Let's be real about the shortage of priests

[Wretched_1]

I don’t think the FSSP & SSPX are both off the charts with vocations because they’re not sufficiently selective. The FSSP probably turns away more applicants than some dioceses get. And unlike the NCAA they’re not offering anything illegal to prospective recruits…

 

[QwertyGirl]

I don’t expect that you’ll reply – and that’s ok! – but it would be interesting to know what about these you disagree with. Just one. I don’t know… why is “original sin” wrong? Or, what is erroneous about the teaching of “infallibility”?

So, in answer to your question, I believe the Church presents with too much negativity. Of course, this transfers to some of the people in the Church (obviously, not all).

In answer to your other question about what I find objectionable about the concept of original sin… I believe that if we are created by a higher power, we are created exactly the way that higher power wants us to be. We are perfect in our imperfection. We were never meant to be perfect, I believe. Therefore, I think it is silly for us to strive for perfection in everything. Of course, this then begs the question of what purpose does it serve for a God to create us in an “imperfect” manner. I don’t have an answer for you other than to tell you what I believe. I believe it is so we are in an environment where we can learn. If everything always ran perfectly (in our terms) then we wouldn’t need to grow in any way. So to put this in an everyday example: Suze steals $5.00 from her mother’s purse. Her mother is very upset and hurt by it, because Suze took something that didn’t belong to her. Catholics would call this a sin. I call it a human failure (made possible by the way God designed us) so Susie’s soul is able to build an empathetic understanding of the soul of her mother.

I realize this is what most Catholics would consider new-age, but I am (after all) agnostic. It works for me, though. I don’t think we are judged by a god with regards to if we “sin” or not. I think we are here to learn, and we are created in a manner that allows us to do that.

 

[Gorgias]

We were never meant to be perfect, I believe. Therefore, I think it is silly for us to strive for perfection in everything.

Yeah… I think that people misunderstand the whole “Be perfect, just as your heavenly Father is perfect” thing. It’s not “don’t make mistakes” – the word that’s used in that line is ‘teleios’, which means “reaching the purpose for which you exist”. And the verb there isn’t “be” (as in a command: “Be!”), it’s a future tense verb – “ya’ll will be”. And, it’s written in what’s called “middle voice” (active voice means that the subject is acting; passive voice means that the subject is being acted upon; but middle voice tends to mean that the subject is entering into a state or condition, or is doing something for his own sake).

When it comes right down to it, “be perfect, just as your heavenly Father is perfect” really means “you will become what you’re meant to be, just as your heavenly Father is what He is.” I would agree with you… there’s often too much stress placed on ‘perfection’ (although, to tell the truth, I don’t think there’s anything wrong with setting ‘stretch goals’ for ourselves).

I believe it is so we are in an environment where we can learn. If everything always ran perfectly (in our terms) then we wouldn’t need to grow in any way.

True. And, I think your example about the theft of $5, from a Catholic perspective, isn’t about condemning someone for having sinned… so much as it is about encouraging the person to learn from their mistake, to repent, to dust themselves off and try to do better next time.

I think we are here to learn, and we are created in a manner that allows us to do that.

That’s a good thought. But, I’m curious… what about people who cannot learn? What about those who, for whatever reason (intellect, unwillingness, negative experiences that form them in certain ways), are unable to learn or unable to approach their experiences as things that they can learn from? What’s the meaning of their lives, then?

I realize this is what most Catholics would consider new-age, but I am (after all) agnostic.

I think you’re closer to Catholic thought on the question than you give yourself credit for.

 

[Wretched_1]

Maybe it’s because so many of these crises type situations seem to have popped up AFTER the Council? Just sayin’. Can you identify one such crisis that was well present before?

 

[QwertyGirl]

That’s a good thought. But, I’m curious… what about people who cannot learn? What about those who, for whatever reason (intellect, unwillingness, negative experiences that form them in certain ways), are unable to learn or unable to approach their experiences as things that they can learn from? What’s the meaning of their lives, then?

I think maybe they do learn, just in ways others don’t recognize. Further, I don’t think it is really our business. By that, I mean that I believe we are here to learn. But I don’t believe we are all here to learn the same things. Suzie (from my previous example) may be here to learn how to be more empathetic towards the souls of others. I may be here to learn how to be a more patient soul. My neighbor may be here to learn to be more trusting.

I believe we are all right on schedule, doing exactly what we are here to do. I believe that if we were created by a higher power, it has our backs. I believe we don’t know a lot of what the Catholic church believes it has the lock down on.

You are so right in that a lot of my attitudes are based in Catholicism. Catholicism has some beautiful messages to convey. Thinking of the well-being of others and being charitable are my two favorites. Unfortunately, you can’t be half-Catholic. The Church is not accepting of someone who discards that which they don’t believe or subscribe to. I proudly have taken the good I found in the Church and moved on to a place where I am able to be honest with myself and others about what I believe.

 

[Gorgias]

The Church is not accepting of someone who discards that which they don’t believe or subscribe to.

Fair enough, but isn’t that a profoundly human reaction?

I mean, even you say that “it’s not our business.” Not “they have it right”, just “I don’t feel empowered to tell them that I think they’re missing the point.” That’s a big difference. And, I would hope that you have the courage of your convictions – that is, just like you’re doing here, you tell people “here’s what the truth is!”

After all, if you’re willing to do that… then you’re doing what the Church is doing (even if you do it in a different way and/or refuse to insist that what you believe is right is what folks should do).

I proudly have taken the good I found in the Church and moved on to a place where I am able to be honest with myself and others about what I believe.

That makes sense.

But… how do you perceive what happened? If the Church got it wrong… and the Church was founded by Christ, and Christ taught the apostles who first headed up the Church… then what happened? How could the Church get it wrong? And does it not matter that (in your opinion) Jesus let the Church He founded fall into error? Just curious how you’ve come to peace with that thought…

 

[commenter]

Maybe it’s because so many of these crises type situations seem to have popped up AFTER the Council? Just sayin’. Can you identify one such crisis that was well present before?

I am not one of those people who credits the council for everything good that happened in the recent past, nor blames the council for everything bad, either. But regardless of what your position on the Council is, the following thing is the most relevant thing about the Council:

It is over.

The devil wants us to re-fight the battles of 50 years ago. He never wants us to concentrate on problems and opportunities we can do something about, in the present. You can’t repeal the council. You can suggest some specific actions individuals might take in 2018 to address the priest shortage.

 

[QwertyGirl]

Fair enough, but isn’t that a profoundly human reaction?

I mean, even you say that “it’s not our business.” Not “they have it right”, just “I don’t feel empowered to tell them that I think they’re missing the point.” That’s a big difference. And, I would hope that you have the courage of your convictions – that is, just like you’re doing here, you tell people “here’s what the truth is!”

After all, if you’re willing to do that… then you’re doing what the Church is doing (even if you do it in a different way and/or refuse to insist that what you believe is right is what folks should do).

I think you made a little bit of a jump there. I never declare anything is The truth. I may declare it as My truth. I believe none of us fully know the truth about anything. It is a big problem I have with the Church. The Church claims to know the Truth about way more than I am comfortable with. I believe my truth may very well not be your truth. And I am fine with that. I am also comfortable with saying “nobody knows”. Now of course I am always willing to hazard a guess, if it is something important to me. On the other hand, I think we are way too preoccupied with having the answers to everything. It sort of goes against who we are and where we are, I believe. So, although I am always searching (and I love hearing the opinions of other individuals and institutions) I am, at the same time, just fine with saying “nobody really knows.”

It may appear to me at times that others aren’t learning the lessons I think they should learn. It isn’t that I think they are missing the mark at all. I have faith that if we are here to learn, they are learning just fine. Just because they aren’t learning according to my syllabus, or my schedule, doesn’t at all mean they aren’t learning. I remind myself that my faith provides that they are being looked after by a higher power, just as I am. When I say “not my business”, that is what I mean. Not my business to judge. Not my business to presume lessons aren’t being learned.

 

[Gorgias]

I think you made a little bit of a jump there. I never declare anything is The truth. I may declare it as My truth.

OK. I get the distinction you’re making. If it’s “your truth” and not “my truth”, though… doesn’t that just mean “your opinion” and “my opinion”?

And, is there any reason to think that Jesus is protecting the Church He founded, so that when it teaches ‘faith and morals’ (and only faith and morals), it would actually teach objective truth? I mean, I get that no human person knows the truth fully… but are Catholics in error if they think that Jesus does (and wants us to know it, too)?

Not my business to judge. Not my business to presume lessons aren’t being learned.

OK. That makes sense.

But… is it anyone’s business to judge? Is it God’s? And if so, then how should He go about His business? Just by letting us make mistakes … or, perhaps, by setting up an institution that’s meant to help us learn and help us keep on moving toward Him?

 

[QwertyGirl]

But… is it anyone’s business to judge? Is it God’s? And if so, then how should He go about His business? Just by letting us make mistakes … or, perhaps, by setting up an institution that’s meant to help us learn and help us keep on moving toward Him?

Good discussion.

I don’t believe in the concept of judgement by a God. Remember, I don’t believe in the concept of sin. I think we are here to learn. That is it. While we may be free to make decisions for ourselves, we aren’t free to not learn. It is like breathing. If we are alive, we are breathing. If we are alive, we are learning. I believe learning makes our souls stronger for whatever the next stage of existence is. Other than that, I am comfortable in saying I am not bothered by what I don’t know. I know this seems simple to a lot of people. I promise you, I am well-educated and not at all simple. I am just at peace with trusting that if we are bigger than our existence here on earth, then we are being looked after. I believe that if there is a higher power, there is intervention when needed by that higher power. There is a plan, I believe. Even when bad things happen here, it is part of a divine plan. We just don’t necessarily understand how. I am accepting of this.

 

[QwertyGirl]

OK. I get the distinction you’re making. If it’s “your truth” and not “my truth”, though… doesn’t that just mean “your opinion” and “my opinion”?

Let’s go back to my example of Suzie. Remember, Suzie stole money from her mother. Her mother was hurt deeply by the fact that Suzie stole from her. That is her truth. Being stolen from is very painful.

I am a different person. If my child stole money from me, I would be mad because I had already taught them stealing is wrong. Then I would remember I am to be patient. Some people don’t learn just from being told. I need to come up with another way of teaching. Maybe I need to punish, to make an impact. It is more of a challenge for me, but not hurtful.

My truth of what it feels like to have a child steal from me is very different than Suzie’s mom’s truth about what it feels like to have a child steal from her. It isn’t just opinion.

 

[Jas31784]

Except he only had one miracle lol.

 

[Gorgias]

Good discussion.

Yep!

I don’t believe in the concept of judgement by a God. Remember, I don’t believe in the concept of sin. I think we are here to learn. That is it.

OK… so, is it ‘sin’ that you have a problem accepting, or ‘consequences for sin’? After all, if I called sin ‘making a mistake from which I can learn’, you’d be ok with that, right?

And… if you’re ok with the notion of a mistake, doesn’t it follow that there are consequences that proceed from that mistake? After all, if you get down to it, I don’t learn from my action, per se – I learn because the consequences make me realize that I’ve made a mistake!

So, if mistakes are ok, and consequences enable learning… then what’s wrong with sin?

(As I type this, I’m also keeping an eye on another thread, in which one poster is pretty torqued about the notion of hell. I posted that it isn’t sin that condemns us… it’s refusal to repent. In the context of our discussion here, I think I’d say “it’s not ‘sin’ that condemns us… it’s the unwillingness to learn, correct our behavior, and try again.” That seems to me to fit well with your perspective on things… doesn’t it?)

While we may be free to make decisions for ourselves, we aren’t free to not learn.

OK… so, if we’re “not free to not learn”, then there’s an objective truth: “not learning is wrong” – objectively, and always. So… what’s the consequence of refusing to allow ourselves to learn?

(Hmm… let me step back a second. By your definition, is ‘learning’ merely “recognizing that an action has a negative consequence” or is it “resolving not to re-do the things that have negative consequences”? I have an intuition that this is important to the discussion…)

My truth of what it feels like to have a child steal from me is very different than Suzie’s mom’s truth about what it feels like to have a child steal from her. It isn’t just opinion.

That makes sense. However, that’s not a question of ‘truth’ – it’s a question of perspective. The truth is the same in both cases:

• stealing is wrong
• mothers teach their children to distinguish right from wrong

What’s different isn’t a truth value, but an assessment of how best to internalize the truth. No?

 

[Wretched_1]

If you were to look at my posts you would see every one of them on this thread that mention the Council are responses made to others who had mentioned the Council first. Are all the problems in the Church the result of the Council? I wouldn’t say that. I would say that they are a result of the infection of Modernism amongst the faithful and to the extent that the Council promulgated such thought amongst the faithful it is responsible.

 

[QwertyGirl]

OK… so, is it ‘sin’ that you have a problem accepting, or ‘consequences for sin’? After all, if I called sin ‘making a mistake from which I can learn’, you’d be ok with that, right?

My problem with the concept of sin, is that the church teaches it is an offense against God. I don’t believe that. God made us the way he made us. He made us to have poor judgement at times. That is the way he wanted us to be. For whatever reason.

So, if mistakes are ok, and consequences enable learning… then what’s wrong with sin?

The concept of sin is that you either have to apologize to some great God, or suffer consequences for it. I don’t believe either of those things. Nothing wrong with it if that is what you choose to believe. I just don’t happen to believe in that. It isn’t necessary.

In the context of our discussion here, I think I’d say “it’s not ‘sin’ that condemns us… it’s the unwillingness to learn, correct our behavior, and try again.” That seems to me to fit well with your perspective on things… doesn’t it?)

I believe we are here to learn. Once we have learned everything we need to learn, we die. It is why we don’t all die at the exact same age. Being stubborn and unwilling to try again maybe the lesson that needs to be learned. That we are supposed to be willing to learn. But I don’t believe that we learn that by being condemned in the next life. I believe we were just given more opportunities to continue learning and get it right. As many as it takes.

OK… so, if we’re “not free to not learn”, then there’s an objective truth: “not learning is wrong” – objectively, and always. So… what’s the consequence of refusing to allow ourselves to learn?

I believe learning is like breathing. You wouldn’t say it is an objective truth that not breathing is wrong, as in sinful. At least I don’t think you would. I feel the same way about learning. We don’t really have a choice in the matter. We are here to learn, and that is what we do.

Truth is truth. It doesn’t mean everyone’s truth is the same. I stand by my original hypothetical. Stealing may not be wrong for everyone. For example, someone stealing to feed a starving child because they have no other choice isn’t doing anything wrong. It is regrettable, but not wrong. It may have negative consequences, but the action itself isn’t necessarily wrong. A whole slew of lessons to be learned may available through the acting, however they will not be hastened by condemning someone or telling them they are they are sinful or telling them if they don’t repent they will go to some place called hell.

 

[commenter]

OK. We live in the world in which the Council (or rather the questionable implementation of the Council) had an effect. Good or bad. We do not know what the Church would be like now if the Council had never happened in the 1960s.

But we do not live in the 1960s. We can make no actions in that decade. We do live in 2018. What actions can we take to make things better in 2018?

 

[SuperLuigi]

I think if parishes are being shut down due to a lack of priests then that is a very serious problem for those at that parish.

There may be other reasons such as financial concerns.

Combine a culture where pornography is rampant with a priesthood where a priest could be dismissed for being found to look at pornography, and you get very few men who want to run that gauntlet. Not to mention the way priests are stereotyped, and the lack of honor they are often afforded.

It’s deeper than that. It’s the price of handing over keys of the arts to the mainstream media, post-modern academia and Hollywood.

But we do not live in the 1960s. We can make no actions in that decade. We do live in 2018. What actions can we take to make things better in 2018?

A big step would be to stop making excuses for family members and friends.

 

[SuperLuigi]

For example, someone stealing to feed a starving child because they have no other choice isn’t doing anything wrong. It is regrettable, but not wrong. It may have negative consequences, but the action itself isn’t necessarily wrong.

Actually, that is quite on par with Catholic teaching.

Truth is truth. It doesn’t mean everyone’s truth is the same.

These statements contradict each other.

 

[QwertyGirl]

Truth is truth. It doesn’t mean everyone’s truth is the same.

These statements contradict each other.

There are varying definitions of truth, which is what I was referring to.

 

[deMontfort]

Can we say relativism?