A need for young Irish men to become Priests

chopchopchop

There seems to be a massive need for young Irish lads to become priests.

Why ain't they signing up do people think ?

I personnaly believe that the closing words of our Lord's High Priestly prayer in St. John's Gospel give the essence of that work of priesthood which is his and ours: "That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee. ... And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one: I in them, and thou in me."

Onesimus

In the Eastern Catholic and the Eastern Orthodox Churches, vocations are not a problem. I don't know why this is. The RC in Poland has many vocations too as does the American RC.

Ireland is spiritually on its knees at the moment, mostly due to the clerical child abuse stuff that happened here in the last 100 years.

Many are afraid to be a priest because of the fear of how people view them. in the 60's one local monastery around here had over 500 people living in it as novitiates. Now there is only 11 of them in the monastery, some as young as their thirties and as old as 96.

I think the nuns and sisters communities suffer the worst for vocations although there are younger women than men starting to join.

Basically the enemy attacks the Holy Family. No Holy Family means no space for the Holy Spirit to breathe a vocation. No Holy Families means no priests or religious.

Skerries

Time to get rid of that celibacy rule

Onesimus

It's not Celibacy that is the problem. There happens to be quite minor few married priests in the Eastern Rite. I've come across the wife of one but thats about it.

I think that many need to be educated on the great gift of celibacy and I think Pope John Paul II does this greatly in his theology of the Body. You can buy Christopher wests theology of the Body online and its great.

People just don't realize how hard it is to be Married and serve the Lord in the Catholic Church at the same time. Being free to go wherever one pleases is important to serve the Lord. Having a family makes that really really difficult. your torn between the two as St.Paul outlines in his epistles.

I'm married and would never DREAM of becoming a priest whilst married because of this. I'm a little speck of evidence therefore that getting rid of the Roman celibacy rule is not really the answer.

wandatowell

Onesimus wrote: »

I'm a little speck of evidence therefore that getting rid of the Roman celibacy rule is not really the answer.

Thats not evidence, thats just your opinion

Broxi_Bear_Eire

Onesimus wrote: »

It's not Celibacy that is the problem. There happens to be quite minor few married priests in the Eastern Rite. I've come across the wife of one but thats about it.

I think that many need to be educated on the great gift of celibacy and I think Pope John Paul II does this greatly in his theology of the Body. You can buy Christopher wests theology of the Body online and its great.

People just don't realize how hard it is to be Married and serve the Lord in the Catholic Church at the same time. Being free to go wherever one pleases is important to serve the Lord. Having a family makes that really really difficult. your torn between the two as St.Paul outlines in his epistles.

I'm married and would never DREAM of becoming a priest whilst married because of this. I'm a little speck of evidence therefore that getting rid of the Roman celibacy rule is not really the answer.

Sorry totally disagree it may not solve all the problems but it would help IMO. To many outdated man made laws are still in place in our church one of the most obvious being confession. All these things need to be looked at or the RC church will continue to decline again IMO but it is also the opinion of many people I speak to and that includes Priests

Onesimus

Broxi_Bear_Eire wrote: »

Sorry totally disagree it may not solve all the problems but it would help IMO. To many outdated man made laws are still in place in our church one of the most obvious being confession. All these things need to be looked at or the RC church will continue to decline again IMO but it is also the opinion of many people I speak to and that includes Priests

Confession is a Sacrament of the Church instituted by Christ himself and is handed down to us both in Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition. It is not Man made. Celibacy? I can see where your coming from, but I think that when one develops a relationship with Christ and then seeks to understand the great gift of Celibacy one can then understand why the RC would have made it a fixed rule in the 4th Century, not because she wanted to punish men. But because she wanted to lead them to a more intimate relationship with Christ. a more intimate relationship with Christ is not possible in the married state as the husband has to worry about the cares of the world and pleasing his wife as well as the Lord and is therefore torn between the two.

Just because a priest is a priest does not give his opinion any more authority. So what priests say don't really have an effect on me at all. I find it childish when people use the opinions of priests to try and give their argument more validity and believability.

totus tuus

The main reason for the vocations crisis, one that has affected all denominations whether they have married clergy or not, is the crisis of faith caused by secularisation.

Onesimus

totus tuus wrote: »

The main reason for the vocations crisis, one that has affected all denominations whether they have married clergy or not, is the crisis of faith caused by secularisation.

Well said.

Broxi_Bear_Eire

Onesimus wrote: »

Confession is a Sacrament of the Church instituted by Christ himself and is handed down to us both in Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition. It is not Man made. Celibacy? I can see where your coming from, but I think that when one develops a relationship with Christ and then seeks to understand the great gift of Celibacy one can then understand why the RC would have made it a fixed rule in the 4th Century, not because she wanted to punish men. But because she wanted to lead them to a more intimate relationship with Christ. a more intimate relationship with Christ is not possible in the married state as the husband has to worry about the cares of the world and pleasing his wife as well as the Lord and is therefore torn between the two.

Just because a priest is a priest does not give his opinion any more authority. So what priests say don't really have an effect on me at all. I find it childish when people use the opinions of priests to try and give their argument more validity and believability.

I don't have to give any reasons for my opinion and your condescending nature is what is wrong with many in the RC Church nowadays. As for confession in its original form you may be right but it has been bastardised by various popes as a means to bring money into the church. I find it amazing that people believe I need to go to my priest to confess when I am pretty sure I can be heard directly.
Again with confession it is clear that it changed when priests used it as a means to basically blackmail people into being allowed back into the church. As I said earlier what I gave you was an opinion and I will still listen to what Priests have to say on matters concerning the church.
I have to say this sacred scripture that has been handed down has been rewritten so many times to suit the needs of various theological historians and sacred tradition really what guff. God also made sure we had free will to enable us to change what problems are just fundamentally wrong. i will always put my opinions forward to try and change things I see wrong with the church

Benny_Cake

Would it not be better to look at increasing the role played by the laity to relieve the pressures placed on priests? Obviously a priest is required for the sacraments but there are a whole range of other ministries performed by priests which a layperson (with the right training) could do just as well. Many of the problems which the Catholic Church had was as a result of clericalism. While I support making celibacy optional (and women priests too, but that's a whole other debate), I'm not sure that either move, by themselves, would result in an influx of new priests.

Onesimus

Benny_Cake wrote: »

Would it not be better to look at increasing the role played by the laity to relieve the pressures placed on priests? Obviously a priest is required for the sacraments but there are a whole range of other ministries performed by priests which a layperson (with the right training) could do just as well. Many of the problems which the Catholic Church had was as a result of clericalism. While I support making celibacy optional (and women priests too, but that's a whole other debate), I'm not sure that either move, by themselves, would result in an influx of new priests.

I think the RC needs to decrease its age restriction for the Diaconate. right now it sits at the age of 35. Whats that all about?

And seeing as Jesus called people of all social backgrounds and education. The RC won't even let you become a brother of a Franciscan order unless you have your leaving certificate finished. Not saying that education is bad. It is very important but they seem to focus too much on a persons educational background as opposed to their close relationship with Christ and obedience to his Church. In the East we don't have this problem. People are welcome from all social backgrounds. its their morality and their closeness to Jesus that we focus on.

Some when they come into the Church may be more educated than others and move on to be scholars and thats great and thats how they serve ( as I said before Jesus calls many from different backgrounds ). Some priests just want to serve in other ways that does not entail being extremely well educated except for the fact of having basic theological training in the seminary. So why does the RC restrict this by looking for those of well educated backgrounds? Seems silly to me.

Onesimus

Broxi_Bear_Eire wrote: »

I don't have to give any reasons for my opinion and your condescending nature is what is wrong with many in the RC Church nowadays. As for confession in its original form you may be right but it has been bastardised by various popes as a means to bring money into the church. I find it amazing that people believe I need to go to my priest to confess when I am pretty sure I can be heard directly.
Again with confession it is clear that it changed when priests used it as a means to basically blackmail people into being allowed back into the church. As I said earlier what I gave you was an opinion and I will still listen to what Priests have to say on matters concerning the church.
I have to say this sacred scripture that has been handed down has been rewritten so many times to suit the needs of various theological historians and sacred tradition really what guff. God also made sure we had free will to enable us to change what problems are just fundamentally wrong. i will always put my opinions forward to try and change things I see wrong with the church

All that you have said above is not your fault my friend. Its the fault of many priests and families who have failed in giving their children the appropriate education in the faith. I'd invite you to take a class in your local parish called the RCIA in which you can learn about your faith more. I havn't the time ( because I'm married :) ) to school you on it all here.

CerebralCortex

totus tuus wrote: »

The main reason for the vocations crisis, one that has affected all denominations whether they have married clergy or not, is the crisis of faith caused by secularisation.

The main reason for the crisis of vocation and secularisation is that less people believe. That is something will be very hard to change, fortunately.

totus tuus

It's amazing how very little some catholics know about their faith. It's a good thing that Pope Benedict XVI has declared a 'Year of Faith' which commences on October 11th 2012 to November 24th 2013.

martinedwards

it USED to be that in big families the oldest inherited, the next either went to uni or became a priest.

but that was in the days when we lived in a Christian rather than secular society.

in todays age, in my humble opinion the 3 biggest blocks to guys deciding to become priests are

1. fewer committed RC guys around to hear the call
2. the celibacy thing
3. not wanting to be associated with the abuse thing because as we all know it was only a tiny number of priests involved, society groups the good with the bad and lands on the bad side.

totus tuus

CerebralCortex wrote: »

The main reason for the crisis of vocation and secularisation is that less people believe. That is something will be very hard to change, fortunately.

But not impossible!!

Onesimus

totus tuus wrote: »

It's amazing how very little some catholics know about their faith. It's a good thing that Pope Benedict XVI has declared a 'Year of Faith' which commences on October 11th 2012 to November 24th 2013.

and that includes all of us ( priests and religious too ). We are always pulling the net of knowledge out of the sea in order to get closer to Jesus.

Manach

I'm also mention the community of faith building services of Nuns as well. Their contribution and assistance to myself and immediate family when growing up left a lasting positive impression of the Church and shows how a life of faith lived in the service of others impacts a society.

MagicMarker

chopchopchop wrote: »

There seems to be a massive need for young Irish lads to become priests.

Why ain't they signing up do people think ?

I personnaly believe that the closing words of our Lord's High Priestly prayer in St. John's Gospel give the essence of that work of priesthood which is his and ours: "That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee. ... And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one: I in them, and thou in me."

Why don't you become a priest?

JCabot

CerebralCortex wrote: »

The main reason for the crisis of vocation and secularisation is that less people believe. That is something will be very hard to change, fortunately.

I don't think its less people believe its just less people believe the Roman Catholics version which really is only one interpretation. I believe there is more to life than just the body and we somehow have a essence which carries on I don't need to go to any organised religion or church to be instructed how to live or proceed or be accepted in this way of life after all these are just lay peoples opnions.

Benny_Cake

Folks, let's keep this on topic. Don't feed the troll.

CerebralCortex

Benny_Cake wrote: »

Folks, let's keep this on topic. Don't feed the troll.

I wasn't trolling, I was challenging the position that priest are necessary. Fortunately they're not.

Onesimus

CerebralCortex wrote: »

I wasn't trolling, I was challenging the position that priest are necessary. Fortunately they're not.

Hmm an atheist being asked do we need priests? Does society need to guess his answer?

Benny_Cake

CerebralCortex wrote: »

Benny_Cake wrote: »

Folks, let's keep this on topic. Don't feed the troll.

I wasn't trolling, I was challenging the position that priest are necessary. Fortunately they're not.

While there is a tiny smidgen of trollishness in that post (if one is a practising Catholic then priests ARE necessary), I wasn't actually referring to you.

ehcocmeo

Vocations in the Catholic Church are actually growing. Go the the US and they are not short of priests.

neilk32

totus tuus wrote: »

But not impossible!!

As people gain more widespread access to religion and become more educated. Religious belief will decrease, this is pretty simple.

It makes me sick to think of people that become priests giving up their lives in the hopes that what they believe is actually true are missing out on so many of the vital parts of life and the prime aspects of being a human.

endacl

neilk32 wrote: »

As people gain more widespread access to religion and become more educated. Religious belief will decrease, this is pretty simple.

Does anybody love the deliciousness of the irony?

Society has been educated out of these beliefs, by the institution that professes it.

Or to quote Sting, 'if you love someone, set them free'. I sat through religion classes. Luckily though, I also sat through reality based ones. Reality won.

Thanks for the education, church-run schools. I've used it well and wisely.

On a serious note though, there are fewer vocations because proportionally fewer people believe. Add to this the lack of societal pressure to 'have a priest in the family'. My own family didn't. We had a Christian brother who died a lonely,bitter and disappointed man, having been condemned to the order at 14. If he was 14 today, he might have lived a life of his choosing. Clerical child abuse wasn't just about priests raping little boys. I'd include my great-uncle. Never wanted to join. Never had a vocation. Never had a choice.

Not all the vocations of the past were actual vocations. Many were sentences.

PDN

neilk32 wrote: »

As people gain more widespread access to religion and become more educated. Religious belief will decrease, this is pretty simple.

It makes me sick to think of people that become priests giving up their lives in the hopes that what they believe is actually true are missing out on so many of the vital parts of life and the prime aspects of being a human.

Based on your punctuation, we've got a while to go until people become that educated.

pauldla

PDN wrote: »

Based on your punctuation, we've got a while to go until people become that educated.

Indeed. I spotted one sentence fragment, and a terrible misuse of relative clauses. Good thing this isn't the Leaving! Shame on you, neilk32, the Brothers would hang their heads if they could see you now. Now write it out 100 times.

However, he does have a point.

endacl

PDN wrote: »

neilk32 wrote: »

As people gain more widespread access to religion and become more educated. Religious belief will decrease, this is pretty simple.

It makes me sick to think of people that become priests giving up their lives in the hopes that what they believe is actually true are missing out on so many of the vital parts of life and the prime aspects of being a human.

Based on your punctuation, we've got a while to go until people become that educated.

What he posted is quite clear, all the same. Neil's thinking is sound. A Member surely, might be expected to set a good example regarding the implicit 'play the ball, not the man' rule generally observed here?

Manners dictate, and all that?

PDN

endacl wrote: »

What he posted is quite clear, all the same. Neil's thinking is sound. A Member surely, might be expected to set a good example regarding the implicit 'play the ball, not the man' rule generally observed here?

Manners dictate, and all that?

No, I don't think so.

If unbelievers want to make pompous and supercilious claims that religion persists because of a lack of education, then they should avoid the supreme irony of writing in a manner that betrays poor educational standards.

Neil set himself up in far too tempting a fashion for this member to avoid playing the man.

neilk32

PDN wrote: »

No, I don't think so.

If unbelievers want to make pompous and supercilious claims that religion persists because of a lack of education, then they should avoid the supreme irony of writing in a manner that betrays poor educational standards.

Neil set himself up in far too tempting a fashion for this member to avoid playing the man.

Saying that Christianity is the "correct" religion is more of a supercilious claim than me stating the fact that religious belief has a direct correlation with education. You just need to look towards Africa for proof of this, with the Catholic Church contributing to the spread of HIV by forbidding their followers from using contraception. You could also look towards the percentage of Atheists in the prison system in the US as an example of this, or the percentage of top tier scientists with a belief in a deity.

Luckily for you I am a computer science major and not studying for a degree in English. It's also lucky for me that there is facts to back up my claims and I don't have to avoid arguments by correcting somebody else's grammar.

Onesimus

I don't know how your remark that as people become more educated they will forget about religion. Jesus calls people to himself from all social and educational backgrounds. Many priests that are called are usually well educated scientists, philosophers, psychiatrists and the list goes on.

chopchopchop

This is a Christian Thread.
God is VERY real to the users (and me) of the christianity forum.
Why can't users who have no interest with God just use there own forums?

I find it an insult that people come on here to judge us for been different.

If you cant wake up to God, I actually feel sorry for you.

My honest opinion is there are alot of lads who would become priests but alot of young Irish lads are nervous fidgets and fear what people might think of them if they said that they are joining the seminary.
It's a shame.

Onesimus

chopchopchop wrote: »

This is a Christian Thread.
God is VERY real to the users (and me) of the christianity forum.
Why can't users who have no interest with God just use there own forums?

I find it an insult that people come on here to judge us for been different.

If you cant wake up to God, I actually feel sorry for you.

My honest opinion is there are alot of lads who would become priests but alot of young Irish lads are nervous fidgets and fear what people might think of them if they said that they are joining the seminary.
It's a shame.

Then they are not fit for the priesthood.

chopchopchop

Onesimus wrote: »

Then they are not fit for the priesthood.

No. They would be. It's just today, there is this thing where saying you want to be a priest to your freinds is like telling them your going to get a sex change op!
Now, I don't mean that in a funny way. Thats actually what it is like.
I have come across 3 guys in there 20's who had in there minds to join the seminary but didnt go ahead with it becase they felt the pressure from there freinds and family would not be worth the hassle.
In effect, the support that was there years ago for joining is GONE.

Onesimus

chopchopchop wrote: »

No. They would be. It's just today, there is this thing where saying you want to be a priest to your freinds is like telling them your going to get a sex change op!
Now, I don't mean that in a funny way. Thats actually what it is like.
I have come across 3 guys in there 20's who had in there minds to join the seminary but didnt go ahead with it becase they felt the pressure from there freinds and family would not be worth the hassle.
In effect, the support that was there years ago for joining is GONE.

Many Saints down through the centuries had the same hassle. It has nothing to do with ''the times'' of it. I say this lovingly and respectfully though, not in a condescending tone. Many who truly want to follow the Lord will meet up with that, if they can't deal with a bit of pressure they won't be able to deal with the demands of being a priest or even being Christian at all.

How you know you are right for the priesthood is when you do get this hassle. How you know your not just ready for the priesthood yet is when you can't deal with the hassle you will get from others.

rugbyman

chopchopchop wrote: »

This is a Christian Thread.
God is VERY real to the users (and me) of the christianity forum.
Why can't users who have no interest with God just use there own forums?

I find it an insult that people come on here to judge us for been different.

If you cant wake up to God, I actually feel sorry for you.

My honest opinion is there are alot of lads who would become priests but alot of young Irish lads are nervous fidgets and fear what people might think of them if they said that they are joining the seminary.
It's a shame.

Chop chop,

I am an athiest, but I regularly read ,and occasionally write in the threads.
i imagine ,no, I am sure I am welcome.

I gain quite a bit from what is written by some theists. I am quite willing to be convinced of the existence of a Supreme being, highly unlikely since i was over forty years evolving into an athiest.
As a corollary, would you be willing to listen to the arguements ,or read the threads of an athiest
Regards, rugbyman

PDN

rugbyman wrote: »

As a corollary, would you be willing to listen to the arguements ,or read the threads of an athiest
Regards, rugbyman

If we are, then we know how to find our way to the Atheism and Agnosticism Forum.

Are you willing to listen to the views of, or read the threads of, Arsenal supporters?

rugbyman

PDN wrote: »

If we are, then we know how to find our way to the Atheism and Agnosticism Forum.

Are you willing to listen to the views of, or read the threads of, Arsenal supporters?

Pdn,
of course you do, my question was directed to a person who said " why do non believers come on here"( my words from memory)

re arsenal, i wondered ,why ask this , then realised ,My name Rugbyman!!!!
not the forst time this has happened., Just a name , my son played Rugby!!!!

I vaguely think you PDN may be one of those who I enjoyed reading, also fellow called Jackass, but youwere a bit narky a few posts up.

Regards Rugbyman

thinking a bit more re reading Theist threads or Arsenal ones, I have already said I read other beliefs/codes and gain from some of them.

lmaopml

neilk32 wrote: »

Saying that Christianity is the "correct" religion is more of a supercilious claim than me stating the fact that religious belief has a direct correlation with education.

Yes, indeed, Catholic schools have a very good reputation.

You just need to look towards Africa for proof of this, with the Catholic Church contributing to the spread of HIV by forbidding their followers from using contraception.

Nobody 'forbids' free choice, neither does the Church do so...she recommends a 'good' choice built on a firm foundation and always has done as far as a loving relationship that involves the care of children is concerned. She does not recommend sex for the sake of sex - that's the difference and one that many people find very hard, and no doubt so do Catholics, but it doesn't undermine the truth of the message. It can take a while to see it though and even appreciate and not despise it.

You could also look towards the percentage of Atheists in the prison system in the US as an example of this, or the percentage of top tier scientists with a belief in a deity.

I don't know how to say or to convey that most people don't actually care about 'how' the message is conveyed, just so long as it is 'sound' - and it doesn't take a linguist to see it.

Luckily for you I am a computer science major and not studying for a degree in English. It's also lucky for me that there is facts to back up my claims and I don't have to avoid arguments by correcting somebody else's grammar.

I am really glad that you are studying - join the club.

Benny_Cake

neilk32 wrote: »

It makes me sick to think of people that become priests giving up their lives in the hopes that what they believe is actually true are missing out on so many of the vital parts of life and the prime aspects of being a human.

There was a time when boys in their teens went to a seminary and became priests, and many of them probably had no idea of what they were committing themselves to. That is no longer the case, however, anyone entering the priesthood in this country, at least, is of an age where they have had the opportunity to experience much of what life has to offer. Many have worked in other professions, and I'd hazard a guess that a great many aren't virgins. there have even been some priests who were married whose wives have passed on. I knew of one guy who wanted to be a priest after leaving college, the vocations director talked to him about it and advised him to go away for a year or two and think about it. As it happened, he didn't go through with it. So it's more than a little presumptuous to assume that men entering the priesthood don't know what they are getting themselves into - just thing, to do it these days it would have to be something you would really want to do. For what it's worth, I'm no longer a practicing Catholic, but I think there are many worse ways a person could spend their life than serving people's spiritual needs and being there for them through the darkest moments of their lives.

Skuxx

Onesimus wrote: »

It's not Celibacy that is the problem. There happens to be quite minor few married priests in the Eastern Rite. I've come across the wife of one but thats about it.

I think that many need to be educated on the great gift of celibacy and I think Pope John Paul II does this greatly in his theology of the Body. You can buy Christopher wests theology of the Body online and its great.

I'm genuinely not trying to be a troll and am interested in the arguments somebody to give me as to why celibacy could be considered a gift?
I'm an atheist, I strongly disagree with a lot of the churches teachings and ways, but I do enjoy learnin more about it!

Onesimus

alan1990 wrote: »

I'm genuinely not trying to be a troll and am interested in the arguments somebody to give me as to why celibacy could be considered a gift?
I'm an atheist, I strongly disagree with a lot of the churches teachings and ways, but I do enjoy learnin more about it!

Matt. 19:11-12 - Jesus says celibacy is a gift from God and whoever can bear it should bear it. Jesus praises and recommends celibacy for full-time ministers in the Church. Because celibacy is a gift from God, those who criticize the Church's practice of celibacy are criticizing God and this wonderful gift He bestows on His chosen ones.


Matt. 19:29 - Jesus says that whoever gives up children for the sake of His name will receive a hundred times more and will inherit eternal life. Jesus praises celibacy when it is done for the sake of His kingdom.


Matt. 22:30 - Jesus explains that in heaven there are no marriages. To bring about Jesus' kingdom on earth, priests live the heavenly consecration to God by not taking a wife in marriage. This way, priests are able to focus exclusively on the spiritual family, and not have any additional pressures of the biological family (which is for the vocation of marriage). This also makes it easier for priests to be transferred to different parishes where they are most needed without having to worry about the impact of their transfer on wife and children.


1 Cor 7:1 – Paul teaches that it is well for a man not to touch a woman. This is the choice that the Catholic priests of the Roman rite freely make.


1 Cor. 7:7 - Paul also acknowledges that celibacy is a gift from God and wishes that all were celibate like he is.

http://scripturecatholic.com/the_priesthood.html#priesthood-IV

That pretty much explains it.

Skuxx

Onesimus wrote: »

That pretty much explains it.

Are they saying then that all Catholics should be celibate or just those in the priesthood?
Would it be common for Catholics to be celibate by choice when not in the priesthood? (I'm guessing more so with the older generation...if it all?)

Onesimus

alan1990 wrote: »

Are they saying then that all Catholics should be celibate or just those in the priesthood?
Would it be common for Catholics to be celibate by choice when not in the priesthood? (I'm guessing more so with the older generation...if it all?)

There is a difference between chastity and celibacy. I cant remember the contrast right now though. Perhaps you should take a look at the CCC for better education on that.

In the Eastern Catholic Churches our priests can marry, but I think they must be married for five years beforehand before they can enter the seminary for priesthood. If their wife dies then they are to remain celibate for the rest of their lives. So if you wanna see a priest who takes good care of his wife come to our Church

Farcheal

-snip-

(repost below)

Farcheal

Onesimus wrote: »

That pretty much explains it.

To me it seems like people are saying jesus said something rather than an actual quote from the horses mouth.

Mathew's gospel was written long after the death of Jesus, I'd be much more inclined to listen to the testimony of Paul.

Onesimus

To me it seems like people are saying jesus said something rather than an actual quote from the horses mouth.

Its Gods word. Not somebodys shoddy testimony. The Holy Spirit speaks to us through scripture.

Mathew's gospel was written long after the death of Jesus, I'd be much more inclined to listen to the testimony of Paul.

Like I said, its really the testimony of the Holy Spirit who used Matthew as the inspired writer of the Sacred texts.

Picking a choosing whose testimony in the Bible we want to believe in means we don't believe in the Gospel but in ourselves.

Farcheal

Onesimus wrote: »

Its Gods word. Not somebodys shoddy testimony. The Holy Spirit speaks to us through scripture.

Like I said, its really the testimony of the Holy Spirit who used Matthew as the inspired writer of the Sacred texts.

Picking a choosing whose testimony in the Bible we want to believe in means we don't believe in the Gospel but in ourselves.

Point of fact is, Paul was a companion of Christ himself. Mathew was someone writing about him hundreds of years after his death. I was merely stating which of the two which would be more believable.

You do understand that God didn't make the bible right? Its a completely man-made piece of writing and imo cherrypicked to give the message the RCC wants to convey. (they destroyed many early gnostic gospels for example).

However this is off Topic.

As stated before, there is much more pressure upon young men to become priests. Being a young man I can tell you with certainty that in this much more secular world than say, 40 years ago, that Priests will become more and more scarce in this part of the world.

The RCC needs to get with the times. People no longer will sit idly By, they want change. For to survive and regain their flock the church needs to institute these changes. I believe a high ranking cardinal who died recently agreed in an interview that the church was 200 years behind times.