Recently I heard a comment saying we need more radical priests. To put this in context what was being advocated for, were priests who adhered to the truth of Catholicism and advocated for tradition and not modernized priests who affirm people. This got me thinking. Say that a priest is charismatic, for the most part orthodox, but not completely. Lets say he teaches decently, but never the hard truths; he never bring up the things that shake up the modern Catholic. But, because of his light and affirming nature thousands of people attend Mass at his parish.
Now lets assume there is another priest. He is a grumpy, hardline traditionalist. He is not uncharitable, but he isn’t all smiles and jokes. He is stern, honest, speaks the hard truth and does not affirm sin. Let us also suppose that he carries out an extremely revenant mass, with focus on God, and not the people. However, because of his disposition and stern, yet truthful homilies only 60 people attend his mass.
Which is better? Is it better to have a semi-truthful heterodox priest who is consumed in the modern world but gives people the experience they want? Or is it better to have a stern, hardline, orthodox priest who will give it to you straight and point you down the proper path of reverence, even though many people leave because of it?
Should the Church save face value and bring many in, regardless of truth? Or is it better to have a small number of truly faithful people?
Things to ponder my friends…