End the bottleneck to grace: An alternative way in which to form and deploy new priests

[Walking_Home]

We are talking about the priesthood here – not the deaconate. While a deaconate is part of Holy Orders – it is not on the same level as the priesthood.

 

[tafan2]

The Church did reform how she trained priests.

Much of what you now propose was how it used to be done throughout the history of the Church.

It didn’t work then, as we see by reforms, and won’t work now.

While I give you credit for thinking outside the box, it seems to me that you want to reduce a priest to a mere “sacramental machine”. That is not what the ministerial priesthood is about

I don’t think this is accurate. I would suspect the two major (their were probably lots of other more minor reforms) regarding formation of priests occurred during/after Pope Gregory VII’s (Hildebrand) reforms and as part of the counter-reformation. But prior to either of these, the church did not have a predominant “worker priest” as described in the OP. I think what is described in the OP was likely the case in the very early Church, and probably occasionally popped up in various (remote) locals and times throughout history. But I don’t think it was ever a widespread. Now, please don’t think I support it because I say it may have been that way in the early church. I am not an ancientists

 

[tafan2]

We are talking about the priesthood here – not the deaconate. While a deaconate is part of Holy Orders – it is not on the same level as the priesthood.

I understand that. But there are certainly similarities between the OP’s suggestions on the formation of these priests and the way the deacons are trained today. Also, they are both “work-clerics”. So I bring it up because the deaconate program does show how the formation could work and because it would likely, overtime, empty the ranks of the permanent deaconate.

 

[Erikaspirit16]

We’ve crossed paths in another thread, and I think we pretty much agree.

However, in this case, I think you need to flip the question: What happened in the 60s and 70s to cause so many priests, brothers, and nuns to leave their orders? And are those reasons still responsible for today’s lack of vocations?

My own opinion is that by taking the “religion” out of vocations, they (“reformers”) made vocations unnecessary. If you can be a social worker, teacher, nurse, etc. without being a nun, why be a nun? If you can head the liturgy committee of the local church, why be a priest? Etc. In other words, the emphasis was flipped: previously you were a nun who just happened to do social work. By the early 70s, you were a social worker who just happened to be a nun. And, to top it off, you probably felt you could be a better social worker by NOT being a nun. So off you went. See “Index of Leading Catholic Indicators” by Kenneth Jones.

As examples, you can look at the destruction of the IHM order in California after they were exposed (by their own leaders!!!) to Carl Rogers’ seminars. He destroyed their religious rationale, so of course virtually all of them left the order.

Or, Mary Johnson. She seems to be relatively unknown, and I was certainly unaware of her before attending one of her talks. She was a nun for about 20 years, and she ran the initial training (in Rome) for the Missionaries of Charity (Mother Teresa). She was the main aide who accompanied Mother Teresa on her travels, so she knew her well. Then she had a lesbian affair with another nun, an affair with a priest, and became sort of a New Age guru. http://maryjohnson.co And of course she has a book, “An Unquenchable Thirst.”

And of course the lack of vocations is not a national issue, it’s a local issue. Some seminaries are full. Some dioceses attract a lot of candidates. How do they do this? Easy: They put the emphasis back on religion.

And yes, I agree with someone above who talked about all the administrative tasks a priest has. I ran into this when my father died–I was trying to schedule a funeral Mass, and the priest went over his weekly schedule with me to find an open slot. He seemed to be spending almost all his time in meetings and dealing with administrative issues. I remember thinking to myself “When does he find time to pray?” And I don’t know the answer to that question. So if you like being the manager of a large enterprise, become a priest. If you want to spend your time thinking about religion, maybe you’re better off NOT becoming a priest!

 

[Augustinian]

Yet somehow that does not apply to permanent deacons? More absurdity – and just another excuse.

The permanent deacons I know are retirees, men who are no longer in the workforce. I don’t know if they are “average” or not, but do you know how many deacons work for a living?

 

[tafan2]

The permanent deacons I know are retirees, men who are no longer in the workforce. I don’t know if they are “average” or not, but do you know how many deacons work for a living?

The vast majority of the deacons around here are still employed and working for a living at the time of their ordination. I think our diocese actually targets men between 35 and 55. While the lower age limit is rigidly enforced, I believe retired men are discouraged. As to acting deacons, I would say more than 50% are still employed. At our parish, we have one retired and two working, and I have three other friends who are deacons and all are still working for a living.

 

[Augustinian]

I think our diocese actually targets men between 35 and 55. While the lower age limit is rigidly enforced, I believe retired men are discouraged.

Fair enough, I was only basing my analysis on my own observations which are very limited.

 

[commenter]

We have focused so heavily on the lack of priests as the “bottleneck” but the decline in strong Catholic marriages is killing parishes and dioceses.
Our diocese has greatly expanded the availability of Confession, but there are few lining up to go, no matter how friendly and available it is.

The problem is laity, especially those under 60 or so, don’t have the religious education or much preaching about why Confession is needed in the first place. They don’t have any context for the sacrament.

The Council of Trent required seminary training because the old apprentice/informal personalized training was no longer sufficient. Given the growth of misinformation, false teaching, faulty reasoning or attack on Reason in 2017, the need for seminaries is stronger than ever. Seminaries in recent years have extensive internships in parishes. Much of the problems in the world are due to bad philosophy, so yes, we do need priests trained philosophically.

 

[Loud-living-dogma]

It seems to me that this whole idea is “bass-ackwards”. We have a shortage of priests, so the ones we do have, we should send them out into the regular workforce? What am I missing here?

 

[commenter]

How about a high school teacher or college professor who is also a Catholic priest, able to offer the Mass (sometimes in Latin!) and hear confessions before or after classes each day? How about an electrical engineer/Catholic priest who works for a private company located in the huge business park on the outskirts of town who is able to offer early morning, noontime and/or after work Masses for those employed by businesses in the park?

My diocese has gone from having 400 priests working as full time teachers in 1963, to today about 30. This is a sad loss, because teachers, especially below the college level, don’t teach a subject, they teach and form a young person.
But the electrical engineer? Sure a priest could use this as an opportunity to minister to others a little bit, or working in a light house, or anywhere else. But some jobs are more likely to use his priestly gifts than others.

Again, you have “The confession light is on for YOU” with extra confession times and evenings during Advent, and penance services in afternoons and evenings, already. Electricians who understand the sacrament will find a day or time convenient. But most won’t understand the need or value of the sacrament, no matter how friendly, and non judgmental, and available it is.

 

[Teek]

Well, I have three sons. If everyone here wouldn’t mind praying for them to be open to God’s will for their lives and that they would be protected from all influences that would lead them to reject God’s call to their authentic vocations…well, that can’t hurt.

Anthony, Michael, and Joseph. Two of them already want to be priests. The youngest—well, we all pray so much for that little rascal we might be overdoing it. He’ll probably be a saint! Shouldn’t have named him after St. Michael. Not a very tamable personality in that one.

Sincerely, though. I highly recommend the book “In the Shadow of His Wings” by Father Gereon Goldman. It stresses the impact that the intercessory prayer of individual people had on his vocation. Various individuals who took him as their personal intention and gave him to the Lord…well, just read the book. My 13 year old son loves it.

Thank you for your prayers.

 

[tafan2]

With all due respect Deacon, my experience does not match this. Several years ago, our pastor started having daily confessions at our parish. We literally have daily lines that are quite long. There are several other parishes in this area that went from the typical one hour on Saturday to two or three times a week, and they also have long lines for all of their confessions. As the pastor at the time said, if we want more people to go to confession, we have to show them that we are their waiting for them in the confessional.

As to the Eucharist, I believe we have witnessed something similar in this area, if not quite so apparent. More parishes in this area now have daily masses twice a day instead of once and many more daily masses are available early in the morning, at noon, and in the evening. Our parish’s evening mass often has 100-200 people at it. A neighbor parish has an evening mass now that overfills its daily chapel (seats probably 50 or so I am guessing). Another parish close by has both a 6:30am mass and a 8:30 am mass. The 6:30am mass overfills their daily chapel every single day, it seats 60, I counted.

No, if these sacraments are widely available, they will be attended. They are becoming more widely available and the result is apparent. But that is at the cost of priests having to have dispensations from the Bishop to say 3 or 4 masses on Sunday and often 2 on weekdays.

 

[omgriley]

The world has changed and the Church has been slow to adapt.

Here we go…

 

[otjm]

Most of the priests I have known who left the priesthood in the 60’s/70’s/80’s in our archdiocese did so to get married.

As to why sisters left their convents, Carl Rogers had some influence on some. But there was also a squeeze, particularly as costs started rising due to multiple issues, particularly among the orders which had a lot of teachers. Some of that had to do with schools closing as they could not afford teachers’ salaries (often the sisters were paid even less than lay teachers) and that issue soon spiraled out of control. Some of the results were due to orders changing their charism (for example, abandoning the charism of teaching). Other results were that orders went from what was often a strict and autocratic chain of command to a more free wheeling consensus modality. In short, some were lost when there was no longer a strict regimen of life; others left as community life dissolved or reshaped in a looser format. it was far more than simply your issue of social work. And some left to get married. Undoubtedly the “sexual revolution” of the 60’s had some impact, none of it to the good.

 

[vsedriver]

It’s not the Internet, video games, drugs, porn, competition from competing faiths, etc., etc. These things are merely attempts by some use to fill the spiritual vacancies in their lives

so you feel a lack of exposure to the sacraments is what is responsible for a lack of priests?

I think it is that it is harder for a rich man to get into heaven than for a camel to go through the eye of a needle.

Societies that are poor in materials seem to be richer in spiritual wealth. They also have more priests. We can see that in Africa and Asia.

I think the real problem is that the priesthood is not an attractive vocation to the vast majority of eligible men. The sex scandal, mainstream media, and birth control have more to do with it than a lack of exposure to the sacraments.

So you want a part time priesthood? You expect a man to juggle a job, a family, and priestly duties? I think that would be a total nightmare. Or is it that you think the permanent deaconate should be raised to the level of fully functioning priest?

 

[Kei]

This would just decrease the respect for the priesthood. It is a way of life.

I also question how good a priest can be if he’s not formally trained and formed and has all sorts of side jobs.

Also canon law says the Eucharist should be celebrated in a properly beautiful place, unless this cannot be done (ie persecution).

Trust that God does what is Right.

I suggest that the reason so few take confession is that they don’t know that they should have it. Where I live the Confessional is available before mass but barely anyone goes to it. I recall a survey saying a ridiculously low percentage of Catholics believe in Transubstantiation.

 

[vsedriver]

The total number of priests however would grow profoundly. Not just incremental growth. Profound growth.

if this was true why aren’t we awash in deacons? Do you believe men are avoiding the deaconate because it just doesn’t measure up to the priesthood?

 

[commenter]

As to why sisters left their convents, Carl Rogers had some influence on some. But there was also a squeeze, particularly as costs started rising due to multiple issues, particularly among the orders which had a lot of teachers. Some of that had to do with schools closing as they could not afford teachers’ salaries (often the sisters were paid even less than lay teachers) and that issue soon spiraled out of control. Some of the results were due to orders changing their charism (for example, abandoning the charism of teaching). Other results were that orders went from what was often a strict and autocratic chain of command to a more free wheeling consensus modality. In short, some were lost when there was no longer a strict regimen of life; others left as community life dissolved or reshaped in a looser format. it was far more than simply your issue of social work. And some left to get married. Undoubtedly the “sexual revolution” of the 60’s had some impact, none of it to the good.

Also, there was a flight from doctrine, and uncritical acceptance of the secular media for their own priorities.

 

[commenter]

Most of the priests I have known who left the priesthood in the 60’s/70’s/80’s in our archdiocese did so to get married…

Undoubtedly the “sexual revolution” of the 60’s had some impact, none of it to the good.

The priests I knew, or read about, who “left to get married” also went on to publicly dissent from the Catholic Faith on matters unrelated to celibacy. I am sure there are exceptions, especially among those who entered sem as 9th graders. But I think there likely was private dissent on the Faith, before any decision on marriage/exit priesthood. So marriage was not so much a causative reason, as concurrent with other things.

 

[Teek]

Thank you! What you are doing is so important. God bless you!