Has anyone else thought about the similarites between being a Mormon missionary and being a Catholic priest?

1)They both have a uniform or a look that distinguishes them from regular members of their faith.
2)The both have a title they go by (Elder, Father)
3)They're both subjected to rules that don't apply to regular members of their faith (especially celibacy)

There are obviously some differences as well.

1)Priests are probably not required to address each other as Father.
2)The Catholic church probably doesn't have rules about clergy being alone with women.
3)Priests tend to be more knowledgeable than lay Catholics & missionaries typically just know what they've been taught all their lives.
3)The Catholic church picks up the tab for the expenses associated with the priesthood.

One wonders which group has a higher percentage of wankers?

elderolddog Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> One wonders which group has a higher percentage of
> wankers?

I would think the Catholic priests would as there isn't any way they're supposed to be getting it according to the rules.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/29/2016 09:30AM by scmd.

Your average Catholic priest has a fairly high intelligence and a post graduate theological degree which helps them to better know what they believe and what they are teaching. The priest also knows considerably more about the world and life than does your normal teenaged Mormon missionary.

Exactly.

I've never heard of a child being molested by a mormon missionary. Catholic priests are in the news fairly often because they molested a child. As a mormon missionary, you know that it's only a two year commitment and then you go home to women who want to date guys like you. For a catholic priest, it's a lifetime job unless you break your vows. In the mormon church, the sexes are often separated in ways that draw a person in to the religion (ie: go on a mission to find the right woman afterward, or find an RM to marry). In the Catholic church, separation of the sexes is a permanant condition if you want to attain spiritual advancement or enlightenment. So with no healthy sexual expression, you have nuns that get abortions, and priests that molest little boys.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/23/2016 06:38PM by azsteve.

The Elders that molest children are quickly rushed out their missions and everything gets covered up.

azsteve Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I've never heard of a child being molested by a
> mormon missionary. Catholic priests are in the
> news fairly often because they molested a child.
> As a mormon missionary, you know that it's only a
> two year commitment and then you go home to women
> who want to date guys like you. For a catholic
> priest, it's a lifetime job unless you break your
> vows. In the mormon church, the sexes are often
> separated in ways that draw a person in to the
> religion (ie: go on a mission to find the right
> woman afterward, or find an RM to marry). In the
> Catholic church, separation of the sexes is a
> permanant condition if you want to attain
> spiritual advancement or enlightenment. So with no
> healthy sexual expression, you have nuns that get
> abortions, and priests that molest little boys.



You've never heard of Mormon mishies molesting children. In Utah if a Mormon child molester has money. I.E. A good tithing source. They are not only not investigated but are protected. There are practicing pediphiles in Utah that are Mormon, that the police know about and can not prosecute them. Regardless of evidence. Because the Mo church does not want anymore bad press. Wanna screwd a kid? Join the Mo church. Do everything your bishop asks you to do. And pay pay pay. You'll never get caught.

https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=mormon+missionary+%2B+child+molester&start=10


I Goggled 'mormon missionary + child molester'.

If you click on the link, you'll be introduced to many specific instances. The church works hard at doing its best to make sure you and others remain in the dark about the few times that it does happen. Certainly getting set apart as a missionary doesn't quell the thoughts that generate the unfortunate activities.

I don't see any comparison.

Catholic priests have extensive training for their jobs. They possess Bachelor's degrees (at a minimum) and four additional years of full-time seminary training, including training in Bible studies, Latin, Greek, and pastoral counseling.

They receive *very* modest salaries (maybe 45K) along with housing and probably use of a vehicle. It's not a bad life, but neither is it luxury.

The mainstream Christian churches pay their ministers. The ministry is considered both a calling and a job. Church ministers in the mainstream denominations are well trained and work hard for their salaries, just as we all do.

For the Catholic priest, it's like being on a mormon mission for your whole life. You're owned by the church, can't have a family or get married, no sex at all for their entire lifetime. Don't expect their best and brightest to sign-up.

Yeah, right, azsteve, Catholic priests Father Gregor Mendal, Nicholas Copernicus, Georges Lemaitre, Theillard de Chardin, Thomas Merton, and all anonymous priests and religious who designed and built the great European churches and cathedrals of the Middle Ages, as well as the unknowns who translated the now lost tongues of the native Americans into modern languages, were completely, like, at the bottom of their
-Xxxxxxxxx

;;x;xxxxxx

Administration note. Stop the personnel attacks!!!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/28/2016 08:11AM by Eric K.

Oh, sorry steverino, I forgot Roger Bacon, founder of the scientific method, and William of Ockham, who conceived Ockham's Razor. Catholic priests both of them. Yeah, that ol' Church of Rome is sure lacking in the best and the brightest and is anti-science all right.

One would think that a highly scientifically trained, deeply critical thinker such as yourself here on RFM, azsteve, would know all that. Obviously you don't.

I don't want to get in an argument with you because, significantly, you are right. What I'm about to say is a lesser point.

Wouldn't you agree that the standards for Catholic priests have changed from the examples you cite? They are still much more mature and better educated than Mormon missionaries, but when you get back to the Middle Ages and even stretching towards the Renaissance, celibacy was not taken that seriously. It wasn't until the 11th or 12th centuries that priests were prohibited from having wives and families, and for centuries after that it wasn't unusual for them to have mistresses. To that extent, priests were more worldly than they are today. Correct?

And in the Middle Ages, the only way to get an education was to become a priest. The secular universities were not established until the 12th century (University of Paris, Oxford University) if I recall correctly. For centuries after that the church remained at least the equal of those universities. So until fairly recently the Catholics benefited from a lack of competition in attracting the greatest minds in Europe and elsewhere. Some of the men you list were, I believe, atheists or agnostics, again attesting to the fact that worldly men entered the priesthood because it was the best career path available if you weren't born into the royalty or the nobility.

If that is true, then it would make sense that today's priests are not generally as brilliant as was historically the case. Another way to put the question would be to ask if you could name a five or six priests from the last century that were in the same class as your examples. I could not.

Again, I'm not defending Mormon missionaries here, just asking/suggesting that the standards and expectations for priests have changed dramatically over time.

Different question.

Would the Catholic Church today encourage or allow a priest to dedicate his life to science? My intuition is that a Mendel, to take one of your more recent examples, wouldn't likely arise from today's priesthood.

True?

There are still priests who are scholars. The Jesuits in particular encourage that. I met a group of priests a couple of years ago who teach at a prominent Catholic university. They are mature, educated, thoughtful men.

One example of a more recent prominent priest/scholar is cosmologist Georges Lemaître (1894–1966,) whose ideas contributed to the later development of the Big Bang theory.

https://www.amazon.com/The-Day-Without-Yesterday-ebook/dp/B007ZS0T42/ref=tmm_kin_title_0?ie=UTF8&m=AG56TWVU5XWC2

You also have paleontologist and geologist Pierre Teilhard de Chardin (1881-1955,) who participated in the discovery of Peking Man.

In a March, 2014 Forbes article, writer John Ferrell attributes the suppression of modern priest scientists to the damaging actions of two popes: Pius IX and Pius X, the latter of whom he termed an anti-intellectual. Pius X initiated a purge that included excommunications, dismissals from office, and book bannings.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/johnfarrell/2014/03/27/about-those-nine-great-priest-scientists/#fd8823eb8f3b

Also, it is clear that fewer men in general are attracted to the Catholic priesthood, thus further shrinking the pool of priest/scientists.

This makes sense to me, Summer. I'm aware of Chardin and Lemaitre, but their contributions were less seminal than some of the earlier priest-scholars and priests like them are less common, at least in my limited view.

You mention the intervention of the Piuses, which makes sense. I'd also suggest, though, that a young scientist would be more attracted to the great universities than to the priesthood because that is where the greater resources and the greater network of likeminded researcher exists. So for a variety of reasons the priesthood (and the monasteries and orders) are no longer the only game(s) in town. There has been a change in degree, perhaps quality as well as quantity.

That does not detract from the main point you, William and others are making.

in the past, a non-inheriting son would enter the priesthood and hope to rise to a position of influence through the church. In modern times, in ireland at least, idiot children enter the priesthood to ensure food and a roof over their head (think father dougal from "Father Ted" - I have it on authority all those caricatures are based on real irish priests - if you have never watched look it up online as it is hilarious).

Ever since politicians received a pay packet, non-inheriting upper class children entered politics instead of the priesthood. Again, I would assume that in rural poorer areas (like in ireland), idiot children who would otherwise not be able to support themselves nor a wife and family, would be entered into the priesthood for economic reasons.

Academic pursuits was reserved for the merchants' sons, monks and the upper classes up to and including the late middle ages. In the 13th century (in scotland at least) the catholic church began 'schools', under instruction from rome, and they 'replaced' (ie in direct competition to) and eventually absorbed the traditional free schools which had been open to all who wished an education, although mostly only the children of merchants and nobles had time to pursue and complete an 'education'. This is the reason most of european history comes from the accounts of monks - they removed and rewrote all the other histories that they deemed heretical.

In comparison, mormon boys who become missionaries also do so with the hope that they will progress and rise to a position of influence within the church. Therefore, there is the greatest similarity between the two - the hope to rise up to a 'better position' in the future.

Orthodox and Anglican priests can marry. Lutherans too, but I have never heard a Lutheran clergy member called a priest. Even women can be Anglican priests. I know a couple where husband and wife are both Episcopal Priests. And now in much of the world Anglican Priests and Bishops can be openly homosexual.

Well, they did put Galileo under house arrest for life, but I guess that was an isolated instance. And even that had a happy ending because I heard that John Paul II pardoned Galileo 300 years later.

BTW Brother William, Adso of Melk says Hi. I ran into him a few days ago and he said that the two of you spent an interesting week in an Italian abbey some time back....

Best wishes.

I think being a parish priest can be a rather pleasant life. Some of the rectories where the priests live can be quite nice and comfortable. They might have housekeepers or cooks. They can enjoy alcoholic beverages and do many normal things such as read books for pleasure, watch sports on TV, and travel. They have interests and hobbies. Yes, they have certain religious duties that they must attend to, but it is not an oppressive lifestyle by any means.

As for the Catholic priesthood, it attracts a wide variety of people. There are some wonderful personalities and there are asshats, along with everything in between. Some are very bright and some muddled through their studies. It's a slice of life, much like other callings and professions.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 10/23/2016 08:58PM by summer.

Huge major differences are obvious. Mormon missionaries are young boys, no college to speak of and serve for a short time. Priests have one maybe two or three degrees and serve for life.

I see no similarities at all. None.

My experience with both Mormon missionaries and Catholic priests is that they're peeps, like the rest of us. I've run into some good people in both groups, and some lunkheads.

The biggest problem the mishies have is that they're young. It's hard to have the long view on stuff when you're only in your late teens or so. Nothing teaches like time. A couple priests with whom I worked years ago were, in contrast, older guys who had seen firsthand how life make fools of us all.

The missionaries for the most part haven't been smacked down by life. Given them time. It will happen.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/23/2016 09:55PM by getbusylivin.

their religious training on top of that. So they are more mature to begin with.

Don't many of them spend at least some time in Rome, as part of their training? (Language training, broadening of cultural perspective. . .)

I've met and listened to number of Catholics priests whom I admire very much, although I don't always agree, and I certainly have no plans to ever become a Catholic.

But in my experience, ordained priests are head-and-shoulders above pitiful little mishies in maturity and education.

Priests are long-term, mature, educated, professionals, and they keep confidences.

Missionaries are young, immature, untrained, bumbling, loose-lipped, short-timer kids putting in their time until they can quit.

NEVER had a catholic priest or nun come knock on my door unannounced and tell me my belief system or lack thereof was wrong

conversely : when their religious leader [the guy with the funny hat] make statements like: ordaining a women priest is a bigger crime than paedophilia or the only way to heaven is through the catholic church

who else makes those kinds of statements?

>>when their religious leader [the guy with the funny hat] make statements like: ordaining a women priest is a bigger crime than paedophilia...

He never said that. He may not want female priests, but he would in no way equate that stand to pedophilia. The Catholic opposition to female priests goes back to Jesus's male apostles. I may not like that, you may not like that, but that's what the popes have believed.

>>...or the only way to heaven is through the catholic church

That used to be more the position when I was growing up, but not now AFAIK. The Catholic church has learned to play nicely with others in that regard.

summer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> >>when their religious leader make statements
> like: ordaining a women priest is a bigger crime
> than paedophilia...
>
> He never said that.

Well, ok, the pope himself didn't, but the Vatican issued a statement that sure looks that way:

http://religiondispatches.org/vatican-equates-womens-ordination-with-priest-pedophilia/

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/16/world/europe/16vatican.html



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/28/2016 12:32PM by ificouldhietokolob.

The other thing here--and it is common to Mormonism--is the danger of having one person or one group claim to be the mouthpiece for heaven. As we know from local Leadership Roulette and from the loosening and tightening of policy in Mormonism, an omnipotent religious leader can reverse the course set by previous omnipotent leaders.

I used to object strenuously to the LDS church's dress standards which I thought had nothing to do with the religion and were imposed by conservative Republicans in diapers. You know, things like jeans, facial hair, etc., at BYU. I recall a time a couple of decades ago when my TBM mother phoned and excitedly informed me that BYU had loosened the dress code. I replied that it was not the dress code in its various forms that bothered me but rather the fact that the church and BYU felt they could issue such codes. I don't want them in the appearance business at all and I am painfully aware of the reversibility of such things when leaders think they can do whatever they want.

I frankly view the LGBTQ problem the same way. The church was once silent on such things, then decided to condemn that class of people, was loosening up somewhat in the 2000s, then tightened up with Prop 8 and finally explicitly brutalized them last November. A looser or more tolerant policy in the hands of an authoritarian regime is no safe harbor. The problem is the belief that any person or group has universal and unlimited authority.

"They took great pains to distinguish the two, claiming there are two kinds of such crimes—one related to the sacraments and the other to moral issues. A Vatican official said, 'The two types are essentially different and their gravity is on different levels.' "

http://religiondispatches.org/vatican-equates-womens-ordination-with-priest-pedophilia/

I'm not trying to excuse the Catholic church, because I think their opposition to female priests is ridiculously outmoded. But I think they are trying to distinguish between the two. Plus, this is likely the Curia speaking (the entrenched,conservative Vatican bureaucracy that even the pope has a hard time fighting.)

Catholic priests receive a thorough, diverse education before they become priests. Mormon missionaries are still wiping their nose with a high school diploma and a certificate of completion from the MTC.

Catholic (Roman) priests want to be priests, and go thru years of discernment before they are ordained. Their promise of celibacy (for a diocesean priest) or vow of celibacy, poverty, obedience (for the religious priest) are voluntary and made after years of the discernment processes. They are mature men when they make these promises/vows, not teenage boys.

There are other priests, within the "catholic" church, that are allowed to marry. Your question is limited only to the Roman/Latin rite.

There is no peer pressure to become a priest.

Comparing a Catholic priest (or even religious brother) to a Mormon missionary is really laughable, if one really understands Catholicism



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 10/29/2016 01:14PM by angela.

Of course my intention was not to say they're alike in every respect. My point was to compare AND contrast. I agree with all the differences pointed out. Another difference is that there's no social stigma to not wanting to become a priest.

That's just it. There IS no comparison. It's like trying to compare a physician with high school kids who travel to third world countries for a few weeks to give immunization clinics. I mean, c'mon.

scg73 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Of course my intention was not to say they're
> alike in every respect. My point was to compare
> AND contrast. I agree with all the differences
> pointed out. Another difference is that there's no
> social stigma to not wanting to become a priest.


A diocesen priest is only required to where his clerics when he is doing his priestly duties. They were civies otherwise. Religious priests where their habits according to their orders rules.

Calling a priest "father" or "mgsr" etc is a sign of respect, but not often enforced. At least not in the parishes I know.

Again the whole "subjected to rules" comparison. 1) Priests willingly make their promises/vows after YEARS of discernment. And not all churches within the "Catholic" church have celebrate priests. There are rites that are open to married clergy.

If one really knows Catholicism one realizes that the "comparisons" are,indeed, so superficial that it's laughable.