Is there truly a priest shortage or is there only a diocesan priest shortage?

[FatBoy]

If there is only a diocesan priest shortage then why can’t the religious priests be required to become diocesan priests?

 

[Trishie]

I find in Australia that due of the importance of preserving community fraternity, parishes served by Order priests sometimes have up to three resident priests, as indeed my parish has, and two other parishes served by different Orders in the locality also have two or more priests. Diocesan parishes generally seem to have only one priest per parish. Our parish Order has withdrawn from a couple of parishes in the last few years in order to preserve the fraternity that is part of a religious community…but Order priests are also getting older and having few aspirants, therefore effectively, it appears that both Order priests and diocesan priests numbers are declining.

Heavenly Father, in Jesus’ name, let those whom You call to Priesthood respond willingly, and receive all the support and education they require to receive Ordination. Grant them health and wellbeing, and lead them to be true sons of the Church, living and teaching the gospel of Jesus. Amen

 

[nightwalker]

If there is only a diocesan priest shortage then why can’t the religious priests be required to become diocesan priests?

They are two separate callings. If you enter a religious order (particularly monastic orders) there are two issues to discern: first are you called to the religious life , then are you called to the priesthood.

Many religious priest, are religious first, coming out of contemplation (if at all) to some specific service. They are not called to diocesan life, and many holy priests would make poor pastors.

 

[Phemie]

Even religious Orders and Congregations are seeing declining vocations – at least in North America. More and more the Congregation that serves our parish is bringing members from Poland and South America to Canada. They don’t seem to have high numbers of ‘home grown’ seminarians.

 

[KCT]

I believe it was Archbishop Chaput who said we don’t have a vocation shortage, we have a hearing problem. God is calling, but guys are not being taught to listen.

That being said, I have heard dioceses in more need than orders.

But, that makes me wonder . . . when dioceses were created, what was their purpose? Was it organization and oversight? If so, I wonder if they relied on orders to help find vocations.

 

[NewUlm1976_2000]

They are two separate callings. If you enter a religious order (particularly monastic orders) there are two issues to discern: first are you called to the religious life , then are you called to the priesthood.

Many religious priest, are religious first, coming out of contemplation (if at all) to some specific service. They are not called to diocesan life, and many holy priests would make poor pastors.

Around here, many order priests do weekly substitutes for diocesan priests (St John’s University Benedictine Priests). They are used to the order and college life. Diocesan priests are glad to have the help, mostly during the summer and higher summer crowds.

 

[bilop]

The only reason orders are better off is that many recruit worldwide.

So, they get many vocations from places like Africa, Vietnam, India, etc. where vocations are plentiful, and send them to the U.S. and Europe.

They have the same issues recruiting in Europe and North America.

God Bless

 

[ASimpleSinner]

There is in fact a laity shortage. Mass attendence is abysmal, fertility is through the floor… folks who self-identify as “Catholic” far more often than not mean to indicate that is where they got “sprinkled” as a kid, where they would or did “book their wedding” and the last location their body will be taken to before going in the ground…

When that is the state of affairs, one can rightly ask “Is their a shortage of clergy or a shortage of believers?” Frankly, in most places, the issue of “shortage” is mostly one of logistics and having enough priests to staff half-empty parishes. If all the buildings blew over in a windstorm tomorrow and we rebuilt, I suspect that the amount of priests we have in the US would largely be sufficient if more parishes were consolidated. The fly in the ointment on that matter is logistics in far-flung rural-dominated diocese… Everyone would have to drive more… something that is NOT cheap to do, but car-pooling sometimes eases the pain…

At any rate, until we do a good job of bringing people back to the sacraments, being open to live, attending Mass weekly (or more!) and exposing their children to the Faith in a fashion that impresses upon them that the Faith is THE most important thing in their life… Well when that does happen (and we have seen places where it has) seminaries fill themselves.

This is a slight over-simplication, other factors are involved including vocations directors and episcopal leadership… But as far as the ratio of priests to practicing Catholics who attend weekly Mass… The real shortage is NOT on the priest’s side of the altar.

We have too many parishes that need to be closed or filled…

 

[Bataar]

It seems that it’s only declining amount liberal orders and/or dioceses. Orthodox and disciplined orders and dioceses are seeing a lot of growth.

 

[johnnydigit]

If there is only a diocesan priest shortage then why can’t the religious priests be required to become diocesan priests?

it’s up to the bishop to invite them over. many religious are waiting patiently…

It seems that it’s only declining amount liberal orders and/or dioceses. Orthodox and disciplined orders and dioceses are seeing a lot of growth.

bingo!

 

[Tsuwano]

There has always been a shortage of priests and probably always will be. The American Catholic Church, at least, is better served than it ever has been. This is not to say that the modern priest is not overworked, he is, but I doubt he is as overworked as the circuit riding clergy of the 1800’s or the urban priests who ministered to Irish, Italian, and German immigrants in the major cities of North America. We shouldn’t stop praying for an increase in priestly vocations, but lay people should also seek ways in which they can become more active in their parishes and dioceses. It is not necessary for Father to visit the hospitalized or shut - ins every day when there are competent lay people who can do that ministry. It is not necessary for Father to organize soup kitchens or clothing drives when the laity are just as able to do it. The Apostles were also overworked, and so the office of Deacon was created. It could be that the priestly shortage is a movement of the Holy Spirit calling the laity to take their own call to service more seriously.

 

[IronHammer]

I have heard it said that in dioceses where traditional values are strong (like the diocese of Lincoln, NE) that vocations are quite high. I wonder if it’s possible to borrow people from those dioceses which have high numbers to help the dioceses with low numbers of vocations.

In my diocese, unfortunately, the bishop is adamant that we can provide for our own, and will not ask for outside help. I believe he may have been right once, but the ship is sinking fast. I am not biased or racist but I can’t stand foreign priests who’s english is so broken it can’t be understood.

In the meantime, we can only pray, pray, pray for vocations.

 

[johnnydigit]

We shouldn’t stop praying for an increase in priestly vocations, but lay people should also seek ways in which they can become more active in their parishes and dioceses.

good point! if young people were half as active as they should be, oh man the Church would be so great. older people as well of course, but the young are the future and they often get shunned aside and blatantly ignored…

I wonder if it’s possible to borrow people from those dioceses which have high numbers to help the dioceses with low numbers of vocations.

i observed that when things get really bad, they do ask them in, but it’s more of a band aid instead of getting to the root of the problem. they need to figure out why they are getting such lower numbers compared to others. give a man a fish or teach a man to fish…

 

[bilop]

I have heard it said that in dioceses where traditional values are strong (like the diocese of Lincoln, NE) that vocations are quite high. I wonder if it’s possible to borrow people from those dioceses which have high numbers to help the dioceses with low numbers of vocations.

In my diocese, unfortunately, the bishop is adamant that we can provide for our own, and will not ask for outside help. I believe he may have been right once, but the ship is sinking fast. I am not biased or racist but I can’t stand foreign priests who’s english is so broken it can’t be understood.

In the meantime, we can only pray, pray, pray for vocations.

But the vocations don’t want to go the the less orthodox diocese. They chose to go to a diocese where they follow the Magisterium. If you now ship them out to some other diocese, you will be breaking the rules. A diocesan priest can’t be sent to another diocese. Doing this will only discourage vocations.

The vocation poor dioceses need to see what the vocation rich ones are doing and replicate it.

God Bless

 

[nightwalker]

But the vocations don’t want to go the the less orthodox diocese. They chose to go to a diocese where they follow the Magisterium. If you now ship them out to some other diocese, you will be breaking the rules. A diocesan priest can’t be sent to another diocese. Doing this will only discourage vocations.

Actually there are a number of seminarians who are willing to fight in their native diocese, but want to make sure their faith survives the seminary. It is possible for them to go to another diocese for formation, and then seek to transfer back to their own (if you are considering this route, be up front with your vocations director).

It is also possible for a priest to be granted leave to assist another diocese for a number of years and then return. (in short there are ways in which it can happen).

Sending priests against their will will definitely discourage vocations, but volunteers can be found.

 

[johnnydigit]

But the vocations don’t want to go the the less orthodox diocese. They chose to go to a diocese where they follow the Magisterium. If you now ship them out to some other diocese, you will be breaking the rules. A diocesan priest can’t be sent to another diocese. Doing this will only discourage vocations.

The vocation poor dioceses need to see what the vocation rich ones are doing and replicate it.

God Bless

a person can apply to seminary at a different diocese, and thus live and serve in that diocese. basically like moving before you enter, but i guess you don’t have to prove residency there.

unfortunately, many seminarians are not necessarily looking for an “orthodox” diocese and just want to become a priest to serve their home town, which of course is still noble. i’m sure they’ll become fine priests and serve their community well. some of us are just more orthodox and traditional than others and would not thrive well under the same conditions…

 

[Tsuwano]

I’m somewhat confused when the adjectives “orthodox” and “non orthodox” are used to describe dioceses that are in communion with the Church in Rome and led by bishops who were appointed by the Pope. What is an orthodox diocese as opposed to a non othodox diocese and who makes the distinction?

 

[IronHammer]

I’m somewhat confused when the adjectives “orthodox” and “non orthodox” are used to describe dioceses that are in communion with the Church in Rome and led by bishops who were appointed by the Pope. What is an orthodox diocese as opposed to a non othodox diocese and who makes the distinction?

An example of an ‘Orthodox’ diocese would be the Diocese of Lincoln. They only have some 90,000 catholics in a diocese with a population that covers the southern half of Nebraska and a population of 500,000. Yet they have continuously had several dozen seminarians in formation for the past several years. Their diocese has opened the only new diocesan seminary in decades. All this because their current (and former bishop) are very faithful to the Magesterium and completely loyal to the Pope. They maintain strong traditional values and take a hard line against heretical organizations like Call to Action and Planned Parenthood.

On the other hand, a liberal or non-orthodox diocese is one in which the bishop is will not stand up publicly against issues such as abortion, gay marriage, celibate/male only priests, etc… In fact, some bishops openly support these heresies. These bishops typically exude an air of rebelliousness to the Pope and the Magesterium. Their dioceses typically have very few, if any, vocations and some have had to close their seminaries/convents as a result of ‘calling the shots’ their way in their diocese.

Hope that clears up the terminology.

 

[bilop]

I’m somewhat confused when the adjectives “orthodox” and “non orthodox” are used to describe dioceses that are in communion with the Church in Rome and led by bishops who were appointed by the Pope. What is an orthodox diocese as opposed to a non othodox diocese and who makes the distinction?

Iron Hammer gave a good explanation. Just to add a little.

There have been several dioceses in the U.S. where the bishops allowed and even supported disobedience to the Magisterium and abuses. Example include pushing for female priests, allowing laity to perform clerical functions (e.g. read the gospel, preach at Mass), doing away with kneeling at Mass, tolerating active homosexuality in the seminary and priesthood, etc. Many of the “non-orthodox” dioceses also discouraged orthodox men from entering seminary, harassing them (see the book “Good Bye, Good Men” for examples).

Not suprisingly, these dioceses have had very few vocations.

Things are getting better as JPII and now Benedict have been replacing the most troublesome bishops as they reach retirement age.

Meanwhile, certain completely orthodox and outspoken bishops, like Bruskewitz in Lincoln, Burke in St. Louis, Chaput in Denver, Carlson in Saginaw, etc. have produced an abundance of vocations, and are completely revitalizing their dioceses.

God Bless

 

[1234]

An example of an ‘Orthodox’ diocese would be the Diocese of Lincoln. They only have some 90,000 catholics in a diocese with a population that covers the southern half of Nebraska and a population of 500,000. Yet they have continuously had several dozen seminarians in formation for the past several years. Their diocese has opened the only new diocesan seminary in decades. All this because their current (and former bishop) are very faithful to the Magesterium and completely loyal to the Pope. They maintain strong traditional values and take a hard line against heretical organizations like Call to Action and Planned Parenthood.

On the other hand, a liberal or non-orthodox diocese is one in which the bishop is will not stand up publicly against issues such as abortion, gay marriage, celibate/male only priests, etc… In fact, some bishops openly support these heresies. These bishops typically exude an air of rebelliousness to the Pope and the Magesterium. Their dioceses typically have very few, if any, vocations and some have had to close their seminaries/convents as a result of ‘calling the shots’ their way in their diocese.

Hope that clears up the terminology.

Planned Parenthood is not ‘heretical’ in that it is not a religious organization. It is a secular one.