Is it right that priests go from vocation to vacation in retirement?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Beautiful
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
In our parish it was the frail “retired” priest who made the visits to the shut-ins, the seniors’ home and the hospital because the pastor didn’t have time to do that.
 
Beautiful said:
Read more at the address given

So you see that the idea of ‘retirement for priests’ is a new product of Vatican Council II. I believe that it is a by-product of modernist’s way of thinking that has and is destroying vocations in the priesthood. To even apply the term ‘retirement’ to any point in the priesthood smacks of worldliness.

While some here may be riding on the crest and last wind of some pretty old but somewhat functional cherished old timers you will be wagging your heads soon and seeing what I am trying to have you see. I too have cherished stories of old timer priests celebrating weekday Masses and other in-between times. That was two decades ago folks. Those days are nearly over for you folks and soon your days will be over too and these lovely heartfelt stories will be nothing more than old published posts on the internet. I suggest that all those bristling their spines about nothing need to go back and prayerfully read all the posts that I have on this thread. Face your future as a Catholic and pray along with me that we see a change but please note that I feel the whole notion of publicly dubbing priesthood as a job that qualifies for retirement has been and is a huge mistake and detriment to the priesthood.
Click to expand...
You quote a source that is not really authorativie, by Church standards, since it does not have any magisterial nor curial authority. It is simply a professor expressing his opinion, and a sociological professor, at that, not a theological one.

There are many, many retired priests and bishops who still play an active role in the ministry of the Church. However, it would be inhuman to expect these men to carry the load of men who are much younger than they are. They do the best they can under the circumstances. To lump them into a collective body that seems to want to move down to the southern part of the country to “escape” their responsibilities is not right. Granted, there are some who will have a debilitating condition. My former pastor was stricken with Alzheimers and moved in with his daughter (he was a widower who became a priest later in life), but, up until the day he could no longer perform his priestly duties, he tried to be active. One of our senior priests, who lives in residence at a parish, still drives out to celebrate Mass and the sacraments wherever he is needed. He is in remission from cancer.

There is one person for whom the retirement provision doesn’t apply. That is the Holy Father. He serves in that position for life. If I recall, Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, well into retirement age, (by AARP standards) was elected to be Supreme Pontiff at the tender age of 78. He is still very active and has made solid decisions and pronouncements.
 
The Fichter note is interesting and shows that it is a legitimate issue for discussion. It notes that before the retirement policy was put into place, generally in the mid '60s, the proportion of retired priests was much lower. But the article is very short and doesn’t address a couple things – first, that life expectancy has increased by a great deal – I haven’t looked up the figures, but probably at least 15 years – and that the other end of the increase in retired priests is the fact that the “pipeline” was shrunk so much by the post Vatican-2 vocations crisis. The proportion of active priests who are over 60 has also greatly increased.

Fichter offers no actual evidence or argument that the priest shortage is created or worsened by a mandatory retirement age…

I ask “does the mandatory retirement age help or hurt the process of assigning aging priests to ministries where they can best serve?” Does anyone have concrete evidence one way or the other?

But I agree with Allen537 that the articles OP cites don’t back up her conclusions, especially since the second one points out how expected retirement age has increased in the last two decades. But the question, “does a mandatory retirement age have undesirable consequences?” is worth looking into.

But each of us should spend the time we’re spending on this thread asking one young man if he’s ever thought about the priesthood…
 
Beautiful said:
I don’t believe the price of gold the certainty of growing old
But I believe in love I believe in old folks
🙂
Click to expand...
As long as those 'ol priest folks are being worked like a 40 yr old till they drop dead…no?

You are hung up on the word retirement. In a priests case, it simply means a change of duties and responsibilities. Not cessation of working.

I will also ask for the 3rd time…what are you actively doing in your parish to alleviate the pain of your problem ? It is a problem, and the problems will get worse so we, as lay folk, need to actively assist and support in numerous ways.
 
Beautiful,

I am not sure of your age, but if you reach 35, you know you are not the same when you were in 20’s. If you reach 40, you are quite different than when you were in 30’s. If you reach 60, then you know how difficult it is to be able to work as same as you used to when you are younger.

Those retired priests are still doing their jobs as priests - their daily prayer, mass, visiting nursing home, etc … they are still priests but they can’t do all the jobs as they used to. They are human like us.

If you prefer them to work, what kind of things do you think they can do?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top