Posted on 10/29/2003 8:59:36 AM PST by american colleen
So, is there a priest shortage?
It is fairly common for the press, Catholic or secular, to report about a shortage of Catholic priests that is usually described as a crisis for the Church. It is true that the number of priests in the US has been declining for over a decade. This has been a fairly small decline however, from 53,000 in 1991 to 46,000 in 2001. There has probably been a similar decline in the percentage of active Catholics during these same years, but this is harder to measure accurately. Keep in mind that there are less than 20,000 Catholic parishes in the US, far less than the number of priests. And just for example, if half of the parishes closed overnight, most Catholics would still have a shorter trip to Sunday mass than to their nearest shopping mall. (Thanks to a local bishop for that fact.) I live in an area where towns of less than two hundred people still have a priest serving their parish.
These statistics need to be interpreted in light of an important fact: The Catholic Church is an international, worldwide institution. Priests can and often do travel between nations to meet local needs. Some people think it a problem that the US has imported a few hundred foreign-born priests because our seminaries can't produce enough. Do these people realize that the US has imported half a million computer programmers because our schools can't produce enough?
You won't see much reporting about this, but worldwide the number of priests and seminarians is growing. Between 1990 and 2000, total priests worldwide increased from 401,000 to 405,000. Granted, this is slower than the percent growth in total Catholics, but remember that several other religions are shrinking in the modern, secularized world. In other words, "They wish they had our problems"! Add to this the number of permanent deacons, which exploded from 17,000 to 27,000 during these years. Permanent deacons are ordained clergy who perform baptisms, weddings and preach. They will play a growing role in the future of the Church, but they get very little publicity. The overall result is that the number of Catholic clergy has increased significantly in the last decade. And during those 10 years the number of worldwide Catholic major seminarians grew from 93,000 to 110,000, a very healthy increase. The lack of growth is mostly in the English-speaking nations. And even there the problem is more local than you might think.
Some US Dioceses are ordaining many more priests than others. By comparing the number of priests active in a diocese during 2001 with the same figure from 1991, we can see how the diocese is trending vocationally. The percentage figure represents the 2001 number divided by the 1991 figure. A higher percentage means the diocese is having more success attracting new priests. Compare these relatively successful dioceses:
Atlanta, GA. . . . 123%
Arlington, VA. . 121
Lincoln, NE. . . . 107
Fargo, ND. . . . 101
Rockford, IL. . . . 97
With these relatively unsuccessful ones:
Rochester, NY. . . 72%
Milwaukee, WI. . . 77
Albany, NY. . . . . . 79
New Ulm, MN. . . 79
Joliet, IL. . . . . . . . 80
I hate to use a cliche, but numbers don't lie. Anyone can see a huge difference here. Ultimately, the bishop of a diocese is responsible for vocations. I will leave it to you, gentle reader, to explore what many other Catholics have said about the men who were leading the Dioceses above during those years. I will say that if we had accountability in the Church like major business corporations do, Bishop Matthew Clark of Rochester would have been forced to resign long ago.
Standard business management practice would suggest that we study the Dioceses that are succeeding, see what factors are helping them, and implement these factors in other places. Bishops that fail to do this should be held accountable in some way. This is an area where some new kind of lay empowerment may be needed. If any readers are curious about the percentage figure for your local diocese, contact me and I will calculate it for you. For now, this may be the best "power rating" available to evaluate the performance of Catholic Bishops.
LOL! There were, maybe, 12 minor seminaries in the United States?
The average age of priests will be 60 in 2005!
The clock is ticking.
I know. I read it. It is the same information that he provided in the initial link.
We all know the numbers and we all know that there is a dearth of priests in some areas. But this does not address why there is NOT a dearth of priests in the more orthodox dioceses and why there IS a dearth of priests in the progressive dioceses - which is the topic of this thread.
That's fine, nothing you can do about that. Shouldn't really be a problem with approx. 30% of Catholics attending Mass once a week. Like I said, I would rather drive for an hour and have an orthodox priest say Mass even if I have to stand the whole time in the back of the Church then have 20 local progressive or apathetic priests who, in trying to be "relevant" are prisoners of the latest spiritual psycobabble or the newest fads.
And plenty of priests.
Uh, no.
I went to one in Dallas in 1965, for a year, and we had 20 students, and three priests tied up teaching us.
At the same time, the Southern Baptists have created about 17 new Churches in these areas during this time frame. Ain't that a kick?
But my real concern is that you find yourself in the company of liberal,modernist,progressive Amchurchians. See, Colleen's comment on the "Rent-a-Priest" founder and compadre of the writer of one of your articles.
Read the article and do some research on minor seminaries - they were as large as regular Catholic high schools, student wise.
The VAST MAJORITY of the men I know who've left the priesthood were in minor seminaries at one time.
I only debunked your citation of "12 minor seminaries" and showed you that at one time there were 122 minor seminaries. I didn't comment on them beyond that.
IMO they are a bad idea but that has nothing to do with this topic.
LOL! ANYBODY who disagrees with YOU is an "Amchurchian."
Dean Hoge has studied the decline in the number of priests for years, and is quoted in the CARA research above. The number of priests is less, the number of seminarians is less, and the replacement numbers are not enough to cover those priests who die and retire.
Canon Law allows each bishop control of priests who study for his diocese, so Bruskewitz is not likely to farm out priests to Mahoney.
Lots of farm boys entering seminaries, as in Rockford and Lincoln and Fargo, and Omaha.
Oklahoma City and Tulsa both have very "orthodox" bishops, yet their numbers are down. Is the bishop in Arlington "orthodox"? Seems to me I've read an article here where he was trying to kick a priest out of his diocese who was squealing on a priest who broke up a long-time marriage.
Anyway, perhaps Dean Hoge will explore these dioceses and draw a statistical correlation.
And, it's interesting that the Pope seems not to want to move any of these "orthodox" bishops into the larger sees. He's had a couple of shots with Bruskewitz (Boston, Milwaukee), yet Bishop Fabian is still on the plains.
It could have to do with how well these men will be received by the priests in place.
O'Malley, your own archbishop, for all the jumping up and down here, seems to have already fallen out of favor.
If FReepers were in charge of screening seminary candidates, the number of priests would dwindle to a handful.
Communion in the hand was a common practice as can be see in reading the Early Church Fathers and the History of the Roman Rite. Folks even used to bring the Eucharist home with them.
All this stuff about kneeling vs. standing, communion in the hand vs on the tongue, receiving kneeling vs standing ect is all so much piffle. The posture of Christians at Mass has changed over time and so has the manner of receiving the Eucharist.
Who is the one so Holy or with sufficient authority as to object to what Holy Mother Church approves for us?
I dare say the early Christians, who fasted twice weekly, and were daily in danger of being martyred for even going to The Eucharist and took the Eucharist in their hands were no less Christian than we holy, enlightened ones alive today.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.