Good Priests Have to Hit the Books

[Victor]

VATICAN CITY, FEB. 3, 2010 (Zenit.org).- Those who minister the Word of God must be well prepared, and the "cultural dimension" of faith needs to be cultivated, says Benedict XVI.

The Pope affirmed this today when he reflected on the life and teaching of St. Dominic Guzmán during the general audience in Paul VI Hall. He noted "the great contribution made by St. Dominic to the renewal of the Church in the Middle Ages."

The Holy Father emphasized the saint's insistence on being well educated and prepared for the apostolate.

http://www.zenit.org/article-28246?l=english

I've been hoping the Pope would do this long ago. Better late then never.

[Dunemeister]

Why not educate the laity? (This is a problem throughout the church, not only with its RC expression.)

[Terrywoodenpic]

Sounds right... I am surprised it is not the norm.
In a top down organization like the Catholic Church it would seem essential.

Why do you think he felt the need to emphasize this ?

[Victor]

There is some stagnancy in different areas of the Church. Theologians are moving forward, while seminarians aren't being given an introductory course to apologetics and how to apply it to a changing and challenging society. Not all priests mind you, but old answers are being regurgitated as if it will have the same affect it had 30 years ago.

There is definately a problem. But it's not easy to fix, because one must concede that there is a heirarchy of priorities in the life of a priest and resharpening your intellect on matters of today sometimes take a back seat.

You can easily stump some priest by asking him a question about New Atheism, mysticism, or simply engaging any of today's movements and arguments.

It doesn't make it any easier that there is a shortage of priests and more responsibilities on trickling down to them. Some priest don't have a financial board of parishoners to help them with all the nuances of running a parish.

There is no easy fix but they have to hit the books or the implications of not doing it can make things worse.

[Terrywoodenpic]

If they had to spend a few hours on a site like this, they would at least see some of the demographic and the problems they need to address...useful answers are a more difficult problem.

[Victor]

Originally Posted by Terrywoodenpic

If they had to spend a few hours on a site like this, they would at least see some of the demographic and the problems they need to address...useful answers are a more difficult problem.

No answer is ever easy when you have people on the other end. Even a good answer can go unnoticed when the people are waiting for another answer. Not all answers speak to our hearts.

[Dunemeister]

Originally Posted by Victor

No answer is ever easy when you have people on the other end. Even a good answer can go unnoticed when the people are waiting for another answer. Not all answers speak to our hearts.

So is the problem with the priests who deliver the message or with the audience who receive it?

And I wonder what you have to say about my original question about educating the laity.

[Victor]

Both...IMO.

I thought I answered your question. But there is that possibility that I might have misunderstood you....sooooooooo....let me ask, what exactly do you mean by educate? I'm fairly certain you are aware that priests don't go to the university of phoenix and get their degree online. So assume you are talking about something more akin to the topics we see here on the forum, correct?

If so, that is precisely why I mentioned apologetics.

I will however add that there are some in the Church (and I'm aware that we might use this word slightly differently) that feel there is no place for apologetics. I don't understand it personally but it's certainly a part of the Church.

[Dunemeister]

Originally Posted by Victor

Both...IMO.

I thought I answered your question. But there is that possibility that I might have misunderstood you....sooooooooo....let me ask, what exactly do you mean by educate? I'm fairly certain you are aware that priests don't go to the university of phoenix and get their degree online. So assume you are talking about something more akin to the topics we see here on the forum, correct?

If so, that is precisely why I mentioned apologetics.

I will however add that there are some in the Church (and I'm aware that we might use this word slightly differently) that feel there is no place for apologetics. I don't understand it personally but it's certainly a part of the Church.

What I meant was giving the laity the opportunity to participate in high-level discussions of theology and apologetics. That is, open the seminaries to the laity so they can have the opportunity to reflect deeply and broadly on their tradition. In the Protestant tradition, where I currently find myself ensconced, this is generally reserved for those who have the money to afford exorbitant tuitions. Occasionally, churches sponsor people, but only those who are planning to become priests or ministers or deacons. What about those who will continue to slog in the hurly burly of regular life? Why can't they join in the discussion? I imagine the church (broadly conceived) has the resources to do this, and since I don't have a lot of money, I've always felt unfairly excluded. I wonder if some of my RC friends feel the same way.

[Victor]

Originally Posted by Dunemeister

What I meant was giving the laity the opportunity to participate in high-level discussions of theology and apologetics. That is, open the seminaries to the laity so they can have the opportunity to reflect deeply and broadly on their tradition. In the Protestant tradition, where I currently find myself ensconced, this is generally reserved for those who have the money to afford exorbitant tuitions. Occasionally, churches sponsor people, but only those who are planning to become priests or ministers or deacons. What about those who will continue to slog in the hurly burly of regular life? Why can't they join in the discussion? I imagine the church (broadly conceived) has the resources to do this, and since I don't have a lot of money, I've always felt unfairly excluded. I wonder if some of my RC friends feel the same way.

Hopefully somewhere in my ramble I address your question.

Note…that I don’t think I’m in complete disagreement with you here (we shall see).

Bare with me as I give you some history and context of my past as it’s relevant to how I came to understand it.
I remember as a protestant I saw most Catholics I knew as worldly and secular and they didn’t seem to care much about Jesus, the Gospel, or even their own Church. I could easily stump them with my arsenal of bible verses that I had memorized. It frustrated me to no end that they had such horrible justifications for what they believe. However, I slowly started to understand that people who are Catholic by default; if you were to ask them what they are, they’ll say, “Oh, I’m Catholic.” But what they really mean is, “My ancestors were Catholic.” It’s more an ethnicity than a religion for some people. It’s what they are, not what they believe.

That just seem bizarre to me as a protestant. And it’s true what G.K. Chesterton once said that the best argument against Christianity is Christians. That is certainly true of Catholicism. Pope John Paul II, putting it politely, says, “The Catholic Church does not forget that many among her members cause God’s plan to be discernible only with difficulty.” (Ut Unum Sint, 11). But then I asked myself “is that really an argument against the truth of the faith?” I don’t see how. To argue that Catholicism is untrue because it doesn’t transform the lives of those who don’t practice it, is like arguing that aspirin doesn’t work because it doesn’t relieve the headaches of those who don’t take it.

Not saying you are making such an argument……but I know I was. I realize Protestantism is large enough to have us all experience it differently of course and it’s rather refreshing you at least have the sense to see that lack of education is a problem that plagues all denominations/religions.

It took some time to understand why this is the case in Catholicism. The simple answer is that most of them really don’t want to. Why? Some are too busy living their faith to really come to fully comprehend all the nuances. There is so much going on in parish life that high-level discussions simply take a back seat. There are some cultural blockages in there as well. They are used to the Church giving them the answers. There is literally hundreds of reasons why and perhaps all of them have some validity to them.

BTW, as far as I know, people are allowed to visit seminaries.

Also, I’ve been a part of several high-level discussions myself. It included priests, theologians, and canon lawyers all in the same room. There is A LOT of programs, materials, and opportunities out there. There really isn’t any excuse for a catholic at the very least to know their faith and even get into the more beefy topics if they wish.

So yeah, I suppose I do feel the same way, but I wouldn’t blame the magisterial for this one.