"Pope Francis Digs at Vatican's Narcissistic Nature.."

[Brendan_64]

The reason I am mentioning this is because it depicts a pastor that smells like the sheep. When a priest is in the community that he serves he knows his community and the people and is able to better guide them spiritually. Perhaps, this is the reason why the priesthood was instituted and is a pillar of our Church. What a difference it is to go to a Mass given by the parish priest than one given by a priest that goes around from parish to parish administering the sacraments. Are you saying that the spiritual guidance of a priest is not needed and is ‘accidental’ and the nuns and laity can guide the community just as well and they only need the priest to do his cultic sacred thing?

So you do not think that inherent in the priesthood is a pastoral mission?

You do have a point there, and yes part of the role of a priest is to be a pastor. However he ought not to be held in a position of being ‘the font of all knowledge’ and we ought not to simply accept with blind obedience whatever he tells us. Sometimes priests tell us things that are not correct. Gone are the days when the priest was the most educated man in the village. We ought not to revere priests.

Your point about the priest smelling like the sheep is a good one. But how often these days do bishops allow priests to remain in a parish long enough to even get to know how the parishioners ‘smell’, let alone actually start to ‘smell like them’? How often do we have priests coming into a parish with an ‘agenda’ about what he wants to do in a parish, before he even knows anything about the people there?

 

[kozlosap]

Agree completely. I had the good fortune of being at the Holy Father’s Angelus blessing at St. Peter’s last Sunday.

He asked the crowd for a few moments of silence in memory of the shipwrecked of Lampedusa. Imagine for a moment, thousands of people in St. Peter’s square falling to dead silence for two minutes. Not a single sound from the crowd, only the background noise of the city. It was unbelievably moving.

This man is about far more than just what he wears. He will evangelize millions.

 

[JReducation]

A couple of weeks ago, I saw a nice movie of Padre Pio on Youtube. According to the movie, it happened one day when he went to his home town, that the people went to him while he was out in the countryside. They told him that there were some bugs eating the crop and if something was not done soon they would lose the group and will all go hungry. Well, Padre Pio went around the crop with a group behind him and he prayed and burned incense. The bugs all died and the crop was saved. Now, hold on, I am not saying that we expect our priests to go around doing miracles to resolve our problems. The reason I am mentioning this is because it depicts a pastor that smells like the sheep.

Abba, this does not work as you think for a few reasons.

1. This is not a priestly act. Any friar could have performed the same act. The miracle itself comes from God, not from the friar. The friar is the instrument.
2. God used St. Francis and many other saintly friars who are not priests to perform the same kinds of miracles. In fact, one Eucharistic miracle involved St. Clare, not a friar.
3. If you ask P. Pio why he would go in the first place, the answer would be a very Franciscan answer. “I am their brother.” He would not say, “I am their priest”. He can’t. Canonically, that would not be true. Pio only had priestly jurisdiction at the friary and this was granted to him, not by the local bishop, but by the superior of the house. Those superiors were not always priests.
4. This brings us to the next part. There are non clerical superiors of religious houses that grant priests jurisdiction. The power comes with the office of the superior, not the ordination of the priest.

When a priest is in the community that he serves he knows his community and the people and is able to better guide them spiritually.

This is true, but not always possible. For example, the Benedictines do not allow their ordained monks to get involved with the communities they serve. They go to the parish in the morning and they leave in the evening. That’s the best they can do. The question is why? Because they place a higher value on monastic life than on parish ministry.

Perhaps, this is the reason why the priesthood was instituted and is a pillar of our Church. What a difference it is to go to a Mass given by the parish priest than one given by a priest that goes around from parish to parish administering the sacraments. Are you saying that the spiritual guidance of a priest is not needed and is ‘accidental’ and the nuns and laity can guide the community just as well and they only need the priest to do his cultic sacred thing?

I don’t think that’s what he’s saying. I think that what’s being aid here is that there are many functions that a priest performs that are exclusively priestly. For example, a spiritual director. If you come to our door asking for a spiritual director, you will not be pointed to one our priests. Neither of them have been trained in ascetic and mystical theology. You will be pointed to Br. C, who is a spiritual theologian and a certified spiritual director, but not a priest. If you asked for confession then you would be pointed to Br. B or Br. J. They may suggest that you seek Br. C for spiritual direction.

Another good example that I can offer you is my experience in the missions in South America. We had seven friars. Two were priests. They traveled several hundred miles to celebrate mass and hear confessions. The other five friars performed baptisms, directed faith formation and administered parishes. The superior was not a priest. He distributed the work according to each one’s gifts and vocation.

How can having a religious (male or female) administering a parish be Protestant? Protestants don’t even believe in the consecrated life.

So you do not think that inherent in the priesthood is a pastoral mission?

Not always. We go again to religious life. You have many priests in religious orders who never go out to do pastoral work. Thomas Merton never witnessed a marriage. Padre Pio never administered the Sacrament of the Sick. The Franciscans of the Renewal, Franciscans of the Eternal Word, Franciscans of Life, Franciscans of Peace, have never done and will never do pastoral work, but we have priests. Camaldolese, Carthusians and Cistercians have priests who only celebrate mass. These traditions are more than 1,000 years old. In the Eastern Catholic Churches, priests don’t run parishes. They celebrate sacraments and that’s about it. The parish is a Western concept.

The fact that we think that the bishop is more important than the priest doesn’t make the priest not important at all.

At the same time, having the priest appearing to be like the bishop to the community is also not satisfactory.

 

[JReducation]

While the parish (led by the priest where we have enough priests) may be the cornerstone of the daily life of the community, the bishop is the symbol of our communion with the Universal Church. One is pastoral & practical in nature, the other is ecclesiatical and mystical in nature. The early church survived for a good while with only bishops and deacons.

Bishops govern in communion with the Bishop of Rome. The local parish pastor governs in communion with his diocesan bishop. Even the local parish pastor is a regular priest (Jesuit, Franciscan, Dominican, etc) he must first be mandated by the vow of obedience to his superior in order to lend his support to the local bishop. Here is the best argument that the religious life does not take a back seat to the priesthood. No religious priest can serve a parish or a diocese beyond the rule, constitutions and authority of the superior.

If the religious life took a back seat to the priesthood, then a bishop could just pull a priest from any religious house and give him a job to do or he could ordain any religious. He cannot. To ordain a religious the bishop must have the permission of the religious superior, even if the superior is not a priest. The priesthood and religious life are complimentary, not subordinate to each other. It’s because they are complimentary that a man can be called to be both, a religious and a priest. But he must exercise his priestly ministry according to the norms of his religious community.

We also have to be clear that administration of the parish and the administration of the sacraments are two different roles. If there is not enough priests for each community, then communities have to share priests for the purposes of the sacraments and someone else need to step in the adminster the parish. Because mine is a Jesuit parish, we have the luxury of having many Jesuit priests in residence. So, we have many priests to say mass and administer the sacraments but have no role in leading the community.

That’s because it’s up to the Jesuit superior, not the priesthood, to decide whether a regular (religious) priest goes beyond celebrating the sacraments. One cannot assume that because he’s a priest he can do all of these other things. It’s always up to the bishop. If the priest is a religious, there has to be an agreement between the bishop and the major superior as to the duties of the priest.

While I know Catholic dioceses is just getting too big, but I do wish that we can figure out a way to bring the bishop closer to the people. Then, we do not have the people thinking that the priest is the bishop-figure in their parish.

There were a number of important realities here. Travel was impossible during the winter months. People did not see a bishop for years. Parishes became little fiefdoms. There were and still are parishes attached to an abbey, not to a diocese. The abbot is the ordinary, but he’s not a bishop. These people would only see a bishop at Confirmation time. Today, many bishops are CEOs, which is what Pope Francis is trying to correct.

I guess many people think as you do. So, the priests could just go traveling from one parish to another administering the sacraments. And the parishes can be administered somewhat protestant style by the religious and the laity.

Common’ how many Protestant friars, monks, nuns, and consecrated religious do you know? How many Protestant communities even believe in the consecrated life?

Will anyone lament the loss of the priests?

Yes. But it does not mean that we have to mass produce priests as we did during the first half of the 20th century and do serious damage to religious orders. Do you realize that about 60% of priests were members of religious orders? That’s not supposed to be. Today, we have balanced out the numbers. About 40% of priests belong to religious orders, because many religious orders only ordain the number of men that they need to serve their members or in their institutions. We’ve gone back to raising up the secular priesthood.

The priest is the pastor of the community who shares that authority by working under the Bishop. I don’t want to be Protestant.

The title pastor is a canonical title, not a sacramental title. Whereas the title pastor applied to the bishop is sacramental. It means what the Apostles meant when they used it. The apostles had no notion of Canon Law.

I am following this debate with great interest.

Actually, he did not. Jesus founded the order of bishops. The fullness of Christ’s sacraments is found in the bishops. Scriptures tells us that the bishops then established the order of deacons. Priests in the early church were not mentioned in the NT though some references to elders in the epistles were taken to mean priests, but I find that tenous.

This is correct. He founded the full priesthood.

To me, it is the local Ordinary that counts.

The local ordinary has full jurisdiction over the laity and the diocesan clergy (priests and deacons). He does not have jurisdiction over consecrated men and women. They have their own ordinary.

Still as the parish is normally the cornerstone of Catholic community life and the pastor of the parish is normally a priest, it is common for us to revolve our Catholic life around what the priest does. I find some sisters or lay catechists doing an excellent job as the parish administrator.

The parish is the heart of the local community of believers. Canonically, a pastor must always be a priest, because he must share in the priesthood of the bishop who is the true pastor.

Our Lord Jesus calls many but few answer the call. This can be applied to the priesthood.

This passage is about following Christ.

 

[Abba]

Brother JR,

For the sake of clarity, I would ask you to please try to make the quotes you are replying to more clear. In the two posts above you respond to some of what I have written and it has my name but then you mix it with what jimkhong has written without name. I don’t want it to seem that what others have said is what I am saying.

Also, just for the sake of clarity, I have never said that the priests serve independently of the Bishop. Any attempt to present the arguments as though that is a position I hold is unfair and is to misdirect.

I have to get some serious work done now, but I will be back if God permits.

 

[JReducation]

Brother JR,

For the sake of clarity, I would ask you to please try to make the quotes you are replying to more clear. In the two posts above you respond to some of what I have written and it has my name but then you mix it with what jimkhong has written without name. I don’t want it to seem that what others have said is what I am saying.

Also, just for the sake of clarity, I have never said that the priests serve independently of the Bishop. Any attempt to present the arguments as though that is a position I hold is unfair and is to misdirect.

I have to get some serious work done now, but I will be back if God permits.

When I respond, I’m not responding to you. I’m responding to an idea that has been placed on the board. I’m not really concerned about who placed it. The goal of the board is to talk about the concepts, not the individuals who posted the concepts. It really makes no difference who posted it. What is interesting is the concept.

 

[Abba]

When I respond, I’m not responding to you. I’m responding to an idea that has been placed on the board. I’m not really concerned about who placed it. The goal of the board is to talk about the concepts, not the individuals who posted the concepts. It really makes no difference who posted it. What is interesting is the concept.

Well, I disagree with your tactics.

I also think that you should stay with the argument and not present ideas as though they are the ones that are being argued and you are presenting a brilliant responds for them. It is not logical.

The central argument here for those readers that are lost right about now, is that I am arguing that inherent in the priesthood is a pastoral mission and that the priest can not be defined as a person that is necessary simply to perform come culti actions. I am the only arguing this position and I am standing my grounds. My opponents here are arguing that the priest is essential only to administer the sacraments in a parish and his presence in a parish is ‘incidental’ for the rest and the laity and religious can take care the rest.

It’s like presenting the priest not much more than a magician. The only difference is where and how they get their powers ( as noted by Galot). The magician thinks that he is able to manipulate energy sources and the priest that he is able to do so because he is obedient and serves a being he calls God. So, an attempt is being made here to diminish the priesthood to some kind of culti act which a priest can perform irregardless of knowing the sheep.

This idea also promotes the notion that a priests ‘job’ is like that of an engineer, lawyer or what have you. When he is done performing his cultic act he can punch out.

I disagree with this understanding of a the priesthood. I understand that the priests under his Bishop and in service to his bishop and as a priest serves as pastor, administers the sacrament and is a spiritual leader and communities need priests. The pastoral services a priest offers cannot be simply done by the laity nor religious.

This reminds me of some years ago, when some pro-homosexual marriage Catholics tried to get a law to be pass that would take the rights of the Bishop away from having anything to do with the money collected at the parish. The Bishop requested that the faithfuls protest the day the law was going to be considered. For political reasons, it was presented as many showed up, but the truth of the matter is the it was a pitiful show regarding the millions of Catholics in the region. I remember telling a Catholic in my neighborhood that I went to the protest and was asked, why? Many consider that the parish can handle their own money, money, money money as though the money was never really afford. It was not afford because if it has a string attached and if people think that they can make a claim to it then it was not really afford. The people that were promoting this idea had their own reasons (to harm the Church) but were trying to do it in such a way as the people they were moving to act were barely aware the the had reasons foreign to the ‘cause’. I did not like that whole idea about limiting the power of the Bishop and the thankfully the law did not pass. It seemed very Protestant to me just like what is being presented here.

In passing, I just want to mention a nun, who I will never forget. She showed up to the protest and traveled from a far away area. She seemed to have arrived very early in the morning and all she was carrying was a copy of canon law. Her argument was that unless the Church violates its own laws the State can not interfere. That simple. She said what she had to say and left. May God bless her abundantly.

i disagree with this notion. I understand that the priest, SHARING, the office of the Bishop is a shepherd, leader and administers the sacraments.

 

[Brendan_64]

It seemed very Protestant to me just like what is being presented here.

How is what is being presented here “Protestant”?

The differences between Catholicism and Protestantism are about fundamental differences in doctrine, such as the real presence in the Eucharist, sola scriptura, justification by ‘faith alone’, etc.

Those are matters off faith and are things of great importance. How we organise the clergy, laity etc. is simply an organisational matter and in the cosmic scheme of things is of little significance.

And I’m not saying we need to, but yes, perhaps we could learn things from our Protestant brothers and sisters, regarding deployment of clergy and laity within our Church. Such things are not core to our faith and more often issues of Catholic culture than Catholic faith. On another issue, with the diminishing number of priests, we cannot just carry on with the traditional model we have become accustomed to. Perhaps the Church needs to look at an increased role for the Diaconate, employing full-time lay officers to administer parishes, cathecise etc. The prospect of priests having to travel around a group of parishes assigned to him spending most of his time administering the sacraments is very real prospect and something we will have to deal with.

 

[Abba]

How is what is being presented here “Protestant”?

Inasmuch as it is a severing of the ties with the hierarchy of the Church. I smell it. The religious are not part of the hierarchy and should not be pretending to be, neither are the laity. Part of the empowerment of ordination is to preach and guide. I don’t want to be guided by the laity at a local church - I am not Protestant. Yes, the laity can catechize and preach and teach but it is very different when it comes from a priest on account of his pastoral mission and the fact that God in a special way speaks through the priest as he does at the sacraments. This is why I don’t that the priest can simply punch out. A priest is a priest always and forever - 24 hours a day, 7 days per week and 365 days per year and always and forever.

The solution to the scarcity is to pray to pray for more priests. You will be surprised if people pray fervently what God can do… we may have more priests than we would know what to do with.

 

[JReducation]

Well, I disagree with your tactics.

You’re reading all kinds of things into the discussion that are not being said. The use of the term “tactics” is very rude. I would ask you to back down immediately.

The central argument here for those readers that are lost right about now, is that I am arguing that inherent in the priesthood is a pastoral mission and that the priest can not be defined as a person that is necessary simply to perform come culti actions.

And we’re giving you examples that show that you’re understanding is very narrow. If this were the case, why do we have entire communities with priests who perform a very different pastoral mission such as enclosed communities of monks and hermits as well as active communities of friars who have priests, but their priests do not engage in parishes, yet their mission is very pastoral. Pastoral mission is a very broad term that takes many expressions. Take for example those men whose sole ministry is to walk the streets of a city. To many, this may not look like a pastoral mission, but to them and to the Church’s hierarchy, it is a pastoral mission. They are not running parishes and they perform their ministry with their non-ordained confreres, but it is not less priestly.

I am the only arguing this position and I am standing my grounds. My opponents here are arguing that the priest is essential only to administer the sacraments in a parish and his presence in a parish is ‘incidental’ for the rest and the laity and religious can take care the rest.

No, what is being said is that in many situations, especially where male religious orders are present, the care of a parish is shared between religious who are ordained and non-ordained. They have no problems with this. In some instances, the person at the helm is not a priest. From your responses, it sounds as if you would be vehemently opposed to such an arrangement. But to oppose such an arrangement would be contrary to the mission of that particular religious institute. This would be a violation of their rights. To avoid such conflicts, one cannot hold such a rigid vision of what a parish should be or how it should be run.

So, an attempt is being made here to diminish the priesthood to some kind of culti act which a priest can perform irregardless of knowing the sheep.

No one said this.

This idea also promotes the notion that a priests ‘job’ is like that of an engineer, lawyer or what have you. When he is done performing his cultic act he can punch out.

That was not what was said. I gave the example of monks who serve in a parish. They go in, celebrate the sacraments. Do whatever other duties they have to do, but they leave at a certain time to return to their monastic life. They do this everyday. They go back and forth from the cloister to the parish. They’re not on 24/7. Priests who belong to monastic and mendicant orders are not allowed to be on 24/7, but they are not less priests when they are doing dishes, scrubbing floors, doing laundry, or playing cards with their confreres.

I also gave the example of the Franciscans of the Renewal, a community that has many priests, but their constitutions prohibit the engagement in parishes or any other traditional priestly ministry. Yet, their priests do terrific ministry walking the streets of a city, running soup kitchens, running homeless shelters, retreats, lectures, missions, and a host of other ministries. They do it alongside of their non-ordained confreres. In no way did anyone paint them as magicians, just because all of the friars are on an equal plane and engaged in ministry equally, but a ministry very necessary to the life of the Church, especially the poor.

i disagree with this notion. I understand that the priest, SHARING, the office of the Bishop is a shepherd, leader and administers the sacraments.

The priest shares in the priesthood of the bishop, because the bishop is the one who has the fulness of the priesthood.

This entire discussion began because the Holy Father said that there is a narcissistic culture at the Vatican that is like leprosy. I and others added that clericalism is part of this narcissistic culture. When one misunderstands the priesthood as different from that of servant, then one contributes to clericalism. While the priest presides over the celebration of the sacrifice of the mass, he is serving his brothers and sisters through the ministerial priesthood. We cannot lose sight of the servant and fraternal model or we contribute to clericalism.

 

[Abba]

The use of the term “tactics” is very rude. I would ask you to back down immediately.

Why do you think that you can accuse your opponent in a debate of being ‘confused’ ‘narrow’ etc… twist arguments around, pretend that what is being argued is one thing when it is another and when it is called to your attention you can demand that the person: back down immediately. I hope you do not want to use your position and friendship with the moderators to shut people up on this forum who have a different understanding as yourself.

I am done discussing with you brother. It was nice reading an exposition about the religious life a topic which is very special to me as I noted. However, we obviously disagree about a very important topic and it is very difficult to discuss with you and then to additionally be threatened and have you use your position on this board as a threat - well it is a bit much.

I have nothing else to discuss with you. You tangle up everything to come off as the one that knows and holds the correct understanding.

Have a good evening.

 

[Brendan_64]

Come on Abba, let’s not end up attacking each other. All Brother J has done is express his opinions on this issue, as have you. Let’s just calm. There is room for differences of opinions within our Church, and there is room for different ways of organising the clergy within our Church.

Inasmuch as it is a severing of the ties with the hierarchy of the Church. I smell it. The religious are not part of the hierarchy and should not be pretending to be, neither are the laity.

What do you classify as the hierarchy?

Are you trying to argue that religious orders do not ultimately answer to the Supreme Pontif? Are you arguing that the Pope is not head of the Church that Franciscans, Dominicans etc. belong to?

The Church is not the organisational structures. The Church is not less Catholic, if the Church chooses to deploy the clergy in a different manner. Our Faith is not defined by what the priest does or doesn’t do, outside of administering the sacraments. The Church is the fleshy Body of Christ on Earth, and we are all part of that. Each part of the Body plays a different part, a priest is but one part of that body. Is your foot more important than your hand?

The solution to the scarcity is to pray to pray for more priests. You will be surprised if people pray fervently what God can do… we may have more priests than we would know what to do with.

I agree with you that we should pray for more priests, but at the same time we have to deal with the reality that already there are not enough priests, and there are currently very few going through seminaries. Yes we can pray for the future, but the reality of the situation of the present also needs to be addressed.

 

[shelby_sun]

Why do you think that you can accuse your opponent in a debate of being ‘confused’ ‘narrow’ etc… twist arguments around, pretend that what is being argued is one thing when it is another and when it is called to your attention you can demand that the person: back down immediately. I hope you do not want to use your position and friendship with the moderators to shut people up on this forum who have a different understanding as yourself.

I am done discussing with you brother. It was nice reading an exposition about the religious life a topic which is very special to me as I noted. However, we obviously disagree about a very important topic and it is very difficult to discuss with you and then to additionally be threatened and have you use your position on this board as a threat - well it is a bit much.

I have nothing else to discuss with you. You tangle up everything to come off as the one that knows and holds the correct understanding.

Have a good evening.

I know brother needs no defending but I think you are way out of line. First, Bro. is more than clear on all his post. He educates, guides, and listens to those who are willing to learn. You just want him to agree with you and now that he won’t you are upset and disrespectful.

You are naive if you think Catholic priests become pastor because they are the best priest for the job. With the shortage of priest the diocese must find priest that can barely get the job done because being a pastor is not their strong suit. The last two pastors at my church should never have been pastor, but the diocese did the best it could to find someone. Lay people stepped up and offered their talents to help where the priest was lost.

This thread was about narcissistic nature in the Vatican, that some of our leaders way too impressed with their positions and feel superior to others. Pope Francis has no time for that, nor should the church. There are many, many lay people that keep churches running and they are equally has important as the priest, because with out them churches would close. Any good priest would tell you that.

St Ignatius believed that our faith was about each person finding their own relationship with God. These are trivial things that keep you from focusing on deepening your own relationship with God on a daily basis. It doesn’t matter who my pastor is or which priest does Mass. That doesn’t change a thing about my faith. I had a deacon marry us and a deacon baptize my children. A lay person gave my daughter her First Communion. Does that mean the Eucharist was less important.

Were you drawn closer to God with your discussion on the this thread. That should be your question to yourself. Did you act like God would have want you to act. Did you show the love God asks of you.

Bro. took a great deal of time to discuss things:shrug: with all of us and answered many of your question. I would think God would have liked you to be more gracious.

 

[Abba]

Dear Brendan64,

To be clear, my objections to some of the notions, claims, insinuations and presentations on this thread are as follows:

1. The insinuation that because a priest in a religious community is under the authority of the Superior of the religious community who after the priest serves his ‘duties’ with the sacrament returns back to the rank and file of the community; that a priest function, and so it would follow and even proves; can be limited to the administration of the sacraments. Hence the priest is only really needed to administer the sacraments and everything else is ‘incidental’. So, a priest is not needed in a community of faithfuls except to stop by and administer the sacraments. Kind of like, a traveling circus, the priest could go from parish to parish and do his cultic function.I disagree.
2. I object to the claim that it is not the case that inherent in the priest hood is the function of shepherd.
3. I object to the claim that it is not the case that inherent in the priesthood is the function of leadership of the community that he is caring for as a servant and helper of his Bishop which he is.
4. I object to the claim (or lack of recognition) that there occurs an ontological change in the person at ordination that is sacramental. It is actually, heresy to claim otherwise – not erroneous but heretical.
5. I object to the claim that a priest can be simply minimized to his functions.

There are things, Brendan64 about my faith that I have come to learn first intellectually and then have integrated with my understanding of my faith and spiritually. Then, there are things that I already know spiritually that at times, such as this one, I need to learn how to defend and present. To this end, I have been doing some reading and have tried to see how I can present a defense for the faith that is in me – but I am no theologian and I lack knowledge and did not go through seminary etc…

We may not have enough priests for each parish but this does not deny that a community needs a shepherd at that level which is why the Bishops have priests and this element of shepherd is empowered by the Bishop who has the fullness of the priesthood. It cannot be argued that because there are priests who work as priests yet do not work at as pastors that this proof that it is not inherent in the priesthood for Bishop do not always serve as shepherds they also serve as Papal Nuncio and at the Roman Curia but this does not make them less Bishops/Shepherds.

Anyone who goes on a Catholic board and attacks the priesthood should do so with the understanding that there is no protective status to do that and it is one of the places where the buck stops. I can now say that I have been exposed to ‘religiousism” . How is that for a new word? When religious consider or present the notion that they are better than the hierarchy – I all of the sudden get anti-religiousism. When I see the Pope I do not see a religious – I see the Holy Father.

Peace

 

[Abba]

Correction on #4:

1. I object to the claim (or lack of recognition) that there DOES NOT occur an ontological change in the person at ordination that is sacramental. It is actually, heresy to claim this – not erroneous but - heretical. And, that because no such thing happens it is evident that a priest can me minimize to a function or functions.

 

[Brendan_64]

Anyone who goes on a Catholic board and attacks the priesthood should do so with the understanding that there is no protective status to do that and it is one of the places where the buck stops.

Nobody on this thread has attacked the priesthood, nobody.

Nobody on this thread has said anything that is contrary to the teachings of the Church.

What people have done is disagree with your opinion of what a priest ought to do within a parish. Your opinion is simply an opinion, nothing more. Your opinion is not an absolute truth. Disagreeing with your opinion is not an attack on the priesthood.

It would seem to me that you are now throwing up a defence that maintains that your opinion on this issue cannot be disagreed, because to disagree with your opinion is to attack the priesthood.

There are enough priests who are members of this forum who would be quick to jump in and correct someone if they thought that person was attacking the priesthood. Nobody on this thread has said anything contrary to Church teachings. Nobody on this thread has attacked the priesthood.

 

[Darryl1958]

I see the Biblical teaching as one in which all people of the Church are involved in a priestly function. We have become a nation of priests in effect rather than being a nation under priess such as was the role that the Levites performed in the times of the Old Covenant.

Now, in regards to what the Pope is taking a dig at, would it be narcissism that is involved for people to regard the priesthood as a hierarchy, with certain strata of that hieros looking upon themselves as holier-than-thou?

How would a non-narcissistic priesthood differ from the priesthood as it exist today?

 

[Abba]

When the priesthood is presented mutilated and crippled - I see it as an attack on the priesthood.

When people advise others to not ‘lick their boots’ and all that represents and insinuate to respect and reverence priests is ‘clericalism’ and a no, no - i see it as an attack on the priesthood.

When people deny inherent aspects of the priesthood - I see it as an attack on the priesthood.

When people try to interpret for others what Saint Francis said - I see it as an attack on the priesthood.

Saint Francis wrote very simply for everyone to understand. What he wrote does not need to be explained by theologians. This is what he wrote:

God inspired me, too, and still inspires me with such great faith in priests who live according to the laws of the holy Church of Rome, because of their dignity, that if they persecuted me, I should still be ready to turn to them for aid. And if I were as wise as Solomon and met the poorest priests of the world, I would still refuse to preach against their will in the parishes in which they live. I am determined to reverence, love and honour priests and all others as my superiors. I refuse to consider their sins, because I can see the Son of God in them and they are better than I. I do this because in this world I cannot see the most high Son of God with my own eyes, except for his most holy Body and Blood which they receive and they alone administer to others.

If people did not understand then can read it again and even a third time to be sure. Saint Francis encourages us to reverence, love and honor priests. Period.

A priest cannot go back to the rank and file with the laity after he administers the sacraments. A priest is a priest always and forever. If a priest dies at 4:00 a.m. - even though he was not administering a sacrament - it is a priest that has died.

If a priest comes on this thread and tells me to let it go that I am wrong - that will be the end of the story. Until then, I firmly stand my grounds.

 

[shelby_sun]

When the priesthood is presented mutilated and crippled - I see it as an attack on the priesthood.

When people advise others to not ‘lick their boots’ and all that represents and insinuate to respect and reverence priests is ‘clericalism’ and a no, no - i see it as an attack on the priesthood.

When people deny inherent aspects of the priesthood - I see it as an attack on the priesthood.

When people try to interpret for others what Saint Francis said - I see it as an attack on the priesthood.

Saint Francis wrote very simply for everyone to understand. What he wrote does not need to be explained by theologians. This is what he wrote:

God inspired me, too, and still inspires me with such great faith in priests who live according to the laws of the holy Church of Rome, because of their dignity, that if they persecuted me, I should still be ready to turn to them for aid. And if I were as wise as Solomon and met the poorest priests of the world, I would still refuse to preach against their will in the parishes in which they live. I am determined to reverence, love and honour priests and all others as my superiors. I refuse to consider their sins, because I can see the Son of God in them and they are better than I. I do this because in this world I cannot see the most high Son of God with my own eyes, except for his most holy Body and Blood which they receive and they alone administer to others.

If people did not understand then can read it again and even a third time to be sure. Saint Francis encourages us to reverence, love and honor priests. Period.

A priest cannot go back to the rank and file with the laity after he administers the sacraments. A priest is a priest always and forever. If a priest dies at 4:00 a.m. - even though he was not administering a sacrament - it is a priest that has died.

If a priest comes on this thread and tells me to let it go that I am wrong - that will be the end of the story. Until then, I firmly stand my grounds.

Abba,
No one has bashed the priesthood. First, you can see things however you want, but that does not mean you are right. Second, this whole thread was about the narcissistic nature of those, many priests, in the Vatican.

There are many religious and none religious priest who do not want too be revered or honored, they simply want to be a servant to God and walk among the people. Pope Francis, as a Jesuit, does not want to be place on a thrown above all others.

I find it sad that you refuse to look at the laity in the church and find God in them as much as you do the priests. Do you really think this is what God wants of you? You are missing out on the goodness of so many, getting caught up in a priest being some sort of royalty.

 

[PeopleB4Things]

Mis-translations aside, I love this Pope and I agree with what he is saying - it is the Gospel. Wow! I really like him. Pope Benedict xvi was right when he said that in seeing him (paraphrase) he has confirmation that he made the right decision and that Our Lord Jesus is indeed in accord. I can see this too, Francesco is our Pope! He is a real Pope who is being guided by the Holy Spirit. He is not just filling in for Benedict - he is our Pope.

Praise be to God!

Agreed. When we have to critically analyze everything, we build walls around us, allowing us to capture things for review before internalizing them. Faith should live and grow inside us and we must constantly feed out spiritual being.through teachings and exploration of the Gospels. I have to admit that the recent years have been scant and I’ve had to rely on myself and my bible to sustain my faith. Pope Francis is like a great wind that has blown into the Church carrying with him renewed grace and love. He is truly a gift from God. Our church needs to stop focusing on ourselves and what we think we know and refocus on our mission to help and work in communion with our fellow man. It’s certainly hard to be a humble servant of God when think we know it all and when we judge others. As we struggle to cast our sins of hubris & narcissism aside, we can hobble beside Pope Frances down the path of renewed faith. Let the winds continue to blow as the Holy Spirit guides us through our papal leader, God’s chosen leader of his church.