“How Bishops Discourage Vocations (and the Key to Attracting Them)”

1. Bishops want more priests
2. It is demonstrable that seminaries develop more priests
in orthodox dioceses.
3. Therefore, bishops support unorthodoxy in their dioceses.
OR
1. Bishops do not want more priests.
2. It is demonstrable that seminaries develop more priests
in orthodox dioceses.
3. Therefore, bishops support unorthodoxy in their dioceses.
Which one is more logical?

The guardian angels of many a young man have kept them safe from the evil one
and that includes keeping them safe from wherever evil is in control.

Get rid of the resident minions of the demon controlling a seminary, a chancery or a See, and then young men will come forward. Until then, their guardian angels will keep most of these souls safely away from the dogs whom scripture tells us to beware.

Charliemarlow,

Thanks for your post. I don't know Bishop McCarrick, and I'm having some difficulty following your reasoning. In response to your comments, one does indeed wonder if some who have worked for the Church would prefer a total and debilitating vocations crisis in order to use an emergency to push through their own agendas and "open up" the priesthood. It's also been argued that those who would "change the Church from within" discourage faithful vocations, while selecting for wolves in sheep's clothing.

I do, however, think it sounds reasonable that young men are more likely to answer their calling if they are directly asked to do so, whether it be by the Bishop, a priest, or fellow parishioners. On the other hand, heterodoxy sounds like a perfect recipe for demoralizing those considering or pursuing a vocation, and not surprisingly, it stands to reasons that it would motivate them to question their calling. Kind of Like Elisha en route to his cave, one might want to get out of dodge when heterodoxy or worse is present.

You know what's interesting, RobbyS, there were a bunch of folks getting a lot of press about "ordaining" ex-nuns to the "priesthood" on riverboats earlier this summer. I haven't heard so much as a whisper from those folks lately. I think they had a sensationalistic story that made for good press, but the interest seems to be totally gone now. Soon their movement will be gone as well.

Catholic eras can be defined by which heresy the Church happens to be fighting at that time, and I think we may be seeing the death rattle of one such heresy.

As for the ex-nuns, presumably they went back to holding seances and giving each other Reiki classes.

Very true. I went to a Catholic high school run by a group of nuns. They were, for the most part, "Sister Sweatpants" types - though at least they didn't promote outright occultic practices like I've heard some nuns do. Some of the very old ones were still solid, wore habits, and such but they had little contact with the students. While many of these nuns were fine teachers of various academic disciplines, when it came to conveying the faith they were very lukewarm. They taught us nothing of substance about the faith, didn't give us any reason to think Catholicism is any different than any other religion, and most importantly they didn't give us any reason to see why consecrated celibacy was special. There was nothing about their lives that would draw a young woman to religious life because their lives were so average. They didn't wear habits, they didn't seem enthusiastic about Christ, and their convent looked more like a comfortable middle class home (albeit one stuck in 1980s decor) than a Christian oasis in a chaotic world. We students went to the convent sometimes to watch movies on their big screen TV and I often thought while I was there if being a nun like this was something I'd like to do. Even though I was not terribly devout in high school, I still knew right away that this all seemed pointless. Why would I give up a husband and children for this mundane, worldly life? I could do the same things - teach at a high school, be lukewarm about the faith, live in a comfy little home, etc - and still be married with children. There was nothing special about life in this convent. No wonder they failed to attract any young women. The youngest nun at my school was in her early 30s at the time (she would be around 40 by now) and she was the exception, not the rule, for that order.

If you haven't, read some of what the present Holy Father has written, sich as "Salt of the Earth," which is a long interview. I was surprised. He is quite blunt in his assessments. To oversimpify, he dismisses the "reformers" as simply banal, bourgeois types who are in love with their own ideas, and unattractive to anyone with an ounce of idealism.

Here in Los Angeles, aka Mahonyland, there was a grand total of FOUR priests ordained this year, out of a Catholic population of 4.5 million.

Two of the new priests were born in Vietnam (one of them is 61 years old), another priest is 60 years old and was born in England, and the only one from Los Angeles is 46 years old. That's it.

And a nun is in charge of the Vocations Office.

Connect the dots.

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.