The Vocation Sensation (Abridged)

I have received no comments nor do I believe many people have endeavored to read my last blog entry. As such here is a slightly abridged version which I hope will be easier to read, and I encourage my readers to read it as it is a very important topic. AP

~~~

I have read quite frequently lately about the hot topic amongst many Catholics which is the question of priestly vocations. I intend to try my best, with the help of the Spirit, to shed some light on this.

As most of us may well know, there has been a shortage of priests in recent years as well as a decline in the number of vocations. Some parishes do not have a resident priest and do not take Holy Communion as often as other parishes do. Other parishes have closed down. The whole doomsday scenario goes on. I used to worry about this question quite a bit but now I've tried my best to confide in the Lord and surrender my qualms to Him because, in the end, He will see His Church through. Correction: He is seeing His Church through.

Here are the facts that many in the women ordination/end-priestly-celibacy camp won't tell you.

(1) The fact that priestly vocations have declined in the US does not mean they have declined all over the world. While priestly vocations have declined precipitously in the Western world, they have either remained steady in number or increased in more underdeveloped countries. Relatively modernized countries like Poland and Ireland actually have priest surpluses and are "exporting" priests around the world to help. Many parishes in secular France have at least 8 priests for tiny parishes. Consider this: statistically speaking, would it not make more sense that in a more strongly Catholic area where there are large numbers of true faithful, there would also be a comparatively adequate number of pure vocations to the priesthood?

(2) Although unfortunate, it is not the end of the world if a parish goes without Holy Communion from time to time. There are countries in the world where parishes only take the Eucharist once or twice a year at most due to supply shortages.

(3) The number of Catholics in the world right now is a bit over 1 billion (1,000,000,000)- one sixth of the world population. That is not the number of practicing Catholics, the ones who most call upon the presence of a priest, which is surely quite a bit less. So when someone says that there are well over a billion Catholics in the world, and that there are way too few priests, and that there simply aren't enough priests to deal with the massive population of Catholics- think again.

There are many groups and dissident factions within the Church today who have created a sort of doomsday sensationalism regarding the vocation question such as FutureChurch and Call to Action which have been plotting to bring down our sacred tradition and who have waited patiently for the moment to strike during which to push their divisive agenda. They scored a minor victory in Vatican II but the Church stood firm.

I have consulted graphical data from the Georgetown University Center for Applied Research in the Apostolate, which I'll describe here (to see the graphs, go to the original blog). In the period where the Catholic Church in the US really got momentum going from 1899 all the way up to the period around 1956-1965, the number of religious priests and brothers rose dramatically. The rate of growth did not begin to seriously decelerate until the '65-'76 period- right in the wake of Vatican II. Then, in the 1976-1985 period, the number begins to plummet. (Incidentally, while many pro-women ordinationists would like to say that there is an ample supply of women to be priestesses, the fact is that the number of women religious has plummeted just as dramatically if not more as with the men.)

How does one account for these trends? Well, there are many reasons to explain the gradual decline in vocations in the post-WWII period- the rebellious spirit of the times, the rise of secularism in the US, the sexual "revolution", the overall assault on traditional authority and morality, etc. However, the plummeting of vocations in the period around 1975-1985 can be most easily explained by the changes enacted during Vatican II and the Protestantization of ministry with an overemphasis on the laity. If the laity are made to think that they are equal in authority as the priest, that they can perform many of the same functions as the priest, and that they do not need ordination to engage in the ministry of the Church, what reason do they have to go through the trouble of ordination? The Novus Ordo Mass in itself does not require much particular skill or expertise to perform. If I dare speak of appeal, the appeal of the post-Conciliar priesthood is not as strong as it once was, when being a priest was something exceptional, loftier, requiring a deeper spiritual retreat from the world and commitment to prayer that has been greatly de-emphasized in our modern times. The overall emphases made in the "spirit of Vatican II" create the impression that being a priest is not as necessary as just doing your duty. Let us not forget that the practice of receiving a tonsure in the pre-Conciliar Church and having strictly altar boys (who were in that position as potential seminarians) contributed greatly to the number of vocations.

Somehow I get the feeling that persisting in the modernist liberalization of the Church will not really help the vocation question since it seems to have done immense harm as the "reforms" have crept in during the past 40 or so years. Perhaps a return to the traditional theology and teachings of the Church is in order. If the Church enters and becomes of the world, it loses its moral authority and its source of strength and sanctity that has so drawn the many religious to its ranks for centuries. This is why priestly celibacy, the deepest sign of a priest's complete commitment to his supremely vital labor and his bride, the Church, must be retained. Regarding "priestesshood", I reiterate the millennial position of our Holy Mother Church that we have only male priests because Christ only chose men to be his Apostles. Men, by virtue of their bodies (as explained in JPII's Theology of the Body) and their scriptural role as the stewards of God's Creation, are the initiators of the sacrifice, they have been chosen throughout history to be God's priests. They are not superior to women nor are women, thus, inferior. Men are ordinate and women subordinate. This is in Scripture (1 Corinthians: 1-16, Ephesians 5:21-33). This is not oppression nor an expression of a lesser worth on the part of women nor even the blind assertion of social practice. Men and women have distinct roles- this is what makes society run. Rather than bicker all day about "liberation" or "rights", why don't we get to work doing what we are called to do, either as men or as women, each called in unique ways to serve God the Father. There is much work to be done. There is no time to waste on this frivolous debate.

O Holy Spirit, Spirit of wisdom and divine love, impart Your knowledge, understanding, and counsel to youth that they may know the vocation wherein they can best serve God. Give them courage and strength to follow God's holy will. Guide their uncertain steps, strengthen their resolutions, shield their chastity, fashion their minds, conquer their hearts, and lead them to the vineyards where they will labor in God's holy service.
Amen.