Given the trickle of new priestly ordinations, can the heirarchy have anything in mind except fewer parishes? I contend that the death of the local parishes will become the largest disaster the American Catholic Church has ever seen. What say you?

-- David Murphy (jmmurphy@grolen.com), December 08, 2004

Answers

The Church used to have a parish for every neighborhood.

I think the tread will be to build larger churches (mega churches if you will) with less ordained clergy and more lay involvement. In the U.S., more emphasis is being given to the proper education and formation of Lay Ecclesial Ministers.

I believe there is a transition underway toward married clergy. More along the lines of the Eastern Rite.

This, of course, will never and should never replace the value of a celibate priesthood.

My humble opinion.

-- john placette (jplacette@catholic.org), December 08, 2004.

What about priests from other nations who could be assigned to American parishes? Do other nations have an abundance of priests? Would some want to live in the U.S.? Just a thought.

David

-- non-Catholic Christian (no@spam.com), December 08, 2004.

Other nations which are currently experiencing a flood of vocations are already sending priests to the United States. There are a good number of priests coming from South America, but even more are coming from Africa. I know three Nigerian priests and one Kenyan priest who are currently on assignment here.

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), December 08, 2004.

In the old days there was a parish per neighborhood because Catholics lives mostly in the cities and so the sheer numbers of people packed into a small place made it possible.

In the country it wasn't uncommon for the parish to cover hundreds if not thousands of square miles. People thought nothing of traveling for a couple hours one way to attend Mass - that's what Sunday's were for, not doing more work, shopping, and catching the game on tv.

It is true that domestic ordinations are down - but also that ordinations in 3rd world nations are up. So I think the current situation will settle down.

Also please note how fast Denver turned its situation around. It takes a holy bishop about 10 years to go from rags to riches (a couple to clean house and get the seminary team formed, and at least 6 years to take a man and give him philosophy, theology, pastoral experience and then ordain him.)

But once the pipeline is set up a good diocese can quickly take care of its own needs and start helping others.

-- Joe (joestong@yahoo.com), December 08, 2004.

The replies I am reading to answer the original question do not seem to envision what is currently going on. We are ordaining almost no priests. Every diocese is experiencing a net loss of of 5% of its' priests every year. A sprinkling of foreign priests will not save a nations shortage.

The mega church will bring impersonal attendance and ultimately spell disaster. The power of the local church is the community and faith suport that lives there. We must not allow this scarcity of priests to continue. We need a national discussion about a married clergy alonside an elective celibate clergy.

Dave Murphy

-- David Murphy (jmmurphy@grolen.com), December 08, 2004.

Our priest currently takes care of three parishes in three different counties.

Thanks and glory be to God!

-- Suzanne (james-betsy@sbcglobal.net), December 08, 2004.

A bit of perspective here. Yes it looks almost certain the US will have far fewer priests per head in 2030, but the US still has, and will have for at least the foreseeable future, more priests per head of Catholic population than almost any other major country. (An exception is India, but even there the priest per TOTAL population ratio is much lower.) Vocations are increasing in Latin America, but off a very low base. They are increasing in Africa and Asia, but pretty much in line with increases in the Catholic population, not really “a flood”.

In any case the Church is opposed to the idea of importing a large number of priests who are culturally alien to from the communities they serve. Priests should be drawn from the communities they work in. On the face of it, the option of married clergy looks like an attractive part of the answer to priest shortages, but I’m just worried at how often things which are introduced as “optional” or “limited use in special circumstances”, quickly become the norm. The “precious jewel” of priestly celibacy may be lost forever.

-- Steve (55555@aol.com), December 08, 2004.

We are ordaining almost no priests.

Only national borders make this statement relevant...

-- Daniel Hawkenberry (dlm@catholic.org), December 08, 2004.

The really only important point here is the care and attention of souls. In attention created by fewer priests cannot be all that attractive.

Let's try another view. The present heirarchy and many devout Catholics savor the celibacy model. However, until 1130 we did have a married clergy. Peter, Bartholomew and Philip and perhaps James of Zebedee were married men. If celibacy were the primary criteria for priesthood nevermind bishops, certainly Jesus would not have chosen twenty-five or thirty percent of his clergy from the married ranks.

The principle then is that care and maintenace of souls is primary. We do that close in not from afar. Therefore I am suggesting that we urge the leadership to seriously consider petitioning Rome on this matter.

Dave Murphy

-- David Murphy (jmmurphy@grolen.com), December 08, 2004.

Yet another view David. St Peter was (or had been) married, but I understand tradition holds that his wife had died before he was ordained. Many women died quite young in those days. Don’t know where you got your info on Bart, Philip and James. Celibacy is not “THE” primary criterion for priests, but the Church decided by the end of the first century if not the very beginning, that celibacy is “A” primary criterion. Even according to your maximum speculated figures, the vast majority of the clergy Jesus originally chose were celibate, in a society where the great majority of men were married.

Yes there were a FEW married clergy up to 1130, but it was acknowledged all along that celibacy was much PREFERRED. And in most places and for most of the time since 1130, there has NOT been a shortage of priests.

-- Steve (55555@aol.com), December 08, 2004.

In any case the Church is opposed to the idea of importing a large number of priests who are culturally alien to from the communities they serve.

Um, no, I don't think the Church is very opposed. During my lifetime, my hometown parish has had six priests. Three were born and raised in Ireland, two in Mexico, and only one from the U.S. I've been to lots of other parishes as well and seen the priests of the aforementioned nationalities, as well as those from Africa, Indian, and the Phillipines. As catholicism is dying out in Ireland, we are now getting alot of priests from Africa as Paul says, and they are the answer (at least in the short term) to the priest shortage in the West. Read all about it: Vatican Seeks African Priests to Re-evangelize the West

-- Brian Crane (brian.crane@cranemills.com), December 09, 2004.

David Murphy, I agree with you 100%. There needs to be a push toward allowing a married clergy.

The Church could solve the problem with a stroke of the pen. Married Deacons could be "elevated" by allowing a deacon to fully administer the sacraments. But,you get into a argument about the theology of the diaconate vs. the priesthood.

We have people standing in line to become deacons.

The Church works very slowly. I think there is a transition now toward a married clergy. I think we're in the middle of it. Married men have been ordained, and the church didn't fall apart.

I believe that the Holy See in the next few years will create a Latin rite married "order" similar to the Eastern rite.

I think the deacons will continue to lobby for more ability to administer the sacraments, in particular, anointing of the sick with reconciliation. I think this is sorely needed.

Having a priest celebrate mass is for me a minor issue. 10,000 people could be brought together for mass. It's the other things that a priest does, like anointing, that suffer due to the shortage.

God bless,

-- john placette (jplacette@catholic.org), December 09, 2004.

David Murphy, I agree with you 100%. There needs to be a push toward allowing a married clergy.

NO THERE DOESN'T! Heed the words of Pope Paul VI: Sacerdotalis Caelibatus

"The Church proclaims her hope in Christ; she is conscious of the critical shortage of priests when compared with the spiritual necessities of the world's population; but she is confident in her expectation which is founded on the infinite and mysterious power of grace, that the high spiritual quality of her ministers will bring about an increase also in their numbers, for everything is possible" to God.

In the community of the faithful committed to his charge, the priest represents Christ. Thus, it is most fitting that in all things he should reproduce the image of Christ and in particular follow His example, both in his personal and in his apostolic life.

Christ remained throughout His whole life in the state of celibacy, which signified His total dedication to the service of God and men. This deep concern between celibacy and the priesthood of Christ is reflected in those whose fortune it is to share in the dignity and mission of the Mediator and eternal Priest; this sharing will be more perfect the freer the sacred minister is from the bonds of flesh and blood...Thus they intend not only to participate in His priestly office, but also to share with Him His very condition of living.

The priest dedicates himself to the service of the Lord Jesus and of His Mystical Body with complete liberty, which is made easier by his total offering, and thus he depicts more fully the unity and harmony of the priestly life. His ability for listening to the word of God and for prayer increases.

-- Brian Crane (brian.crane@cranemills.com), December 09, 2004.

By design of the Congress of the United States, the Immigration Laws are transforming the United States into an increasingly diverse nation. It is a given and is not likely to change considering the political realities at work. This is not to say my comment is a judgement either way. It is not it is an observation of realities.

No doubt the Catholic Church will continue. It will be more diverse, however. What remains to be seen is the effect that the generally more religiously conservative immigrants have on the liberal, secular, materialistic American post-christian culture.

We are in for some interesting times indeed. I pray this experiment in democracy holds together. The Catholic Church will remain even as the demographics of the U.S. changes. But an amorphous all- inclusive ideologically vague Catholic Church, which remains a possibility, will eventually only become a tool for the state in whatever form the U.S. government takes. Only a unified, disci- lined Catholic Church will retain its Catholic identity and she will be many colors and ethnicities, but likely with a much smaller membership. There will be persecution ahead but its form remains to be seen. That is the fruit of a diverse, secular society, where religion is respected in name only not in practice.

It is already here and having its way with catholics.

Karl

-- Karl (Parkerkajwen@hotmail.com), December 09, 2004.

Sorry to say it Steve, but Peter wasn't married. The word translated in most english bibles as "motherinlaw" isn't translated as such in other places.

She was his mother. If he had been married, why didn't the wife do the serving - why wait for his mother in law to do it?

If for the sake of the argument we want to believe he was married at one time, it is pretty clear from the text that he wasn't married when he met Jesus - and he wasn't married while leading the Church.

Also, how many churches with a married clergy have booming numbers of such men? The orthodox have married priests... do they have a surplus? No.

So that option doesn't seem - based on the evidence - to be a solution to a crisis of numbers.

If we had better quality bishops and priests the quantity would take care of itself in 10 years.

-- Joe (joestong@yahoo.com), December 09, 2004.

Steve,5555 Your history is weak regarding married apostles. However, I urge you and others not to take your eye off the ball. The potential disaster facing the Church of this century is that souls are not going to be lead, serviced or guided without a vibrant local faith community. "Without a vision the people perish". We need to replace the diminishing number of priests. Our parishes each have good, holy, faithfilled people willing to serve in a priestly capacity. We really only have to tap into this resource, which the Holy Spirit has already prepared. We need not turn on one another, but rather we need to influence our Bishops. I urge you to direct your energy in that direction.

Dave Murphy 12/9/04

-- David Murphy (jmmurphy@grolen.com), December 09, 2004.

To John Placette:

John Thanks for the support. Could I urge you to be active in contacting your Bishop raising his awareness of the interest of the Church they lead.

Dave Murphy 12/9/04

-- David Murphy (jmmurphy@grolen.com), December 09, 2004.

Joe;

Yes Peter was married as a matter of fact. His wife went to live with her mother in Caparnaum while Peter traveled with Jesus. His mother in law did not think much of Peter for leaving his fishing business to follow Jesus so there was tension at home. This is just for the record. The much more important point is that the American Church is hurrying towards a disaster because of the scarcity of priests and the necessary disappearance of local parishes. Can I urge you to focus on creating a solution to that problem rather than getting lost in less important questions or trying to maintain traditions which in fact are no longer working.

Dave Murphy 12/9/04

-- David Murphy (jmmurphy@grolen.com), December 09, 2004.

You presume too much. The Catholic Church isn't a democracy. Our prelates don't take polls of the rank and file.

Why you also presume: ''Our parishes have good, holy, faithfilled people willing to serve in a priestly capacity.'' is hard to understand; as if this were being published somewhere?

God must CALL his priests. They aren't a ''resource'' waiting outside the church door to enlist. The Church can't tap the ''priestly capacity'' of faith filled people. God alone chooses who will serve Him and speaks to the man. Not the other way round.

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), December 09, 2004.

“The word translated in most english bibles as "motherinlaw" isn't translated as such in other places. She was his mother.” I don't know Greek but that’s the first I’ve heard of this idea Joe. Could you elaborate?

“ If he had been married, why didn't the wife do the serving - why wait for his mother in law to do it?” I understand that this is taken as evidence that his wife had died. His mother-in-law was living with him presumably because she had no surviving children of her own.

Brian, the Church doesn’t oppose SOME priests coming from Africa to the West, in fact it is important that some do, but not vast numbers such as would have a significant effect on priest numbers. As the English Bishop says in the page you link, "I don't think there are any real answers to the vocations crisis unless we are able to foster our own vocations and let our people feel that they have their own priests."

-- Steve (55555@aol.com), December 09, 2004.

Peter was indeed married. In the Pshita bible - Mathew 8:14, Markose 1:30 and Luke 4:38 - it directly translates to "mother of his wife". The same translation is used in other bibles as well.

-- Abraham T (Lijothengil@yahoo.com), December 09, 2004.

I look forward to having a flood of "immigrant" priests..I can only keep praying that it happens soon. IMHO the last thing we need is more lay people doing the job of priests..we need more people praying for young men to become our priests.

-- Lesley (martchas@hotmail.com), December 09, 2004.

David, I seriously believe that we are in the middle of a transition toward a married clergy.

Unfortunately, bishops have developed into middle management. It would take the Vatican to make a radical step to speed the process.

We'll see (but probably not in our lifetimes) a developement of an approved theology of the married clergy before it becomes totally accepted.

In the meantime, everyone needs to be an active member of the Body of Christ. After all, except for the consecration and pronouncement of reconciliation, we can all do what the priest does.

We are all the Body of Christ.

God bless,

-- john placette (jplacette@catholic.org), December 13, 2004.

Maybe you've shown us a skewed perspective, John. It's hard not to notice your words, ''Unfortunately, bishops have developed into middle management. It would take the Vatican to make a radical step to speed the process,''

But we accept the bishops' full authority, it isn't even questioned by the Popes. There has never been ''middle management''; the judgments of our bishops are the Church.

Also, you maintain there is already a process where there isn't. Only the Pope could initiate one, and it isn't even a radical step. It may yet come to pass. But there are no signs. One part of your posts is quite wrong: ''Unfortunately''. There's nothing unfortunate in the Catholic Church. It can be improper, such as in scandal. But celibate priests never have been. Not improper, nor unfortunate. They've been blessings to the Church, and will continue as blessings. God will make new vocations if we have faith and pray.

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), December 13, 2004.

to Loschavez;

You are not getting it. It's not that difficult to see, but you have to use your mind and reasoning power to perceive the future. Let me give you a specific example: Here in New Hampshire, the Bishop told me last Saturday 12/11/04, that we now have about 125 priests in this diocese and that seven years from now, 2012, we will have about 75. If you do the math we are at about -7 priests per year. Assuming the -7 figure is accurate over time then 10 years later or around 2022 we will have virtually no priests! Now you who refuse to think about our problems in real terms are going to have to deal with a priestless Church. Imagine that! All of which to say is that WE HAVE A PROBLEM. Let's get busy creating a solution instead of bickering about the sexual formula for priests. Each of us has a responsibility to address the leadership of the Church and insist that we cannot let this problem slide any further than it already has. Let's get rid of the negativity and press for a positive, real answer to this most serious problem. At issue is the eternal condition of souls, each of which is far to precious to sacrifice to a principle such as celibacy.

-- David Murphy (jmmurphy@grolen.com), December 13, 2004.

Dear David:

I haven't suggested we have enough priests to the foreseeable future. Only that God can awaken new vocations. The Church has never needed for laymen to create solutions. We have the Holy Spirit. If we have something useful to contribute it's our fervent prayer, not new reasoning by the laity about a married priesthood.

For that matter, there's no clear reason to believe married men would be called by God to fill the needs of the clergy. Nor would He call women, as so many liberated women think. The Catholic Church has Christ's holy promise that He will be with us all days, even to the end of the world. We can believe Him, that the Church is not winding down or falling into passive obsolescense.

If she were indeed, married clergy wouldn't make a difference. Likelier they would be the ruin of the Church.

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), December 13, 2004.

Married priests is not the answer. The character of the candiidate is more important than other considerations. The schismatics like SSPX and others have no problem filling their ranks without dangling any carrots in front of them. What we need is to bring the Church back into the past, difficult as that may seem. The future looks bleak if we continue on the same road which we are traveling.

-- Charise (Charltontime@AOL.com), December 13, 2004.

I agree - holiness is always the answer, not lowering the bar to ordination.

When I was in the seminary I recall seeing some ads for the archdiocese of Detroit. Some yahoo thought that if they offer prospects free education, a stipend, vacations, etc. that an otherwise normal man would jump at the chance to be ordained.

But even the Marine Corps knows that otherwise normal men won't be bought off like that. They don't bribe their recruits. They offer them a challenge which is risky and could very well get them killed - and have so many young men clamoring for recruitment that they have to turn many away.

Besides, Jesus Christ offered his followers the cross, not a plush lifestyle. Those religious and diocesan seminaries and above all, spiritualities, that are challenging, that require abnegation and sacrifice, tend to attract the men who are not afraid of obedience, poverty, and chastity. They offer the kingdom and so get both quality and quantity.

I recall thinking that the priesthood was a lifestyle that a sane person would only chose if he positively knew Jesus Christ had personally called him to. No other value or benefit was worth the suffering and sacrifice!

And thus, at least in my experience, the vocational discernment of God's will was what led me to go home, not the perks or lack thereof.

Any life style can be challenging and hard if the person's heart isn't "in it" - if they don't believe in it and don't treasure it. This is why, despite the opportunity for sex, married couples break up!

For those who think married clergy will produce a boom in numbers because they will have a sexual outlet or a spouse to share love with... how can we explain the dearth of Catholic men signing up to take on full time positions in our parishes?

Obviously, if the Holy Spirit had been calling married men to the active ministry and priesthood all these years, we'd have grown up with a growd swell of men attending all Church functions, begging to be put to work and not being satisfied with mowing the lawn and handing out flyers or cooking pancakes and bacon every 3rd sunday.

But we're not. So what does that mean for the idea that marriage is the solution to the priest shortage?

-- Joe (joestong@yahoo.com), December 14, 2004.

To those who have misread this thread; I have never suggested taking some half hearted layman and ordaining such a person. The prime requirements for ordination are holiness and deep faith. Do you find anything in my comments that would suggest otherwise? A few years ago, the Manchester diocese here in New Hampshire elicited candidates for the diaconate. They were overwhelmed with candidates. There were far more than they could handle. In our parish alone six men offered their services (I was not one of them). This I offer by way of evidence that the Holy Spirit is already way out ahead of us and that there exists a tremendous number of potential priests in our midsts. They have not come forward because there has been no call. The fact that that there has been no call is not proof that there are no potential vocations.

Another point, if I may, why all the negativism? It seems everytime someone suggests a solution to a problem we get one of two general answers: one, there is no problem or two, your solution will never work. Given this attitude we will remain stuck in place. Could we not move on to something positive?

As to the Holy Spirit doing all of the work, since when did you get the idea that is the way God works? When Jesus was on the earth he didn't just sit on a bench in Nazareth. He was up and moving, coaching inviting, acting. He didn't say to himself," well, if the Holy Spirit wants to save mankind he can just change men by Himself, I'll just stay home". WE need to become active in forming the Church of tomorrow. Acting in concert with our fellow Catholics, but doing nothing is not an option.

-- David Murphy (jmmurphy@grolen.com), December 14, 2004.

Another point, if I may, why all the negativism?

Wasn't it you David, who said "I contend that the death of the local parishes will become the largest disaster the American Catholic Church has ever seen?" And you complain that others here are mired in negativism. Sheesh!

It seems everytime someone suggests a solution to a problem we get one of two general answers: one, there is no problem or two, your solution will never work. Given this attitude we will remain stuck in place. Could we not move on to something positive?

You are not the only one to suggest a solution. You just disagree with other solutions offered. Pope Paul tells us: "high spiritual quality of her ministers will bring about an increase also in their numbers, for everything is possible" to God." This is proving and has proven to be true. Ordinations are already increasing in dioceses that are orthodox such as Lincoln, Rockford, Arlington and in Fraternal societies like the FSSP. Why, you ask? Because the Bishops and priests there are devoted and pious. They are loyal to the teachings of the Church, obey the Pope, encourage devotions, and preach as men of God. Oh and guess what else they embrace: the male, celibate priesthood!

-- Brian Crane (brian.crane@cranemills.com), December 14, 2004.

David, I think you're right. We have men standing in line for the diaconate.

There is a push to better educate the deacons in theology. (Graduate level)

There is also a push to better educate the lay ecclesial ministers in theology.(Undergrad).

This raises the bar.

Eugene, these are the signs.

My opinion is that once the deacons (who are NOW, ordained clergy) are educated at the level of the priests, the Church will "elevate" the deacons.

I think there will be a new order of priests.

Celibate priests will always be valued.

What is wrong with a married man being able to celebrate mass? Nothing.

We have deacons now who are on the same scale as the priests. The two, soon to be three, that we have in our parish would make wonderful priests.

The Church moves (and changes) very, very slowly, but it does happen.

Vatican II changed the identity of the priests, and the laity. All for the better.

God bless,

-- john placette (jplacette@catholic.org), December 14, 2004.

John Placette, Mon Ami: There's a fundamental disconnect in your thesis, ''My opinion is that once the deacons (who are NOW, ordained clergy) are educated at the level of the priests, the Church will "elevate" the deacons.

I think there will be a new order of priests.''

God calls His priests. They can't merely be educated to that ''level''. Deacons have a calling to the Catholic diaconate; and married men are indeed called-- by God. The Church cannot ''elevate'' anybody; God sends vocations. A Pope wanted Saint Francis of Asissi to enter the holy priesthood. Francis did not hear a call from God. He remained a holy brother.

Many good Catholic women ''feel'' called. They go on to denounce the Pope & magisterium for sexist bias, and launch feminist movements. But God isn't even consulted! That's almost the way you're proposing future Catholic vocations. With no worry about HIM; just the urge to govern from the ranks. Faithful Catholics should know better.

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), December 14, 2004.

I guess you are right. We will have plenty of priests. The number of parishes will be sufficient to meet the spiritual needs of souls. God is on autopilot he will solve everything so where shall we go on vacation. I'm seriously considering quitting my job since God will provide. In fact God has provided so much to His Church that the number of priests is mushrooming. Let's all be negative. Hey it works!! good Luck!

-- David Murphy (jmmurphy@grolen.com), December 14, 2004.

It seems you consider our Holy Father negative. Or, is it celibacy that strikes some Catholics as too negative?

But Christ gave priests the example, so it's positive. Faith is our contribution, after all. And, if you so choose, pray the Pope will ''come to his senses.''

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), December 14, 2004.

Vatican II changed the identity of the priests, and the laity. All for the bettter.

Was there a crisis in vocations before Vatican II?

God is on autopilot he will solve everything so where shall we go on vacation. I'm seriously considering quitting my job since God will provide. In fact God has provided so much to His Church that the number of priests is mushrooming. Let's all be negative. Hey it works!! good Luck!

Great, more pleas for anti-negativity coming from the source of negativity on this thread. Listen, I understand your concern, but it seems very clear that vocations will flow from dioceses and orders that pray for vocations, embrace Church teaching, revere the liturgy (and don't tolerate abuses), provide priestly examples of piety, reverence, and faith and encourage family prayer. Read an inspiring story about how prayer and devotion can make a difference: The Mothers of Lu Monferrato

-- Brian Crane (brian.crane@cranemills.com), December 14, 2004.

Brian

If someone were standing near a building which had a ladder leaning against it and the ladder began to teeter in the direction of the one standing near the ladder, would it be negative to warn the potential victim?

We undoubtedly will achieve some vocations in the manner that you describe and hopefully we will get many of them. The proportion of the problem that we are facing however is that we are losing somewhere between 5 and 8 percent NET of our priests each year. Unless that trend is reversed and soon, the face of the church will necessarily have to change. That set of changes will negatively affect all facets of the faith. If we want to reverse the direction we are headed some action must be taken.

To deny the realities of current trends is not healthy.

D. Murphy

-- David Murphy (jmmurphy@grolen.com), December 15, 2004.

If someone were standing near a building which had a ladder leaning against it and the ladder began to teeter in the direction of the one standing near the ladder, would it be negative to warn the potential victim?

No! You should make him aware of the teetering ladder and urge him to straighten the ladder and set it firmly in place as it should be, as it was made to be used.

-- Brian Crane (brian.crane@cranemills.com), December 15, 2004.

Brian: Psst, the ladder is falling! What if you can't put it back quite the way it was? Celibate vocations don't look like they are going to be enough before we are virtually out of priests. You can hope your formula would work, I wish it could too. But what do you do if the numbers fall way way short? We cannot write off thousands of souls to preserve celibacy no matter how precious it is. Measured against the loss of souls, I submit a married clergy alongside a celibate one would be accepable to God and man.

Dave Murphy 12/15

-- David Murphy (jmmurphy@grolen.com), December 15, 2004.

''We cannot write off thousands of souls to preserve celibacy. I submit a married clergy alongside a celibate one would be accepable to God and man.''

David, You haven't been called to write off anybody nor to save the Catholic faith from becoming a priestless Church. In fact, neither you nor me can ordain one single priest. We have the option of prayer and faith in God. He's quite capable of picking out good priests when it suits Him. Nobody is asking you to live in celibacy. You just go ahead and marry.

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), December 15, 2004.

The issue of priestly marriage versus celibacy should be examined in light of those priests/ministers are in both situations. Married priests/ministers:

1. Eastern rites Catholics
2. Orthodox Church
3. Anglicans
4. Most (all?) Protestant churches

For the best understanding one should draw especially from the example of the fellow Catholics and Orthodox churches, who hold masses or services daily. From my experience in Protestant churches and from what I've read, the ministry as a pastor can be *very* straining on the person, and that difficulty is multiplied when having to consider caring for a wife and children. Not only will he be strained to provide for them materially, but also he will not have sufficient time to spend with them in order to be a good husband and father.

Imagine how much more difficult it would be for married Catholic priests who often have a flock much larger than their Protestant counterparts (1000 v. 200, approximately). Add to this the fact that the priest must be available DAILY to say mass, and he will also have other sacraments and office work to attend to.

IMO, a rite of married priests is a bad idea. Not only will we have strained, stretched, and worn-out priests, but they will be unable to handle as much of a workload as the celibate priests. So should the Church pay these married priests less, in proportion to their amount of work? How will they sufficienly provide for their families? What about the vows of poverty?

-- Emily ("jesusfollower7@yahoo.com"), December 16, 2004.

Another question: do Eastern rite Catholics and Orthodox have a similar vocations crisis, or has the married priesthood compensated for their gaps?

-- Emily ("jesusfollower7@yahoo.com"), December 16, 2004.

Emily, becoming a priest doesn’t involve taking a vow of poverty. Only a member of a religious order, whether priest or lay (monk or nun) takes a vow of poverty. Most priests are not members of a religious order.

-- Steve (55555@aol.com), December 16, 2004.

Steve, thanks for clearing that up. I knew that some priests didn't take a vow of poverty, but wasn't sure how common it was. What's the distribution?

-- Emily ("jesusfollower7@yahoo.com"), December 17, 2004.

Ok, starting over...

Yes, I suppose since it is theologically do-able, the Latin rite church could open the priesthood to men who are already married.

But what would that instantly solve? Nothing. You'd still need men to go to seminary, and you'd need to pay for their upkeep and support of wife and children... the whole process would take a decade.

In the same period of time, speading 1/10th the amount, you could simply reform the seminaries, recruit young men, train them, and ordain them.

What's lacking is will, not men. Those dioceses headed by holy and theologically sound and constitutionally courageous bishops don't have any problem attracting men to their seminaries. So that seems to be the core issue: better leadership.

Sure lots of married men (myself included) could give fine homilies and give sage advice in confession...but the technical ability isn't the sole qualification for the sacrament of orders.

Openning the priesthood in the Latin rite to married men would create more practical problems than it would solve, and we'd still be faced with the issues of holiness, seminary formation, and courage in the face of cultural enemies.

-- Joe (joestong@yahoo.com), December 21, 2004.

Joe Strong

Joe I am glad to see you at least are open to cinsider the possibilities. As to your concerns about logistics. If we could find two or three men from almost every parish, men who are know for their steadfast faith and constancy, who are willing to serve in the priest hood. They could perhaps be trained relatively quickly to liturgical function, counselling and guidance, ordained and then continue with deeper theological studies post ordination. This has been done in the past eg, the second world war.

The support of families may not eben be an issue. Suppose we had a few priests in each parish they could serve in duty shifts or someother arrangement. Therefore they could maintain their "day job" in the same manner as deacons now do. Educational expense might well be subsidized or titally underwritten depending on the circumstances of the diocese and or the candidates.

I urge you to talk this subject up in your diocese or at an even wider forum. This problem must be solved or the parish system cannot prevail.

D. Murphy 12/22

-- David Murphy (jmmurphy@grolen.com), December 22, 2004.

Emily, about one-third of the Catholic priests in the world are members of vowed religious orders which take a vow of poverty. This proportion has been gradually decreasing in recent years. The proportion is a bit higher in most mission countries and lower in most Western countries.

-- Steve (55555@aol.com), December 22, 2004.

The trouble with part time priests is...the job they have isn't part time. Plus once a man (married or not) is ordained, he is transformed ONTOLOGICALLY into a priest of Christ, and is bound to his bishop in a real way - he is not free to up and move to another diocese without permission. His time, where he lives, what he does outside...all those things are now brought under the aegis of Canon law... like getting a commission to be an officer in the Army only more so.

Logistically quite a lot of things would have to happen and it would be expensive. Who would be the pastor? That's a full time job. If the priest is forthright in preaching the Gospel imagine the leverage the state or enemies would have on him through his wife and children?

The diocese would be duty bound to pay a living wage to him to support a family. Insurance, cars, etc.

And they would have to give him a living wage while he spends 3-4 years studying theology, while spending at least some prolonged period in a community setting (as he would be ordained into the brotherhood of priests, he has to feel a true brother of all priests and filial relation with his bishop).

I suppose they could put the minimum age limit at 40 or 50, to obviate or make rate a case of a man with a young wife and young children, but if so, after all the expense the Church would only enjoy 20 years or so of service rather than the 40 or more typically found from single men.

What scandals would erupt if his children aren't exemplars? We have to consider the bell curve not anecdotal evidence. If the Latin Rite began ordaining married men... using the current seminary system and current Bishops in place, it's not a forgone conclusion that those selected would be orthodox or of the highest caliber. Many might just be good honest Joe's without a deep prayer life.

Then there are the whole psychological/spiritual issues to deal with.

Heaven knows its hard to be a good husband...but being a priest and a husband would expose a man to some serious spiritual warfare. If you don't think the devil exists then you haven't been trying to be holy hard enough. He does and when he attacks you know it.

As an aside, we married folk (especially men) have to remember, and keep it close to heart that Satan is real and does try to constantly pull us down or get to us through moods, through other people, events, etc.

When all is nice and sunny and then out of the clear blue sky your wife gets a seriously bad mood going... picking fights, touchy, easily upset, "fragile" we normally assume its "that time of month", PMS...but it may also be her being tempted. Pray for her and suspend judgement. The Holy Spirit gives the gift of peace..so if peace is under attack, pray for reinforcement.

Priests are under constant assault. Ditto for seminarians (which is why their prayer life is far far more intense than lay peoples). Every perverse thought and temptation - you name it - can hit them 24/7, even during Mass itself. Especially within 24 hours of some nice gift or grace...when people natually let down their guard a bit.

A single, celibate priest lives in the rectory, his private time relatively secluded from the world. But a married priest would necessarily live in the suburbs, with his wife and children... he would have to spend time with them and mingle with the world more directly... maybe that would be good, but it would also have it's down side too...more exposure to spiritually lethal toxins.

Pray for your priests! But don't for a second think they have a job. It's not a job. It's an ontological state of being...spiritually it is being the tip of the spear, the front lines of battle, the canary in the mine shaft... if they are good they are attacked viciously. If they are lax, the slavos let up - but shift to subtler assaults on their pride and presumption (they forego prayer, meditation, etc.)

Having pursued that vocation for 11 years, I can tell you, I wouldn't dare go ad altare Dei unless there was a positive sign that God called me and the Church signed off on it as divine inspiration. It's just too august and too hot a position to be in for a man to take it upon himself for any reason or motive.

I'm not saying that it's a bad idea, just that it wouldn't instantly solve the priest shortage problem - because it would take at least 10 years to implement on a large scale...10 years that could be spent training celibate men on just the same level with less expense and other logistical problems.

The priest friend who was a seminary rector for the eastern rite told me stories of how his bishop had trouble moving the married clergy around - he couldn't send them to poor parishes or dangerous places as that would be exposing wife and children to danger or poverty.

Those priests also have the problem of repressive regimes holding their families hostage (really or in threat) as leverage to keep him from "speaking the truth to power"

-- Joe (joestong@yahoo.com), December 23, 2004.

Well said Joe.

-- Andy S ("ask3332004@yahoo.com"), December 23, 2004.