G
gracepoole
Guest
I actually included it in the OP. And it does not mention retreats specifically — hence my question here.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
L
LilyM
Guest
Interesting question.
Back in the stone age when I was going through Catholic high school, students would have yearly retreats. We lived in an area with relatively few priests, so the retreats would almost invariably be run by lay teachers or the religious sisters whose order ran the school.
We might have a priest in at some point to say Mass and hear confessions, or run a session or two. That was about the extent of priestly involvement.
I can see certain situations (one obvious example being if it’s a retreat for young men discerning for the priesthood ) where having a laicised priest running the show might well be very problematic. But I don’t think this would apply to the majority of retreats.
Back in the stone age when I was going through Catholic high school, students would have yearly retreats. We lived in an area with relatively few priests, so the retreats would almost invariably be run by lay teachers or the religious sisters whose order ran the school.
We might have a priest in at some point to say Mass and hear confessions, or run a session or two. That was about the extent of priestly involvement.
I can see certain situations (one obvious example being if it’s a retreat for young men discerning for the priesthood ) where having a laicised priest running the show might well be very problematic. But I don’t think this would apply to the majority of retreats.
O
otjm
Guest
Playing some sort of guessing game about someone else’s state of grace or lack thereof (I am trying to put this politely) is not something anyone should engage in.
The fact that anyone has gone through the process of laicization, one that is slow and intrusive, should indicate they are intending to continue on as fellow Catholics. To impugn any priest who goes through laicization without proof that they are errant in following the Magisterium without strong proof is to judge them without evidence. Your comments are unseemly at best.
To say that I am making a huge assumption is to imply that the process of requesting a laicization is in and of itself reason to suspect the sincerity of their faith. You have no grounds whatsoever to substantiate that position.
As to knowing who is not following the Magisterium, that is shown by subsequent actions and statements. None have been ascribed to the individual in the OP’s post.
The fact that anyone has gone through the process of laicization, one that is slow and intrusive, should indicate they are intending to continue on as fellow Catholics. To impugn any priest who goes through laicization without proof that they are errant in following the Magisterium without strong proof is to judge them without evidence. Your comments are unseemly at best.
To say that I am making a huge assumption is to imply that the process of requesting a laicization is in and of itself reason to suspect the sincerity of their faith. You have no grounds whatsoever to substantiate that position.
As to knowing who is not following the Magisterium, that is shown by subsequent actions and statements. None have been ascribed to the individual in the OP’s post.
O
otjm
Guest
There are few priests who are laicized, for starters. So there is almost no chance whatsoever that anyone intending to enter seminary with the end result of being ordained is going to take the scenario you posit - of thinking they have some easy out when they decide to get married. That ignores both the process and time spent in seminary determining a vocation, and your unstated presumption that someone can make it all the way through without that underlying “intention” - or attitude, if you wish, being discovered. Being in seminary is a bit like being in a fishbowl. Everyone is observing you.
Men do make sincere decisions; they do struggle, and there is a process in place.
I don’t know where the statistics came from so I cannon comment in their validity or lack thereof; however, there were a large number of italicization after Vatican 2; and a significant number of them had to do with marriage; these were all priests ordained prior to Vatican 2. Vatican 2 ended in December of 1965 - 54 years ago. that is an average of less than 500 priests per year, and includes not only diocesan but also order priests. In 1970 (after laicizations had started) there were 59,192 diocesan and 37,272 order priests. 25,000 sounds like a lot, until it is put into perspective. and given that some of the priests who were being laicized were order priests, some of that decision may have had to do with the order, as opposed to other issues (or including them).
It helps to have some perspective.
Men do make sincere decisions; they do struggle, and there is a process in place.
I don’t know where the statistics came from so I cannon comment in their validity or lack thereof; however, there were a large number of italicization after Vatican 2; and a significant number of them had to do with marriage; these were all priests ordained prior to Vatican 2. Vatican 2 ended in December of 1965 - 54 years ago. that is an average of less than 500 priests per year, and includes not only diocesan but also order priests. In 1970 (after laicizations had started) there were 59,192 diocesan and 37,272 order priests. 25,000 sounds like a lot, until it is put into perspective. and given that some of the priests who were being laicized were order priests, some of that decision may have had to do with the order, as opposed to other issues (or including them).
It helps to have some perspective.
O
otjm
Guest
Yes, there is a practical difference, as his practice as a Catholic may be circumscribed to some degree. While there may be a general set of things he may not do, it is my understanding that it may not be uniformly applied; and ultimately it is a matter between the bishop and him.
As to giving a retreat (something that a relative of mine, a lay person, does in a number of States), it does not appear that he is violating anything.
As to teaching in college, I don’t recall that anyone clarified what he teaches; if he were teaching something in Theology, that may or may not be something he could do depending on the subject(s), his rescript, and his bishop. So, for example, teaching a course on the history of the Church may not be outside the bounds of what he can do, but teaching Sacramental Theology may or may not be part of the rescript.
The short of it is that the thread is continuing on with insufficient information to do anything but speculate.
As to giving a retreat (something that a relative of mine, a lay person, does in a number of States), it does not appear that he is violating anything.
As to teaching in college, I don’t recall that anyone clarified what he teaches; if he were teaching something in Theology, that may or may not be something he could do depending on the subject(s), his rescript, and his bishop. So, for example, teaching a course on the history of the Church may not be outside the bounds of what he can do, but teaching Sacramental Theology may or may not be part of the rescript.
The short of it is that the thread is continuing on with insufficient information to do anything but speculate.
J
jack63
Guest
Thanks for the interesting response.
(ref on Deacons http://www.usccb.org/news/2014/14-093.cfm). My concern is that if you let a significant number of the laicized priests play a role, you’ll completely decimate the ministry of the permanent Deacons.
My second thought is “Isn’t seminary an education where you in a fishbowl, so that people can watch you…study and go home and sleep?” That was my experience in higher education at least. What possibly can others learn about you watching you study and go home and sleep? I mean this question sincerely and not rhetorically. I’ve read your other posts…I think you’ve said you’ve been to seminary before. Your details, story, and outcomes aren’t my business, and I’m not asking. I just want to know what I’m missing here.
My third thought is “Seminary is a free graduate education.” People will make it through no matter their intentions. I see the laicization restrictions as a way to prevent the abuse of this.
Yes…No doubt the 25000 number is spread out over more than 50 years, and yes many of those priests would have been laicized right after Vatican II. I’d look at it another way though, let’s say there are approximately 7,000-8,000 laicized priests who’d still want to play a role today such as retreats, teaching, and other major types ministry. There are also about 15000 active Deacons in the US.there were a large number of italicization after Vatican 2; and a significant number of them had to do with marriage; these were all priests ordained prior to Vatican 2. Vatican 2 ended in December of 1965 - 54 years ago. that is an average of less than 500 priests per year, and includes not only diocesan but also order priests. In 1970 (after laicizations had started) there were 59,192 diocesan and 37,272 order priests. 25,000 sounds like a lot, until it is put into perspective.
(ref on Deacons http://www.usccb.org/news/2014/14-093.cfm). My concern is that if you let a significant number of the laicized priests play a role, you’ll completely decimate the ministry of the permanent Deacons.
While I see where your coming from. My first thought is “Well they certainly made it through seminary and then left in droves to get married in the 60’s and 70’s”…just like you said. I know that was a long time ago and people have different attitudes today, and their is a stronger discernment process in place etc etc…still it happened.So there is almost no chance whatsoever that anyone intending to enter seminary with the end result of being ordained is going to take the scenario you posit - of thinking they have some easy out when they decide to get married. That ignores both the process and time spent in seminary determining a vocation, and your unstated presumption that someone can make it all the way through without that underlying “intention” - or attitude, if you wish, being discovered. Being in seminary is a bit like being in a fishbowl. Everyone is observing you.
Men do make sincere decisions; they do struggle, and there is a process in place.
My second thought is “Isn’t seminary an education where you in a fishbowl, so that people can watch you…study and go home and sleep?” That was my experience in higher education at least. What possibly can others learn about you watching you study and go home and sleep? I mean this question sincerely and not rhetorically. I’ve read your other posts…I think you’ve said you’ve been to seminary before. Your details, story, and outcomes aren’t my business, and I’m not asking. I just want to know what I’m missing here.
My third thought is “Seminary is a free graduate education.” People will make it through no matter their intentions. I see the laicization restrictions as a way to prevent the abuse of this.
Last edited:
E
EnglishTeacher
Guest
There is a similar situation with a laicized priest in our diocese. He is permitted to do some speaking on Scripture and religion, but I believe there are restrictions on what he is allowed to speak on and how. (I am unware of the specifics.) You could contact your diocese to find out his standing for purposes of leading retreats or speaking at parishes. Normally parishes are supposed to get approval from their diocese for any speaker that they bring in (though that may not always happen in practice), so chances are that he received approval prior to the retreat.My question is this: he and his wife have led spiritual retreats at various Catholic parishes. Is this permitted according to the terms of his laicization?
Last edited:
O
otjm
Guest
Having been in college seminary when Vatican 2 ended, allow me a few observations.
There certainly was a hope on the part of some of the priests ordained prior to V2 that it would allow priests to marry. That obviously did not happen; but that whole issue goes to seminary training prior to V2. Additionally, in the 2,000 year history of the Church, priests have not been allowed to marry (with a minor exception in the Eastern rites; a married man, ordained and has children loses his wife; he may be allowed to remarry if the children are young). Where the hope came from I have no clue, but we certainly had some discussions about marriage while I was there (2 years of college).
The seminaries I am familiar with are either year-round residency, or at least residency during the school year. You don’t “go home”. I was at Mount Angel Seminary in Oregon; it is still that way there - although they are allowed off the hill more frequently than we were!
Laicization is not a simple “file a form and get a stamp of approval”. Laicization can be requested; it is not guaranteed. There are restrictions, and if I understand correctly, it has to go through Rome (and presumably your bishop!), So there are restrictions, and your concerns are answered the best they can be from the initial interview to gain admission to the seminary, to a fairly constant reviewing of what you are doing, where you are in your spiritual life, and ordination is more than just a matter of “showing up”. Two of my shirttail relatives were “invited to leave” - they were not kicked out for any misbehavior, and it was not about wanting to get married or having some half-baked ideas about Catholicism; it had to do with the fact that the bishop decided to not ordain them. Both were well into Theology when that occurred (theology then being a 4 year program after your B.A.). Needless to say, neither really wanted to discuss the matter.
In short, your concerns are very well addressed by staff in the seminary, and they aren’t there to simply pass out diplomas. Their purpose is to assist the candidates in discerning if they have a vocation; it is rigorous both in studies and in immersion into the spiritual life. Most candidates receive very significant $$ assistance in getting through the 6 to 8+ year program, and the money to keep the seminary going are both through fund raising and through the diocese (or perhaps the order; I am not familiar with orders which might have a seminary).
There certainly was a hope on the part of some of the priests ordained prior to V2 that it would allow priests to marry. That obviously did not happen; but that whole issue goes to seminary training prior to V2. Additionally, in the 2,000 year history of the Church, priests have not been allowed to marry (with a minor exception in the Eastern rites; a married man, ordained and has children loses his wife; he may be allowed to remarry if the children are young). Where the hope came from I have no clue, but we certainly had some discussions about marriage while I was there (2 years of college).
The seminaries I am familiar with are either year-round residency, or at least residency during the school year. You don’t “go home”. I was at Mount Angel Seminary in Oregon; it is still that way there - although they are allowed off the hill more frequently than we were!
Laicization is not a simple “file a form and get a stamp of approval”. Laicization can be requested; it is not guaranteed. There are restrictions, and if I understand correctly, it has to go through Rome (and presumably your bishop!), So there are restrictions, and your concerns are answered the best they can be from the initial interview to gain admission to the seminary, to a fairly constant reviewing of what you are doing, where you are in your spiritual life, and ordination is more than just a matter of “showing up”. Two of my shirttail relatives were “invited to leave” - they were not kicked out for any misbehavior, and it was not about wanting to get married or having some half-baked ideas about Catholicism; it had to do with the fact that the bishop decided to not ordain them. Both were well into Theology when that occurred (theology then being a 4 year program after your B.A.). Needless to say, neither really wanted to discuss the matter.
In short, your concerns are very well addressed by staff in the seminary, and they aren’t there to simply pass out diplomas. Their purpose is to assist the candidates in discerning if they have a vocation; it is rigorous both in studies and in immersion into the spiritual life. Most candidates receive very significant $$ assistance in getting through the 6 to 8+ year program, and the money to keep the seminary going are both through fund raising and through the diocese (or perhaps the order; I am not familiar with orders which might have a seminary).
- Status
- Not open for further replies.