In
America we have a tendency to pour energy into symptom management
instead of addressing the fundamental issue. It's true that we don't
seem to have enough priests, especially young ones, to answer the
demands for clergy within the Church today. Part of that may be a
problem with our expectations. We actually have more priests per member
in the pew and more Masses available than in any other country I've
visited. But, I think the central issue is a lack of vocational
investment in young men.
First to examine the media's proposed solutions of married priesthood or perhaps opening the clergy to women . . .
There is
a tradition of the priesthood being open to married men. In fact, it
was implicitly licit until a little under a thousand years ago, though
most men still chose to be celibate. Having worked as a missionary (and
obviously one who could not have the additional service of
administering the sacraments), ministry is all-consuming. To add to
that, I can't imagine having to chose between your sick wife at home and
a sick lady across town who needs Last Rites. Your time and investment
in relationships for those you minister to are hard to maintain when
you are committed to a set of primary relationships.
There is the additional danger that a call to the clergy becomes
merely another job option amongst others--both lessening the cultural
value of religious men who are "set apart" for service and holiness as
well as compromising the clarity of a "call" to walk in the footsteps of
Christ. Priesthood becomes a function of a person instead of an
indelible spiritual character. Perhaps I've read too much Victorian
literature, but the idea of washed up, married academics settling into a
preaching job doesn't seem to be the spark that will reignite the
American church. The Vatican hasn't said anything that would indicate
this is an anticipated change either.
Just to be fair, Eastern Catholic Churches have maintained a
tradition of married priests without (the appearance at least of)
watering down the quality of their ministers. We must remember, though,
that they serve communities of only a couple hundred families at most,
and they come from a different culture in terms of their understanding
of marriage.
It seems that if there were an abundance of men with a genuine
calling to married ministry then we would have plenty of permanent
deacons. They can be married, plus they can perform two of the
sacraments and can do any of the administrative, teaching, and
counseling that a priest does. However, we also have a paucity of them.
In regards to opening the clergy to women. I think it would
quickly become a political statement rather than a spiritual
opportunity. It also would be a sacramental impossibility since we
believe that the priest actually stands at the altar and in the
Confessional as an "Alter Christus," another Christ. Since, Christ
chose to reveal Himself to us as a male, we follow His example in
keeping the outward sign consistent with the inward reality of God as
protector & provider (traditionally, male attributes). There's a
bunch more
here and
here and elsewhere, but that's the cliff notes.
So, onward to my somewhat optimistic solution. I say
"somewhat" because it seems unrealistic to anyone talking to the average
Generation Y citizen on the street, but I have seen it work out
beautifully within small communities across the nation.
I look at my fellow 20&30-somethings and notice a sad
trend. Why are we so convinced that a married clergy will be a solution
when we can't even convince young adults to marry? It's not only the
idea of a
religious vocation that is in crisis; it is the idea of
ANY life-long vocation. So, here's what I've seen work:
Vocational investment starts in the home. Families that form
the interior lives of their children raise young people who are
introspective enough to hear the call of heroic generosity. Parents
need to hold up each vocation as worth of consideration, and they need
to honor their priests. They also need to support their children when
they do feel a call to accept a religious vocation--sometimes this is as
much a sacrifice for the family as it is for the child. All of this is
part of putting God first and everything else second, which is
difficult between cleaning diapers and scrubbing crayon off the wall.
But the kids know who is first in their home and who ought to be first
in their lives.
Secondly, Catholic schools need to be concerned about more
than measuring up to the nearest half-decent public school (with the
bonus of uniforms and a better-off peer group.) Catholic schools have a
responsibility toward vocation education and providing students with
opportunities to meet and feel comfortable around religious.
Implementation of deeper theology and Church history and perhaps
rudimentary Latin also helps a young mind that might be inclined toward
priestly studies to feel that attraction. Yet, those subjects are hard
to find in most Catholic schools, especially at the high school level.
Schools help create a narrative framework for our children's future
choices. Most Catholic schools in the last 50 years have been opting to
teach no narrative at all, or a secular narrative that doesn't foster a
love of the Church and the Faith.
Within the parish and diocese, there needs to be specific
support for those considering a vocation to the priesthood. Just as we
encourage (or require) engaged couples to go through formation and/or
retreats, future priests need formative guidance. Dioceses across the
nation that have large amounts of men in seminary have vibrant youth
groups, vocational discernment groups and individual mentorship from a
strong vocations director in the diocese, retreats, etc. Interestingly,
in my experience, the parishes within those dioceses that send the
most
young men into seminary also have only male altar servers and priests
who spend extra time investing in those young boys. Vocationally
blessed dioceses also have parish-based prayer support in the form of
chalice programs,
etc. that get individual families to pray for vocational openness in
their parish and in their own family. This works. Check out the
numbers of seminarians in dioceses where Archbishop Chaput or where
Bishop Conley
have been. They're really focused on these types of programs. NC has
not been doing too poorly either in the last 7 years after these things
were implemented.
Any vocation, especially to the priesthood, is a total gift of
self. Helping it to be more culturally acceptable (by adding women or
sex) doesn't automatically yield more generous people. As you all know
from working hard to raise your own children, a culture of generosity
starts at home. In our homes we create our own culture, nurtured by
faith, that starts by honoring God and heroic generosity and ends in a
personal call to love in a particular way through each of our
vocations. If the Church has to go through a bit of a sacramental fast
so that we can appreciate the value of our priests and the sacraments
they administer to us, I'm ok with that. God can do anything with a few
loaves and fishes. And meanwhile, as one of the few people
intentionally reproducing in my generation, maybe I can work on that
raising future priests issue too. :)
PS: Two of those small communities of young
people and students that I have personally witnessed transforming the
vocational crisis of our nation have been:
Christendom College--around
for 35 years and has always had less than 400 students total at a
time-->alumni yield 68 priests, 50 sisters, 1 deacon, 2 brothers,
and 25 men currently in seminary.
Fellowship of Catholic University Students--around for 15
years and is a group that has grown to a couple hundred missionaries
working on college campuses around the US-->285 have entered
seminary; 110 have pursued religious life; 49 men entered the seminary
from a FOCUS program just last year.
God is doing plenty of calling. We just need to open the ears of young people to listen.
