Ingenting:

At my parish we have a trained singer and musician who leads the music ministry. She is paid for that and does a very good job.

Parishes have different resources; it is not fair to compare.

And we have priests who are blessed to give us inspiring homilies, and have a lot to do in our big parish.

So it is good to be a bad singer as a Priests?
Most Priest I know who can sing well do not show of at all. So singing poorly is ok?

My question: if Priest can study to become teachers in Theology why can't they study to become musicians?

Priests and seminarians have too busy schedules. If we want to train them to be perfect at everything, then seminary would take forever and we wouldn't have priests. They have to prioritize what they do.

For the last two years, I learnt science (PCB), but did not study computer programming or accountancy. While it would be good and helpful if I had studied the latter subjects, I had to prepare for a fiercely competitive entrance exam and had to prioritize.

To use a Christian analogy, going for Mass is essential while wearing a scapular is good but not essential.

So it is with seminary training. Music is good and helpful but not essential. Theology is essential.

Sorry, but are you only capable of reading things in the most obnoxious way possible?

I would rather a priest be wise and holy than that he sing well and be impious and foolish. If he can be wise and holy and sing well, that's great. But two of those are much more important than the third.

Because the capability of any human to perform any task - whether it’s to sing, to learn, or even to breathe - is finite. There comes a point at which the human body says “no more” and shuts down. There are precious few priests as it is without imposing an unreasonable demand that would result in an even greater shortage of priests.

CC didn’t say it - maybe he didn’t even imply it, but what he said is making me think and wonder if you’re here as a mere troll. Credit where it’s due; it’s a different approach than usual.

Philosophy and Theology can be a bit intellectual and too much in your head for me anyway.
Music and art can express the Theology.
Art to me is the expression of the Theological thruths.
Your thoughts?

And music can be too physical/vocal and too much in your throat for me anyway. Two can play that game.

Can you explain how art expresses theology?

Sounds dangerously close to liturgical dance, if you ask me.

A person who struggles with theology and philosophy might not be suited for the priesthood. There are exceptions like St. Joseph of Cupertino and St. John Vianney (whose feast is today), but each was a special circumstance.

But no priest is ordained to be a musician.

Neither is a Priest ordained to be a Theologian at a university.
Why is it that Priests need much Theology in order to say Mass? How will it help them? I mean, how will serious intellectual studies lead a person to a sense of Liturgy?
Benedictines who knows about music and art are often best at having a sense of Liturgy so I don't know what you are talking about.

Priests do not just say Mass. Priests get a whole lot of theological questions from people, and they want answers.

What you don't seem to get is that to be a musician - i.e. to be more than just a person who happens to be able to sing or play an instrument - you need decades of dedicated practice.

Your posts continue to display a massive misunderstanding of the role and ministry of priests.

On weekdays, most priests spend no more than an hour to an hour-and-a-half celebrating Mass, and that's if they have two Masses that day and are accustomed to preaching extensively at daily Masses. On Sundays, it could be up to four hours (three Masses that are longer than daily Masses). Most priests don't sing at all at daily Mass, and even if they sing all the hymns etc. with the microphone on for weekends, they're singing 20 minutes, max, at each Mass. (There are priests who sing the whole Eucharistic Prayer, but they tend to be very good musicians.) In other words, you're focusing on about one hour out of the entire week.

To avoid errors in his homilies, he needs a good grasp of theology (it's surprising how easy it is to say something that's wrong).

What does he do the rest of the time?

1) He hears confessions, for which he needs to know moral theology. It also helps to have at least a basic knowledge of psychology.
2) He meets with people who have spiritual questions. For this, he needs an understanding of the process of spiritual growth, which is intimately connected both with human psychology and with the ways God is accustomed to working with us.
3) He fields calls/emails/message board posts from people who have questions of all sorts. In this current age, some are struggling themselves with issues of faith and reason, and many more have children or friends who are.

Those priests who are in charge of parishes also spend a massive amount of time on adminstrative matters, which are generally left out of the seminary curriculum and learned by observation when a priest begins his ministry as an assistant to an experienced priest.

Hopefully, he finds time to pray in all of this.

The current seminary system was established at the Council of Trent, Session XXIII, Chapter 11. It replaced hit-or-miss training whose defects were clearly showing in clergy who had been unprepared to deal with the Reformation.

The Second Vatican Council addressed priestly formation in its document Optatam Totius.

In the United States (I assume other countries have something similar), the concrete norms for seminary training are in the Program for Priestly Formation (PPF).

Finally, St. John Paul II's great letter Pastores Dabo Vobis lays out a comprehensive vision of what it is to be a priest in the modern world.

If you want to know why musical training is not on the forefront of priestly formation, and if you want to know what is and why, you need to review these documents. Frankly, if you continue to post the same sort of things you're posting in this thread, it will be a strong indication that you aren't really interested in the answers to your questions, and I (and I expect many others) will cease answering them.

So many Priests were not prepared for the reformation.
Does this mean that in order to talk with Lutherans one would need some Theology? I mean, can I a non-Theologian talk with Lutherans and other non-Catholics about Catholicism? I am only talking about doing this with people I meet in daily life and then not as a professional.
Let's say we were to dicuss morality. Would I need some special things for that? In order for us to ubderstand morality what do we need to study? You say that it is easy to say something wrong and I guess I err at certain times.

Ecumenical dialogue and moral theology require solid theoretical formation.

You don’t need to know the theologies of every religion/denomination/sect/whatever you wish to defend. A good Catholic apologist needs only to be well-versed and -grounded in Catholic theology. It’s up to the other guy to have a clear understanding of his own religion. If s/he doesn’t, it just makes your job easier.

Having said that, though, it can take years, decades even, to acquire the level of knowledge required to accurately defend Catholicism. Even then, there’s more than enough who still get it wrong (a certain Jesuit priest of undeserved public renown comes to mind).

Boy am I learning the importance of this these days....

Where does one find good readings on morality fot a non-Philosophy student?

Actually St Thonas knew both the arguments for and against and wrote them down in Summa theologiae. I mean, one must know both sides, right?