Vocation Shortage?

[Pius_X]

I’m not saying it is right that young men/boys view serving in this light, however it is a reality.

I am glad that you understand the meaning of serving mass and hopefully you are considering a vocation to the priesthood.

When something is not right though, we should not encourage it.

I am considering the priesthood.

 

[debraran]

franciscanfriars.com/fr.%20glenn%20letters/frglenn1054.htm

Look at these new postulants! The orthodox orders do seem to thrive more than the less.

 

[Pious_Mat]

It is very true that orthodoxy boosts vocations. That is part of why I am an advocate of the Tridentine Mass.

People seem to want to be part of a ritual and way of thinking that is distinctly Catholic, and it seems to me that as it is celebrated by many secular priests, the Novus Ordo doesn’t look all that different from Lutheran and Anglican ceremonies.

Also, the thing that fosters orthodoxy and vocations the most, in my opinion, is the sacrament of penance. Parishes where confession is greatly advertised rather than never mentioned or even discouraged always seem to be doing better.

 

[debraran]

I agree…my old church was “stale”, everyone seemed to go through the motions, but I didn’t sense reverence and the amount of people were dwindling. Then after some prayer, I jogged by a Dominican church in a nearby city…it was like EWTN’s mass. They have confession everyday but Sunday, twice on Saturday and 3 masses a day. There a lot of parishinors, some travel far to attend on Sunday, but I think it’s the reverence of the mass, the seriousness of the people involved and the “Dominican flavor” doesn’t hurt.
I hear Fr. Groechel, who’s order I posted above will be coming to our area next month, I hope I can meet him and hear him speak.

 

[Jared123]

I agree…my old church was “stale”, everyone seemed to go through the motions, but I didn’t sense reverence and the amount of people were dwindling. Then after some prayer, I jogged by a Dominican church in a nearby city…it was like EWTN’s mass. They have confession everyday but Sunday, twice on Saturday and 3 masses a day. There a lot of parishinors, some travel far to attend on Sunday, but I think it’s the reverence of the mass, the seriousness of the people involved and the “Dominican flavor” doesn’t hurt.
I hear Fr. Groechel, who’s order I posted above will be coming to our area next month, I hope I can meet him and hear him speak.

Fr. Groechel is wonderful. I heard him speak a few years ago, before his accident. He was part of a religious order that got away from othrodoxy and was going done the tubes. He eventaully had to break off and start a different order. He keeps it very orthodox and as you stated vocations are doing quite well. The key is orthodoxy.

 

[Jared123]

It is very true that orthodoxy boosts vocations. That is part of why I am an advocate of the Tridentine Mass.

People seem to want to be part of a ritual and way of thinking that is distinctly Catholic, and it seems to me that as it is celebrated by many secular priests, the Novus Ordo doesn’t look all that different from Lutheran and Anglican ceremonies.

Also, the thing that fosters orthodoxy and vocations the most, in my opinion, is the sacrament of penance. Parishes where confession is greatly advertised rather than never mentioned or even discouraged always seem to be doing better.

Mat,
You have it figured out. I am not familiar with the Tridentine Mass but have heard from other Catholics in areas where the diocese is unorthodox that this is the only way to go. Fortunantly here in Lincoln I can go to any parish in the diocese and the pastor will be on the same page as the Vatican.
You are very much correct about the Sacrament of Confession. If a parish only offers this Sacrament for 30 minutes one time a week, then this show how seriously they take the Sacrament. Consequently the parishinors won’t ever go. Confession should be made avilable on a daily bases as should mass. My home parish offers daily confession in the morning before daily mass. We also have two daily masses a day (all the elementary school kids attend daily mass). One Mass on Saturday, Three on Sunday.
We generally have long lines for confession. This is a sign of a strong parish.

 

[Lepanto]

Not to turn this into a Quigley thread. (Quigley having been the longstanding minor - high school - seminary for the Archdiocese of Chicago which closed this past June.) But I do find it notable that since the announcement, there has been a certain amount of talk and effort in the Archdiocese to find other ways of reaching out to boys and young men in order to establish relationships and foster vocations. The irony is that discussion of such is often preceeded by saying something to the effect of, “In light of us no longer having Quigley…” Of course, the reality is that this sort of particular outreach, exposure, and nurturing being promoted is crucial in attracting potential priestly candidates. But, then, there must also be a more formalized way of helping them to develop and be nurtured. Absent the minor seminary, all we have which remains is a new high school discenrment group program (akin to something which was tried and failed in the past) that doesn’t have the same intensity. It should be noted, then, that it isn’t about either/or but both/and. A need exists to take those steps which will attract, interest, and support/foster vocations on a more individualized basis and particular degree in the parishes. But there must also be a way in which to help the discernment along and enable the vocations which do exist to mature among the supportive environment (and challenging grind) of others who are also exploring this as a possibility for their life in reponse to the Lord’s call.

An article in the National Catholic Register from about 4-5 weeks ago had an eve-opening article on Quigley. I don’t recall the exact numbers, but something like only a handful of students there actually went on to the priesthood over the past 30 years. Despite its name as a “seminary”, in effect, it was not a seminary because it did not lead to the priesthood. It may have been a great Catholic school, but it was not doing anything for vocations any more.

Perhaps…the money could be better spent elsewhere?

 

[Tim_Kirchoff]

An article in the National Catholic Register from about 4-5 weeks ago had an eve-opening article on Quigley. I don’t recall the exact numbers, but something like only a handful of students there actually went on to the priesthood over the past 30 years. Despite its name as a “seminary”, in effect, it was not a seminary because it did not lead to the priesthood. It may have been a great Catholic school, but it was not doing anything for vocations any more.

Perhaps…the money could be better spent elsewhere?

The decline in priestly vocations coming from Quigley may be traced to a policy change a few decades back, when some apparantly believed there would soon be too many priests. Before this change, each parish could send two young men to Quigley on subsidized tuition. This policy was abandoned, I myself don’t know why.

Yes, in the past few decades, Quigley had been on the decline. Yes, in the sixteen years after the consolidation (if you would call it that) of Quigley North and Quigley South, only one graduate of Quigley had been ordained.

However, that does not account for the dozen or so Quigley graduates currently in the college or major seminary. Quigley had been on the upturn for the eight years or so before its closing.

 

[chicago]

An article in the National Catholic Register from about 4-5 weeks ago had an eve-opening article on Quigley. I don’t recall the exact numbers, but something like only a handful of students there actually went on to the priesthood over the past 30 years. Despite its name as a “seminary”, in effect, it was not a seminary because it did not lead to the priesthood. It may have been a great Catholic school, but it was not doing anything for vocations any more.

Perhaps…the money could be better spent elsewhere?

I’d like to read the actual article. If you can point me to it online anywhere, or find the date of publication, or even if someone would be willing to email or snail mail me a copy, I’d be appreciative. There were several articles running via the AP wire on the school early summer, and I wonder if it was just a version of that or something original.

In a web search, I see that America also recently printed an article on the subject which I’d also like to read, if anyone has it available.

One of the statistics which was repeatedly cited to justify the closing of the school last year was that there “had only been one ordination in the past 16 years”. Quite possibly, this is what you read.

It is a spun stat (quite effective in it’s argumentative purposes to the unknowing public who read it) which infuriated most alumni and students, due to it’s discontexual use. What it is really indicitive of is that there was a period of trial for both the Church and seminary system in Chicago during the late 80s/early 90s. It was the pre-new catechism era when a lot of confusion and question reinged within the Church’s life. The seminary system as a whole was in shambles in Chicago, on every level - requiring reform. Quigley, at this time, was restructured to merge the North and South brances. The students were disrespected in this process and tradition was broken, leaving many frustrated and derailing any vocations which likely existed. Following that, the college seminary was also restructured, moved, it’s enrollment/recruitment process changed. This entirety led to much upheaval which probably accounts for the complementary loss of vocations during those years.

The “sixteen years”, it must also be noted, refers specifically to the period following Quigley’s restructuring. (Post 1990, or the “Archbishop Quigley” era.) So, while it is fair to note the fact that there has (thus far) been only one ordination to the Chicago diocesan priesthood (religious order members don’t count in their stated statistic, though there are also those in religious life among these classes) from the membership of Quigley graduates up to the late 90s, it must be remembered that recent graduates who are on a priestly path will not be ordained until 8 years after graduating Quigley. They should not be overlooked when “counting heads”.

Recent years have, indeed, been a rebuilding process whereby Quigley has been on the rebound regarding its mission. About a dozen graduates of the institution are presently in the higher levels of the seminary system, and most appear to be solid vocations which may well make it to the altar in time. It that a huge number? No. But the institution was clearly reforming its identity and solidifying something which would, undoubtedly, grow, if only appropriately nurtured.

The larger problems at play include things which are not specifically issues at Quigley such as family life, Catholic education and formation at a primary age and grade school level, identification and recruitment of boys who might make good candidates, thinking outside the box to find candidates who may not be enrolled in the Catholic grade schools (where Catholic grade schools still exist, even), respect for the ability of boys to discern a call from an early age. Not enough emphasis has been placed upon these sorts of things in recent times, and it has hurt the minor seminary.

(con’t…)

 

[chicago]

(…con’t)

Ironically, with the closing of the institution, the Archdiocese NOW is starting to try and address some of these issues. But this makes no sense. For exmaple, a humorous irony which I have noted is a new program that has been developed for 6th graders (and other students about that age) on vocations. The booklet which comes with that program features roughly 9 pictures on its cover, fully half of which were taken at Quigley. My joke is, “Hey doesn’t this look GREAT! Yeah, but if you find it interesting, well, you can’t go there… PSYCH!”

A “new” program for teenage boys (which will feature monthly discernment group meetings at the college seminary) has been started to attempt fostering vocations among teens. But this sort of endoavor is little different that a similar one which was to complement Quigley’s formal efforts some years ago. That one led no where and was ultimately abandoned. Why should we think that things will be any different now? And, will a monthly meeting and some occasional service or pilgrimage trips be enough of an environment to support continued discernment at this age?

Indeed, even Cardinal Mundelein, in his letter on the construction of a new facility (its present closed location) for the high school seminary noted the importance of having a dedicated school to this pupose, seeing as how the other Catholic high schools really were not effectively accomplishing the job, themselves, of offering that which is unique to such a seminary environment for fostering vocations.

Finally, I think that the minor seminary suffered from much misunderstanding. It’s nature is to be a high school of discernment where one learns in a supportive environment such that students explore vocation. Focus on the priesthood as an option of interest and potentiality for your life brings this to a point and fosters its seminarians to dig deeper, searching out something within themselves and God. The fact that teens would be willing and able to do this, let alone encouraged, in a dedicated way over four full years is what differentiates the seminary from any other “good Catholic school.” Some go onward in discernment and seminary studies. Others don’t. It is not intended to merely be a “priest factory”, pushing through and churning out as many hand annointings and laying on of hands as possible. It is not the major theologate, even; it is a “preparatory” program. The students’ level of maturity and personal journey is respected in that regard, even as they are challenged to give greater of themselves in considering the call. Still, too much stress of expectation should not be placed on either the institution or it’s students to “churn out” or “become priests” just because of their openness to enroll and explore. Rather, that is a discernment process which gets fostered naturally and provides what it will in God’s good measure if this is properly emphasized as the goal.

The fact remains that what is needed is a “both-and” approach. Traditionally, it has been understood that the Lord tends to plant a seed and begins to call many men to his ministry from a tender age. Yet if this is not encouraged and fostered in every way possible and using all good resources which we have available, there will be difficulties. Destroying treasures which can not be easily replaced doesn’t help in that regard. Nor does reallocating money to other purposes without retaining the best thing you have going to guide and attract those who are interested towards for further potential progress.

Quigley was long considered the pride of the Archdioce of Chicago, it’s crown jewel, the best school going. Sadly, some had long lost belief in it (and perhaps belief in the Church and its priesthood, also), failing to support it properly and see it continue to succeed. When you sacrifice such a treasure with so great a history, what important a witness, such significant potential, it does not bode or reflect upon well for everything else at the lower levels. As the Church of Chicago tries to find ways to support other ailing (and sometimes succeeding) schools, the question must be asked as to whether their efforts are credible if they can sacrifice expendably rather than invest in and commit themselves to that institution which is most important to our very existance… the minor seminary.

 

[Jared123]

Let me ask you this question about Quigley, were their priests teaching at this school? Or was it all Catholic/Non-Catholic laymen and women?
I think this plays a huge part in getting vocations from private schools. If there aren’t any role models for the boys and girls (nuns) to look up to, how do you expect them to become a priest? I also question the theology being taught in many Catholic schools. I will give you one example. I do some substitute teaching during the school year. I was subbing in a school in another diocese across the river from the Lincoln diocese. This school actually happened to have one priest teaching theology, and two other theology teaches that weren’t religious. During class a female theology teaching called in the priest who also taught theology and asked him if he would present the other side to her argument. What was the argument…why women should be ordained in the Catholic Church. The priest was absolutely floored and couldn’t believe that was being taught to high school seniors in a Catholic school. I was subbing in another Catholic shool across the river from Linclon. I was talking to one theology teacher who was quite good. He told me that when he interviewed for his teaching position the head of the theology department asked him if he considered himself a conservative, moderate, or liberal Catholic. He told me that he wanted to answer the question by saying that he was an orthodox Catholic and in line with the Magesterium on the Catholic Church. However, he knew that if he did, he wouldn’t get the job. So he answered that he was a moderate Catholic. He was later hired. He went on to tell me that the department head wasn’t in line with the Magesterium and he was the department head of a prominant Catholic school in this Archdiocese. I went on to sub in several of the schools in this archdiocese and was totally amazed. First of all there were hardly any priests teaching, no nuns that you could tell were nuns (they didn’t wear a habit), and most of the theology being taught was a joke. How do you expect a young man to discern a vocation in this environment??? So in this Archdiocese with literally thousands of Catholic students, they had but a few vocations.
I know that I keep beating a dead horse here, but I will compare their system to the Lincoln Diocese. First of all we have all priests teaching theology in every Catholic high school in the diocese. The principal and superintendant of each Catholic High School is a priest. Some of the elementary schools, but not all have habit wearing nuns as teachers and principals. In fact we have an order of nuns called the Christ the King Sisters that all teach school or are principals. Tuition is next to nothing. $500 for elementary school and $1,000 for high school. This allows a Catholic education to all students if they want it. Money shouldn’t be an issue. There is a strong emphasis put on Catholic schooling in this diocese. Why? Its very simple, the Bishop knows that this is were you will find vocations, and if you want a strong diocese, you need strong Catholics, and this starts with Catholic schools. If a Catholic receives orthodox Catholic schooling from the age of 5 through 18 do you think they will have a better chance of staying true to the faith and being part of a parish? Yep, and of course those Catholics are more likely to produce vocations.

 

[chicago]

Let me ask you this question about Quigley, were their priests teaching at this school? Or was it all Catholic/Non-Catholic laymen and women?

There were a decreasing number of priests instructing at Quigley is recent years (ironically, during the period when it was somewhat on the uptick.)

Like most Catholic schools, it was once staffed (if not exclusively, certainly primarily and intensely) by priests “back in the day” (“of the Giants” as some would like to think of it). By the time it was overwhelmed with students (well over 1000) in the late 50s and had to split into two brances (North and South) there were certainly lay teachers assisting, due to the enormity of the endeovor. In the 70s, the lay influence at Quigley South even was so significant as to precipitate a nationally notable attempt at unionizing its teachers (which was fought in court and eventually won by the then Archbishop, Cardinal Cody.)

Over the years, less and less priests were made available as instructors in the various disciplines. Though numerous priests were certainly involved in the school as their primary full time pastoral assignment. In the late 80s (at least at North, where I went) and early 90s, students were still likely to have a priest teaching them at one time or another over the four years in most of the subjects (history, music, languages, computer science, religion just to name the ones which I recall off the top of my head). Priests also tended to serve in administrative positions (rector, president, academic dean, disciplinarian, formations director, development office director.) Yet (as priests were eventually retired or reassigned to other pastoral positions in the Archdiocese and not replaced with other priests to serve the school) this continued declining to the point that (and Tim can correct me on this) there were only about three full time priests on staff as of last year. One of them being the rector (who also served as President as of last year, and formations director.) Priests were teaching some of the religion classes.

However, one of the reforms of “Archbishop Quigley” times which lasted until the end was to include a weekly “formations” meeting of small groups of students with a priest. So, even as priests were taken away in numbers assigned to instruct or administrate at the institution, there remained a significant influence of exposure to and interaction with priests and seminarians, even if not on as intense of a daily basis. Also, each student was required to have a “priest sponsor” (from either his parish or elsewhere) who was responsible for staying in touch with the student, signing his report card, offering some guidance. There was an annual Mass and luncheon at the school inviting all of the priest sponsors.

In order to be admitted to Quigley, the pastor of the parish where the boy was from had to write a letter of recommendation. He would also, hopefully, be in communication with the young man over his time at Quigley, following his progress and lending support. Students were expected to be involved in some sort of altar service/lectoring/EMHC/choir type thing at their parishes.

Finally, due to Quigley’s importance to the Archdiocese, it received many priestly (and episcopal) visitors on a regular basis. Even notable prelates from other diocese would occasionally “drop in” just to visit or offer some words of encouragement. Most of the auxiliary bishops, along with the cardinal, would individually make an annual visit to celebrate Mass. There was an annual “Mass of the Newly Ordained” (where priests who were ordained that year would visit and concelebrate.)

The school’s downtown location and proximity to both the cathedral and chancery/pastoral center offices (not to mention Loyola University) meant that students were constantly working aside or just bumping into priests in these environments. Quigely students helped staff the rectory office at the cathedral and were the longstanding “official” servers of Holy Name Cathedral for major liturgical celebrations.

Students interacted with additional priests on retreats, visits to the college and major seminaries, pilgrimage and service trips.

I do wish that there had still been more priests involved on a daily basis as instuctors and think it would have helped some, but even absent that it wasn’t like the guys didn’t have more exposure to priests than about 97% of others Catholics… for better or worse.

I think this plays a huge part in getting vocations from private schools. If there aren’t any role models for the boys and girls (nuns) to look up to, how do you expect them to become a priest?

I agree wholeheartedly!

 

[chicago]

I also question the theology being taught in many Catholic schools. I will give you one example. I do some substitute teaching during the school year. I was subbing in a school in another diocese across the river from the Lincoln diocese. This school actually happened to have one priest teaching theology, and two other theology teaches that weren’t religious. During class a female theology teaching called in the priest who also taught theology and asked him if he would present the other side to her argument. What was the argument…why women should be ordained in the Catholic Church. The priest was absolutely floored and couldn’t believe that was being taught to high school seniors in a Catholic school. I was subbing in another Catholic shool across the river from Linclon. I was talking to one theology teacher who was quite good. He told me that when he interviewed for his teaching position the head of the theology department asked him if he considered himself a conservative, moderate, or liberal Catholic. He told me that he wanted to answer the question by saying that he was an orthodox Catholic and in line with the Magesterium on the Catholic Church. However, he knew that if he did, he wouldn’t get the job. So he answered that he was a moderate Catholic. He was later hired. He went on to tell me that the department head wasn’t in line with the Magesterium and he was the department head of a prominant Catholic school in this Archdiocese.

I would posit that this sort of watered down and miscreant theology and ideologies was a very real, widespread problem in numerous Catholic schools (Quigleys included) to variable greater or lesser extents during the “problem period” of early 70s - mid/late 90s. (Not surprizingly, the time in which ordinations were decreasing all over.) Mostly, at Quigley in that era, there was probably a need for something more intense and integral which would address the serious concerns of the day in a way which was not just kneejerk and all too common opinion, at times. And, yet, it must be remembered that even the seminary system had to journey through the reality and influence of the times, which was a genuine struggle and challenge in finding it’s appropriate place within such a context. These problems in the Catholic schools are less intense now, I think, as bishops are wising up, improving curriculums, and environments are changing within the Church, generally, which foster something more integral again. Could more, and better, instruction be offerred? Probably. And it will certainly take time to retool after such a long period of difficulties. The remnants of dissent remain in not a few places. Yet, I’d doubt that there was a lot of outright dissention on faith and morals being formally expressed at Quigley in recent times, at least in formal teaching.

 

[chicago]

First of all we have all priests teaching theology in every Catholic high school in the diocese. The principal and superintendant of each Catholic High School is a priest. Some of the elementary schools, but not all have habit wearing nuns as teachers and principals. In fact we have an order of nuns called the Christ the King Sisters that all teach school or are principals.

But when you are having problems even staffing parishes with pastors or all your sisters are getting elderly and they can’t sustain running their own order extremely well, let alone a school, this becomes something which can no longer practically occur.

Tuition is next to nothing. $500 for elementary school and $1,000 for high school. This allows a Catholic education to all students if they want it. Money shouldn’t be an issue.

Money shouldn’t be an issue, ideally. But you have to pay the bills, somehow. The electric company doesn’t care that you have poor families attending and the teachers have to feed their families. So the cash has to come from somewhere.

There is a strong emphasis put on Catholic schooling in this diocese.

As there is in Chicago, with one of the most extensive Catholic school systems in existance.

Why? Its very simple, the Bishop knows that this is were you will find vocations, and if you want a strong diocese, you need strong Catholics, and this starts with Catholic schools. If a Catholic receives orthodox Catholic schooling from the age of 5 through 18 do you think they will have a better chance of staying true to the faith and being part of a parish? Yep, and of course those Catholics are more likely to produce vocations.

I’m not so sure. I know a lot of Catholics who recieved arguably strong Catholic school educations who aren’t that orthodox or even practicing. And Catholic schools are typically viewed by a many people who choose them as nothing more than a good private school option which provides excellent education and offers some moral framework. Somewhere, we are failing and need to find a way to better integrate lives into a meaningful adult faith for Catholic school students and others alike than just expecting that sending them to a Catholic school will accomplish this. Otherwise, all we’ll create are a lot of crafty lawyers.

 

[Tim_Kirchoff]

Yet (as priests were eventually retired or reassigned to other pastoral positions in the Archdiocese and not replaced with other priests to serve the school) this continued declining to the point that (and Tim can correct me on this) there were only about three full time priests on staff as of last year. One of them being the rector (who also served as President as of last year, and formations director.) Priests were teaching some of the religion classes.

There were four priests at the beginning of the year, but one left about halfway through, for reasons I can’t fully explain. It wasn’t because he wanted to leave though.

Beyond this, my friend, I see no problems with your account.

 

[chicago]

There were four priests at the beginning of the year, but one left about halfway through, for reasons I can’t fully explain. It wasn’t because he wanted to leave though.

Ah, yes. I knew that I must have been forgetting about somebody. I suppose that is what the Archdiocese wanted to happen, lest he remind people of what they didn’t want you to hear.

 

[Jared123]

But when you are having problems even staffing parishes with pastors or all your sisters are getting elderly and they can’t sustain running their own order extremely well, let alone a school, this becomes something which can no longer practically occur.

I realize that if you don’t have vocations than you have to staff parishes first. We are fotunante to have priest in most small towns with a small parish. That priest drives into the larger town that I live in to teach school. We currently have 6-7 priest teaching in a school of 350 students. We also have two habit wearing sisters (Marian nuns) teaching.
Money shouldn’t be an issue, ideally. But you have to pay the bills, somehow. The electric company doesn’t care that you have poor families attending and the teachers have to feed their families. So the cash has to come from somewhere.

Our parish funds the elementary school and the high school is funded by endowments and the diocese. We also have a large amount of the faculty that is religious that doesn’t get paid very much at all. The laymen and women are payed very little. Starting elementary teaching wage is under 20,000. They look at this as a scarifice or their vocation. They also don’t have trouble finding teachers and the ones that are here tend to stay around for a long time. You are not going to find this in a large city. First of all you won’t have the religious teachers since they are busy staffing the parishes and the laymen and women you hire will want to be paid comparable to the public schools. Bingo tuition is now $10,000 a year and this excludes most Catholic families.

As there is in Chicago, with one of the most extensive Catholic school systems in existance.

I’m not so sure. I know a lot of Catholics who recieved arguably strong Catholic school educations who aren’t that orthodox or even practicing. And Catholic schools are typically viewed by a many people who choose them as nothing more than a good private school option which provides excellent education and offers some moral framework. Somewhere, we are failing and need to find a way to better integrate lives into a meaningful adult faith for Catholic school students and others alike than just expecting that sending them to a Catholic school will accomplish this. Otherwise, all we’ll create are a lot of crafty lawyers.

I** would agree with this statement except I don’t think most Catholics receive an orthodox education. If I had the choice of sending my children to a watered down Catholic school or a good public school, I would send them to a good public school. At least there my children wouldn’t be taught ideas contrary to the Church that I would have to reteach when they came home. Think about being a third grade child that is being taught things that are contrary to the Church by your teacher, and then you come home and your dad tells you something else. What do you think this child is going to say about the Catholic Church? They will be confused. My wife was raised in Houston, Texas. She went to Catholic schools until the 7th grade. Her dad (who is now a professor at Franciscan University in Steubenville) pulled her out of the Catholic school and put her in a public school because the Catholocism was so wacked out. Like Bishop Fulton Sheen said “If everyone knew what the Catholic Church stood for there wouldn’t be 10 people who stood against her.” Unfortunantly **most Catholic students aren’t ever truely taught what the Church stands for, but rather get some watered down version that either turns them off to the Church or makes the Church seem no different than the protestant church down the street.

 

[chicago]

We currently have 6-7 priest teaching in a school of 350 students. We also have two habit wearing sisters (Marian nuns) teaching.

Grade school? High school? 350 students would be considered a “small” high school around here. So there’s a multiplication factor to what you’re saying. Plus, how many schools do you have?

The laymen and women are payed very little. Starting elementary teaching wage is under 20,000. They look at this as a scarifice or their vocation. They also don’t have trouble finding teachers and the ones that are here tend to stay around for a long time. You are not going to find this in a large city. First of all you won’t have the religious teachers since they are busy staffing the parishes and the laymen and women you hire will want to be paid comparable to the public schools. Bingo tuition is now $10,000 a year and this excludes most Catholic families.

Rookie teachers often make about the same here in Catholic schools. Most Catholic schools make use of them, in part to balance their budget. But you can only have so many and still offer a quality education. At some point, these teachers will move on or up the payscale. Indeed, while many consider teaching at a Catholic school to be a noble sacrifice and are willing to take lesser salaries to what would be comparable at a public school, paying wages which are commensurate with experience and sustainable to provide for a family is a serious issue of concern.

I would agree with this statement except I don’t think most Catholics receive an orthodox education.

Well, I had in mind not just the children of recent eras which often received bad theology or mushy nothingness, but also those who were educated by the relgious and priest operated institutions of previous times. They are often the most outrageous objectors to matters of faith, ironically.

If I had the choice of sending my children to a watered down Catholic school or a good public school, I would send them to a good public school.

I concur. Of course, the reason many parents choose Catholic education is precisely because they are worried that their children will be corrupted in the public institutions and feel that the Catholic ones will inculcate some sensibility of morals and offer a safer learning environment, whereas the public schools are seen as threatening. So the "faith system"doesn’t mean much to them as they only marginally practice and believe as is it.

At least there my children wouldn’t be taught ideas contrary to the Church that I would have to reteach when they came home. Think about being a third grade child that is being taught things that are contrary to the Church by your teacher, and then you come home and your dad tells you something else. What do you think this child is going to say about the Catholic Church? They will be confused.

Well, again, hopefully things are improving if only slow but sure. And, hopefully, 3rd graders don’t have to face things that are overly serious in this regard. I can see where at older ages there are issues. But, then, at these ages the kids are going to have to deal with some challenges to the faith, anyway, from outside ideas which they will certainly encounter.

My wife was raised in Houston, Texas. She went to Catholic schools until the 7th grade. Her dad (who is now a professor at Franciscan University in Steubenville) pulled her out of the Catholic school and put her in a public school because the Catholocism was so wacked out. Like Bishop Fulton Sheen said “If everyone knew what the Catholic Church stood for there wouldn’t be 10 people who stood against her.” Unfortunantly most Catholic students aren’t ever truely taught what the Church stands for, but rather get some watered down version that either turns them off to the Church or makes the Church seem no different than the protestant church down the street.

That is, perhaps, a fair enough assessment of where things were for some time in the earlier noted period. Things started to change, I think around the mid 90s when the catechism came out, EWTN gained popularity, and the internet and Catholic media started to explode. Not to mention the exponential influence of JPII. We’re moving in a different direction these days than where we were.

 

[AspiringDeacon]

I am in my first year of the Deacon program. I can tell you, in response to the issue of a vocation shortage, that I NEVER NEVER NEVER even thought about becoming a Deacon until someone asked me! I agree 100% with those that say awareness of the vocations, and being asked, is much higher on the list of how to grow vocations than any of the other issues you hear about (like celibacy, etc.)

This is the motivation I have for establishing my blog, a diary of my journey through the program, at prayforvocations.blogspot.com/. I want to communicate as much information as possible about the program in the hope it helps someone identify their own vocation, be it lay, deacon, or priest!

 

[Teelynn]

Ah, yes. I knew that I must have been forgetting about somebody. I suppose that is what the Archdiocese wanted to happen, lest he remind people of what they didn’t want you to hear.

How right on you are. We have had priests yanked where we desperately (and I mean desperately) needed them in our own parish community that happened to be declaring more truth than fluff coincidentally. Excuse my cynicism, but the Archdiocese calls the shots and in a manner in which appears to be circumstantially innocent. Keep thinking I read more into things than there actually is, but I keep seeing things happen over and over again that cannot be ignored.