Joel Osteen

[Gorgias]

–Boring sermons with absolutely no application or nexus to the real world circa 2016;

That may be. Yet, I’ve found that just about every Catholic in the pews has a different idea about what makes a good homily. They’re not supposed to be ‘self-help seminars’ or ‘get-rich-quick pep talks’ – Catholic homilies are supposed to discuss the readings of the day (and, of course, their application in today’s life)… and, most importantly, make the link between the readings and people’s needs and the Eucharist.

–A church hierarchy that expects people to look to unmarried priests to counsel people about things the priests have zero experience with, including marital problems and financial problems;

This seems to really bug you. Let me ask you: do you require your doctor to have the ailments he treats you for? What about your tax preparer – does he have to be in the same life situation as you, in order to have him do your taxes? But… why do you assume that priests – who haven’t experienced marriage (but have counseled lots of married people) – cannot discuss these sorts of problems with people?

–The scandal of priests molesting kids and bishops simply moving them from parish to parish.

Aah, yes… trot out the ‘priest scandal’ card. You realize, of course, that these were primarily in the past, don’t you? Like as in 30+ years ago?

 

[Gorgias]

Wjeffrey, if you want to get on joel Osteen’s case theologically, fine.

However, a lot of criticism leveled against him - on this board, and in the world at large - smacks of nastiness

To tell the truth, the only thing I have against him is the mess he makes of Christian theology. If he wants to encourage people to pay him good money to mis-characterize God’s message, then that’s between him and God…

 

[PolarGuy]

Unfortunately, Gorgias, much of your points rather ring hollow, for several reasons.

As to the priest scandal, it will be “trotted out” for a long time, because it was horrific, on many levels – the priests did wrong, and so did the bishops who knew of their acts.

Worse, do we stop talking about the Nazis because, after all, they were, gee, in the 1930s & 40s? After all, that’s ancient history, isn’t it? Of course not.

Further, lawsuits are ongoing now; dioceses are still paying settlements; victims are still coming forward. Don’t act like they’re not.

It would be refreshing for more Catholics to say, “this happened; it was horrific; it damaged the Church,” rather than act like it never happened.

I’ll type more in a few minutes.

 

[PolarGuy]

As to sermons, Catholic parishes seem to almost never reference any world events or moral issues, beyond the most brief references (if that). We hear the same stuff over and over – “in the first reading, yada yada yada…” In the weeks after a major hurricane hit my area and displaced thousands, leaving thousands without power, no priest at my parish so much as referenced the storm once (for that matter, my parish refused to allow folks without power to use church facilities; my Baptist secretary’s church, by contrast, allowed folks to come in, warm up, charge their cell phones for free, and made them sandwiches, but that’s another tale…). That’s a recipe for the sermons to be forgotten the moment mass is over.

By contrast, Joel Osteen’s sermons are drawing 7 million viewers a week in 100 countries. Many Catholics watch him (I’m one of them, obviously). Like it or not, his sermons are touching many lives, and a bit of introspection – “what’s he doing that we’re not?” – would appear to be in order.

 

[PolarGuy]

Finally, as to what priests are qualified to counsel people on, I’ll ask you this:

–If I have no experience with any subject, but just think about it a lot, am I then qualified to be an expert and counsel people on it?

–If I never have sex but think about sex a lot, am I then qualified to counsel people on it?

By the logic you cite, a priest is an expert about anything he gives counsel about, just because he may counsel a lot of people about it.

Does a doctor need to suffer from an ailment to treat it? No, but that’s a bad analogy. Why would people want to, or be encouraged to, seek marital advice from someone who is unmarried; or seek financial advice from someone whose every real need is met by others?

Someone very close to me spend 20 years as a nun. She told me: During that time, absolutely none of the nuns she knew ever balanced a checkbook; when they foodshopped, they simply bought whatever they wanted (she used the example of lobster newburgh) because the parish paid for whatever they bought.

Are those the people you should go to for advice when you’re struggling to pay for a roof over the heads of your 3 kids, and feed them, and baby daddy won’t send child support? Priests and nuns have no business counseling anyone about marriage; sex; or finances (which is probably 85% of why people need advice; sex and money are the 2 biggest sources of marital problems, statistically).

Further, priests – and particularly pastors – are used to being obeyed; come from a very hierarchical structure where orders are given and followed, and are absolutely useless in, say, a setting requiring marital skills.

I suspect I’d get much, much better relationship advice from Joel Osteen – who appears happily married – than I would from 99.9% of priests. I certainly would rather go to him for financial advice than a priest.

Don’t you think you would, too?