 “[[YOU] Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded YOU and lo, I am with YOU always, to the close of the age."

The RCC has existed for some 2,000 years with a direct and unbroken line of “Popes”, through severe persecutions, sinful men and attacks from within the Church itself, and POLITICAL AGENDS on a professional level. ALL of witch GOD tolerated, BUT the promised that the “Gates to hell: shall not prevail Mt 16:18-19 has held true.

It is illogical to think that this could be accomplished without the Direct intervention and Protection of The Holy Spirit.

If the RCC is NOT GOD’S only interpreter of the Bible; then who or what is? Or aRe you suggesting the Billions of people have been mislead for, 2,000 years and MANY have died for. And IF the RCC is NOT God’s One true faith and church, then which one is based on what evidence?

[2] http://www.theworkofgod.org/dogmas.htm

Keep in mind that both defined Doctrines & Dogma are unchangeable and are to Obeyed & Believed. This site answers your question, which SPACE here prohibits.

[3] I’m not a theologian or a philosopher; BUT I don’t agree that the Church is somehow seeking to excuse the wrong and sinful actions of man, past, present or [likely in the future].

Pope Francis [God Bless and GUIDE Him] is quick to share HIS OWN opinions, the same as you and me. He has NOT to my knowledge made his thoughts on the DP into a Doctrine [which precedes Dogma’s], and therefore is not teaching with the authority of his esteemed office. Even IF he were doing so what the POPE teaches CANNOT [lacks the authority] to contradict Sacred Tradition and, OR, the Magisterium.

While there is historical evidence in the PAST of The Church dodging Her responsibilities; recent years have seen that corrected. And I AM NOT qualified to speak for “the Church” except to share MY personal opinions, NOR is anyone else on this FORUM.

GBY, Patrick
 
I wish there were more sermons on Hell.

Anyhow, I am not in any position to make any changes, so I think for me it would be pointless for me to name them off. I do admire St. Teresa of Avila, however, for her determination to reform the Carmelite order. She is very inspiring.
 
Yes, I could. It’s actually even advertised on their parish websites.

But would I? No.
 
I can see some reasons for charging a fee. First of all, there is a school of thought that something which costs significant money is valued more than that which is cheap or free. Second, a wedding requires that the church be opened and its utilities run, and the priest invest his time. Third, many if not most couples will be spending more than a grand on their wedding, whether it comes entirely out of their pocket or is paid by their parents or in part by contributions from the guests, so if they have money to spend on dresses, suit rental, reception venues, etc they should have some money to give the Church and not just expect it to be a free public resource.

I’m pretty sure we donated several hundred dollars to the church in connection with our wedding, and that was 25 years ago almost, so prices have quite likely gone up.
 
Last edited:
Tis_Bearself said:
I’m pretty sure we donated several hundred dollars to the church in connection with our wedding,
Click to expand...
A suggested donation is different. However, many here in Australia will not even engage in any discussion of reduction of their set price at all.
 
We wouldn’t have asked to reduce the donation. I always understood a “suggested donation” to mean, that’s how much it costs. The problem with making an exception for one person is that word gets around and everybody wants the discount and gets mad if Joe Neighbor gets it and they do not.

I realize I sound harsh and mercenary, but when it comes to churches there’s often a Tragedy of the Commons going on and I can’t blame them for just setting a price and saying, that’s it.
 
This site for the Catholic Parish of Saints Peter and Paul in South Melbourne says there is a set contribution of $800 if using a resident priest or $850 if bringing in your own priest.
 
Tis_Bearself said:
I can’t blame them for just setting a price and saying, that’s it.
Click to expand...
That’s wrong. There is no compassion or kindness towards those who can’t afford it.

Let’s take Melbourne—$400 for a registry office wedding, $1-2k for a church wedding. Many young people aren’t getting married in the Church, for a variety of reasons but the cost is unfathomable.

So, we agree: they are charging for a sacrament and do not want to budge because then they’d get no money?
 
They’d better have a real good excuse when they go before God and are being judged for simony.
 
Mike_from_NJ said:
This site for the Catholic Parish of Saints Peter and Paul in South Melbourne says there is a set contribution of $800 if using a resident priest or $850 if bringing in your own priest.
Click to expand...
Let’s not forget this bit:
The offering made for the use of the Church does not, however, include the donation which is made to the Priest for celebrating your marriage which is customary around $300.00 to be handed to the celebrant in an envelope on the rehearsal night or on the wedding day.
Click to expand...
 
Tis_Bearself said:
We wouldn’t have asked to reduce the donation. I always understood a “suggested donation” to mean, that’s how much it costs. The problem with making an exception for one person is that word gets around and everybody wants the discount and gets mad if Joe Neighbor gets it and they do not.
Click to expand...
I don’t think this usually is an issue if people are honestly granted it based on need. We do it all the time with schools and the like, and I don’t think people generally complain if those who have an inability to pay are only charged what they can afford.
 
DarkLight said:
I don’t think people generally complain if those who have an inability to pay are only charged what they can afford.
Click to expand...
I know people who have asked for a reduction of the “set contribution/donation” amount and have been turned away.

So no, this isn’t the case.
 
You see it as lack of compassion; I see it as setting a value on a valuable item that people think they should just get for free. That young couple saving for a house will have no problem spending much more than 1000 dollars on a house, yet they expect to get the use of someone else’s building and the priest’s time for cheap or free. Presumably these people are currently living somewhere and not camping in a tent or a cardboard box, so they are not so poor that their every spare dime should go towards shelter. Their marriage should be every bit as important as their future home. They should be willing to make some sacrifices -1000 dollars is not an exorbitant amount in this day and age. By saying they don’t want to pay for it and thus won’t bother unless they can get it cheap, they’re making a powerful statement about their own values, and it’s nor a good one.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top