Cardinal Marx Calls for more Lay involvement

  • Thread starter Thread starter Pulvis
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Interesting. I’m not quite sure what to think of this.

What are these “lay ministers” supposed to do, exactly?
 
Germany is not the hotbed of orthodox Catholicism, so I am not surprised that there is only one man in formation to be a priest in this German archdiocese. In my diocese in Texas, we have about 40 seminarians…and that’s not including all the ones that go off to religious orders (about another 40). The priests here preach hard-identity Catholicism, and that is something a young man will give his life to. When you start allowing laymen to take over all the priestly roles, there is no longer any appeal to the ministerial priesthood. Plain and simple.

Sorry to hear that the poor Cardinal is having to scrape by with such emergency measures. We are witnessing the last moments of the death spiral of European Catholicism. So sad, considering their legacy.
 
Maybe they should be consulting with some traditional Midwest U.S. dioceses such as the diocese of Lincoln NE, which are not having these problems. My own diocese has added parishes rather than closing them.
 
dshix said:
Interesting. I’m not quite sure what to think of this.

What are these “lay ministers” supposed to do, exactly?
Click to expand...
He said laypeople. Sounds good…
Must have seen the oppportunity and a strength in their Strategic Planning to keep parishes open.The usual SWOT to improve.
Perhaps a priest in charge of more than one parish,and as far as Mass. And perhaps also less Masses a weekend in each parish but that is fine. And quite common here in ruaral areas where a priest does more than one parish in a weekend sometimes. Awesome effort…
Perhaps a few services weekdays( are they called like this in English when the priest can t attend…and leaves consecrated hosts?)
Smart. It was heartbreaking to see lots of furniture and stuff which belonged to churches in Europe at auctions in US.
Laypeople usually have their roles in a parish and serve keeping priests informed and having periodic meetings. So,nothing too unusual but a good idea ,it seems.
Go Europe…be creative and have people serve which is wonderful.
Xingu was a special case in Brazil. Deep in the Amazon their issues and specific problems were different.
Anyway,I am glad to read a beam of light for the Church in Germany. Hope it works.Just speculating out of enthusiasm myself,thinking aloud,I know… Best of wishes for Europe.
 
phil19034 said:
Well… Germany started the Prostantization of Europe, I guess Germany wants to finish the job.
Click to expand...
They did a very good job with Benedict…sehr gut!
Anyway,we are guessing.,and it is the pastoral what he seemed to be referring to.
Let s leave Germany safe from our speculations,Phil.,
I was playing it by ear honestly. I ll release them from my " such relevant" brainstorming,:)and still hope for the best.
 
Or they could admit that Germany doesn’t lead the way (and never should have), travel to places that actually have seminarians, and figure out what those places are doing that the Germans aren’t.

Just a thought.

My diocese, Arlington, at last count has 43 seminarians. We have 69 parishes. No crisis here. Maybe we should consider Germany mission territory and send them priests.

Marx wouldn’t like our priests though. They even do things like go to confession and think it’s important and stuff.
 
Havard said:
According to Maike Hickson (catholiccitizens.org), “In the year of 2016, only one new seminarian entered the diocesan seminary of Munich.” (Marx’s archdiocese.)
Click to expand...
More liturgically traditional dioceses do seem to attract more seminarians. Of course, those of a more progressive bent dismiss these results as seminarians of the “wrong sort” (I have seen that said of places such as Nebraska).

Our seminary is in the care of the local Benedictine monastery. I think they produce wonderful priests. And we do have vocations.
 
I think the good Cardinal needs to work on his country’s vocations crisis first.

Lay involvement is all very well, but just as a family needs a father, the Church needs priests.
 
It is rather uncharitable to assume the good Cardinal is** not **doing all he can for vocations. No one here is a Cardinal, and an argument from one’s own diocese’s success is rather provincial. Even in the United States not all regions have the same level of spiritual fertility. Europe is some of the most sterile “soil” in the world. Maybe someone here could do a better job than Cardinal Marx, but I would surely not assume so. Rather, such a venture would be and education in evangelization where so few are receptive.
 
Vocations come from families…poor bishops… It must feel like rowing in jelly sometimes…
 
graciew said:
Vocations come from families…poor bishops… It must feel like rowing in jelly sometimes…
Click to expand...
Yes and no. I have read a number of studies and testimonies from seminarians, former seminarians, and priests that say dioceses who have orthodox bishops and most importantly orthodox vocation directors have a good (or better) number of seminarians.

The dioceses that have modernist vocation directors and/or bishops often have very low numbers of seminarians.

From what I’ve read this is for a few reasons:
  1. if the bishop or vocations director has a modernist lean, they have a tendency to turn away a lot of seminarian candidates who have a traditional lean to them
  2. if the bishop or vocations director has a modernist lean, the seminarian candidates may often decide to join a religious order instead of the diocese, petition to become a seminarian for another diocese, or decide against becoming a priest altogether
  3. if the bishop of vocations director has a modernist lean, they may send their seminarians to seminaries that are less stellar than others; which may result in an orthodox seminarian leaving his calling or leaving for a religious order or other diocese.
  4. finally, if the bishop or vocations director has a modernist lean, it will eventually infiltrate all the parishes which can negatively affect vocations.
For example, in my home parish & diocese (the one where I was baptized and confirmed, not the Archdiocese of Philadelphia where I currently live); their vocations office had a modernist lean. At one point, the diocese only has 3 seminarians, and none of them were actually from the diocese. However, my home parish, which has been a good parish in the diocese has 5 Deacons and has a number of priests come from the parish in my lifetime. But all the priests who grew up in my parish have joined religious orders.

Today, the diocese has 5 seminarians and is doing a better job.

So having good, orthodox vocation directors makes a huge difference.
 
pnewton said:
It is rather uncharitable to assume the good Cardinal is** not **doing all he can for vocations. No one here is a Cardinal, and an argument from one’s own diocese’s success is rather provincial. Even in the United States not all regions have the same level of spiritual fertility. Europe is some of the most sterile “soil” in the world. Maybe someone here could do a better job than Cardinal Marx, but I would surely not assume so. Rather, such a venture would be and education in evangelization where so few are receptive.
Click to expand...
Dear Pnewton,

You are right in the considerations that you raise.

However, I am of the firm opinion that what generates vocations is to be staunchly orthodox rather than “wishy-washy”.

Cardinal Marx has often flirted with heretodoxy, as with his insistence on a “liberal” (aka heterodox) interpretation of Amoris Laetitia and his harping on “apologizing” to homosexuals (I think it should be the opposite - the LGBT movement should apologize to us, humbly beg forgiveness, and repent of their promotion of sodomy to youth). If he were to set his house in order, I am sure he would witness a steady increase in vocations. 🙂
 
phil19034 said:
Yes and no. I have read a number of studies and testimonies from seminarians, former seminarians, and priests that say dioceses who have orthodox bishops and most importantly orthodox vocation directors have a good (or better) number of seminarians.

The dioceses that have modernist vocation directors and/or bishops often have very low numbers of seminarians.

From what I’ve read this is for a few reasons:
  1. if the bishop or vocations director has a modernist lean, they have a tendency to turn away a lot of seminarian candidates who have a traditional lean to them
  2. if the bishop or vocations director has a modernist lean, the seminarian candidates may often decide to join a religious order instead of the diocese, petition to become a seminarian for another diocese, or decide against becoming a priest altogether
  3. if the bishop of vocations director has a modernist lean, they may send their seminarians to seminaries that are less stellar than others; which may result in an orthodox seminarian leaving his calling or leaving for a religious order or other diocese.
  4. finally, if the bishop or vocations director has a modernist lean, it will eventually infiltrate all the parishes which can negatively affect vocations.
For example, in my home parish & diocese (the one where I was baptized and confirmed, not the Archdiocese of Philadelphia where I currently live); their vocations office had a modernist lean. At one point, the diocese only has 3 seminarians, and none of them were actually from the diocese. However, my home parish, which has been a good parish in the diocese has 5 Deacons and has a number of priests come from the parish in my lifetime. But all the priests who grew up in my parish have joined religious orders.

Today, the diocese has 5 seminarians and is doing a better job.

So having good, orthodox vocation directors makes a huge difference.
Click to expand...
I do not know nor have asked much about seminaries,you know…Though one of my nephews is a priest,I am just his aunt and have encouraged him,that is it.

There is a span within what you call orthodoxy,so I imagine there must be many variables to lead a person to join in what best suits their calling.
Code: 
I might be " Sailing to Philadelphia" one day..:)
In the meantime,we will keep praying that for whatever reason,as you have mentioned,you keep having vocations,and also that those who are rowing have faith God is strengthening their arms for a reason…
 
The Church tends to flourish when people do their roles, with less blurring. Fathers and mothers are both crucial, but different. So are priests, deacons, religious and laity.

In my American diocese, we have very few vocations. We have had decades of many priests and sisters wanting to act a little more like laity (get your own apartment, more career and grad school orientation, etc). Teaching about the Mass is almost exclusively a “community gathering” where the priest is not exactly the celebrant, but facilitates everyone’s participation and unity. The consecration is much less important than the Sign of Peace, or lay petitions.

If the Consecration, and sacrament of confession are deemphasized, of course the seminary will be empty. But is there really more “lay ministry” than before Vatican II? NO!
Laypeople in 1960 put more emphasis on their marriages. One parent was home to take care of children, rather than the current obsession with material things.

Laity were far more active in bringing Catholic ideals into the public square. They impacted on the kinds of movies made, they hampered pornography, they opposed evils like legal abortion. Today’s laity are much more passive in the public square, tending
to follow the media on everything, rather than the Church.

If the cardinal finds all these capable laity, with time on their hands, ready to take on parishes, why is abortion still legal in Germany? Why are there so many problems with marriage, both legal gay marriage, and massive divorce among Catholic marriages? Sounds like a lack of “lay involvement” rather than an overflowing surplus ready to take on new challenges.
 
RomanoAmerio said:
Dear Pnewton,

You are right in the considerations that you raise.

However, I am of the firm opinion that what generates vocations is to be staunchly orthodox rather than “wishy-washy”.

Cardinal Marx has often flirted with heretodoxy, as with his insistence on a “liberal” (aka heterodox) interpretation of Amoris Laetitia and his harping on “apologizing” to homosexuals (I think it should be the opposite - the LGBT movement should apologize to us, humbly beg forgiveness, and repent of their promotion of sodomy to youth). If he were to set his house in order, I am sure he would witness a steady increase in vocations. 🙂
Click to expand...
👍
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top