Posted on 08/08/2007 10:51:03 AM PDT by NYer
It's all in the interpretation. In 1983 in Canon 204 �1 of The Code of Canon Law of the Catholic Church, the Church teaches that "Christ's faithful are those who, since they are incorporated into Christ through baptism, are constituted the people of God. For this reason they participate in their own way in the priestly, prophetic and kingly office of Christ. They are called, each according to his or her particular condition, to exercise the mission which God entrusted to the Church to fulfill in the world."
In 1987, more than 20 years after the second Vatican Council, Pope John Paul II said, in the Apostolic Exhortation Christifideles Laici (On The Vocation and The Mission of The Lay Faithful in The Church and in The World), that "The participation of the lay faithful in the threefold mission of Christ as Priest, Prophet and King finds its source in the anointing of Baptism, its further development in Confirmation and its realization and dynamic sustenance in the Holy Eucharist."
You will find the background and growth of the Lay Ecclesial Ministry here.
I agree decline in vocations is lack of faith for which a change of heart is needed. John Paul II's Veritatis Splendor, like so many other writings of this Holy Father, always culminated prayers to our Blessed Mother. Perhaps this is the key.
Most of the abuses which have followed the Second Vatican Council are not really the fault of the council itself, but rather a failure on the part of the Holy see to enforce the decisions of the council authentically. When a lot of the liturgical abuses and heresies reared their head the pope should have quashed them quickly and decisively. Instead, there was a lack of leadership on many issues in the last 40 years which have allowed these things to proliferate to the point that it will be difficult to root out all of them without a lot of tension within the church. Altar girls, Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion, Clown Masses, allowing pro-abortion politicians to receive communion have all given the wrong impression to Catholics that creates doctrinal chaos. Many people aren’t trying to foster their faith through the teachings of the church now, they are trying to to further their own teachings through the church by eliminating the parts of tradition which they don’t like.
what you’re missing is that many of our brethren on FR are as militantly anti-deacon as they are militantly anti-PLC.
I would respectfully submit that perhaps the Holy Spirit is no longer calling single men to the priesthood. Perhaps in this day and age and in this country - where life is exponentially easier than it has ever been anywhere throughout Church history and where one can have a paying job, a family and an active religious life because you’re not in the fields all day struggling to earn your bread - the Holy Spirit is telling us that now married men can support both a family and the work of the Church, and that there is no longer a real need for celibate priests. Celibate priests, after all, are a tradition, not a biblical edict.
/dons flameproof underwear
Altar girls are as offensive to you as pro-choice politicians receiving communions? Come on. One is AT WORST mildly annoying to the very orthodox, while the other is an abomination.
I used to think that something like what you’ve suggested might be true.
However, the problem that I have with that is that the evidence is in: orthodox dioceses in the United States are seeing their priestly vocations grow, and in the long-term (if not always in the short-term) will be able to meet the needs of their Catholic people; less orthodox dioceses are often vocations deserts.
So what does that suggest to me that the Holy Spirit is telling us? How about, the Holy Spirit prefers to send vocations where the men who become priests are more likely to be good, solid, orthodox priests, and sends fewer vocations where the men are likely to be mis-educated and malformed by bishops and seminary rectors & folks who don’t seem to actually care much for Catholic faith.
As well, if it were so that perhaps the Holy Spirit is decreasing celibate vocations in our First World nation, where the living is easy, then why are there even fewer vocations in Latin America and parts of Africa, where the living is so much more difficult?
It’s an interesting theory, but it doesn’t actually explain much of the data at hand.
sitetest
You didn’t read what I wrote. You introduced a new topic altogether. I didn’t say anything about “offensive” nor anything about the level of confusion that the various issues were causing in relationship to one another, I merely gave a list of things causing doctrinal confusion throughout the Church.
I am not speaking of laymen fulfilling various liturgical ministries, which is clearly something that was permitted by Vatican II, but of laymen leading parishes as “parish life coordinators” in the place of priests. This is not something that was ever envisioned by the Council, let alone permitted by it. There is no question that the proponents of a a more “democratic” Church use canon 204 to justify the over-use of lay ministers but that does not mean that Vatican II is to blame for the abuse of this canon.
I agree.
Agreed! The proponents of this measure (and we know most of them) blame this move as necessity driven by 'lack of vocations'. The majority of practicing Catholics in those dioceses are not hoodwinked by the psycho babble. They have seen young men who want to be priests, overlooked by the bishops, because they don't share "their vision". These same bishops often declare that they are "carrying out the mandate" of VCII. If you take a closer look, however, and ask how, why, when and who chose thse men to be bishops in the first place, you will then discover their 'hidden' agenda.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.