But apart from the "pill" we have to contend with a loss of Catholic identity (which using the pill is an example) that was spurred on first by a loss of priestly and religious identity in the late 1960's (around 1968 to be exact) and well into the 70's.
I won't focus on religious life, but women religious orders are all but dead except for a couple of shining lights.
The Catholic culture that the Tridentine period of the Church created (from the Council of Trent through Vatican II, so around 1965)was very monolithic. It centered on Sunday Mass and religious obligation. Sunday Mass was rather non-participative but highly spiritual for the laity. But participation was experienced in a robust way in popular devotions outside of Mass, in particular Benediction of the Most Blessed Sacrament and novenas, many of which were culturally based and quite exuberant. Devotion to the Blessed Virgin Mary and the cult of the saints was extremely important. There were also clear delineations between morality and immorality and the shame that immorality brought to the family. (The dark side to this shame is that it was kept in the dark and abuse of various kinds festered. We've only become too well aware of this darkness since the abuse scandal came to light).
All of the above collapsed almost overnight in the late 1960's and through a misguided wrong interpretation of Vatican II. What could have been a zenith for the Catholic Church especially in America, became a nightmare of confusion, loss of identity and a new distorted Catholic identity, a mere shadow of a former strong Catholic identity that was the yeast of a strong Catholic Church built around strong Catholic parishes.
Everything Catholic including our physical church buildings and our Catholic identity both as laity and clergy was gutted and what was replaced was vapid, empty, sterile and confused. The Church that had been a rock of sure and certain faith became a marshmallow of happy, bouncy, sweet, puffy nothings. Guilt about sexual issues was thrown out with the sexual revoltuion and the guilt transferred to social issues and Catholics not doing enough to help the poor, work for peace, march in protest of this that or the other.
The renewal of the Mass could have been revolutionary if it had only been a translation of Latin into the vernacular maintaining some Latin, a revision of the lectionary and the elimination of some "useless repetition." But the so called "renewal" went way beyond that in the minds of Liturgical Theologians which made what should have been change within continuity of the 1962 Mass a major rupture. The Mass became unrecognizable from its predecessor and completely different from parish to parish thus dividing parishes in terms of how the Mass was celebrated.
Noble simplicity that was asked for by the Council was more than likely directed toward Pontifical Solemn High Mass which were very complicated, not most parishes simple High Mass on Sunday and certainly not toward the Low Mass.
Once Catholic cohesiveness was fragmented, Catholic lay identity weakened, and priestly identity was transformed into some kind of community builder and social worker. Soon there wasn't much left to what had fueled vocations for centuries after the Council of Trent.
Very quickly in the late '60's and '70's there was an intentional move to down play the unique role of the Catholic priest in the Church by emphasizing a new ecclesiology where the priest was simply an "animator" of the laity and their role in the Church. There was a move to clericalize the laity and laicize the clergy, very, very odd to say the least.
In an attempt to make the Church on the institutional level more participative for the laity, laity took on roles in the institutional church that once were reserved only for priests and religious (women religious in particular). In this context the "vocation crisis" was seen as an act of the Holy Spirit and therefore good since the laity would then have to take on roles that only priests and religious had done previously. In this incredible mindset, fewer priests and religious was seen as "willed by God!" Yes, the sin of presumption that bordered on blasphemy of the Holy Spirit infiltrated many in the Church who thought God willed Vatican II in order to destroy the pre-Vatican II experience of Church and what Church was in those dark days.
But Vatican II actually wanted Catholic laity to take a strong Catholic identity, especially the Church's spiritual and moral identity to the secular world where they lived and worked, especially into the realm of politics and other public venues. This aspect of Vatican II was totally ignored over a more "churchified" approach to the laity in terms of institutional roles in the Church.
Then priests mingling in the world and living like lay people began to love the world and wanted to be like lay people. So they left the priesthood in droves, married and became lay people once again. We cannot underestimate the damage this did to the psyche of Catholic laity watching this mass exodus in the 1960's and 70's. Priests were perceived as very unhappy and beguiled and who in the world would encourage their son to join such a vocation?
Then because of many factors and the "pill" being one of those major factors, Catholic marriages too began to crumple and divorce and remarriage became quite commonplace. This will have a deleterious effect on the identity of Catholics and the promotion of vocations.
Later posts will focus on "theologians'" desires for the Mass and the theology of the laity and clergy as a further way to erode strong Catholic identity for both the clergy and laity.
15 comments:
I would say that, certainly, Priests should strive to be proper role models for young Catholic men. The identity, or personality, of the Priest is important in that respect. Also, the reverence and dignity with which the Priest conducts the Mass is an important factor in developing the proper attitude and understanding among those who may be potential Priests or Nuns or Deacons. The personality of the Priest cannot be totally submerged, nor should it be. It just should not be "all about me" as in some Masses I have attended. Fr. David is a case in point...his passion and intensity are a draw for the youth in our Church, as well as for adults, but his Priestly identity is never in doubt. I'm old enough to be his daddy, but I hate having to Confess to him...*blush* At some Churches, I think the Priest might come out of the booth and slap me on the back and hand me a beer.
As a young man of eighteen years considering a priestly vocation either to one of the Societies of Apostolic Life that promote the EF or perhaps to a diocese, the biggest turn-off to me so far (and really the only one) is my fear that I might be relegated to "social worker, nice guy without a backbone" status. I will not be able to conscientiously celebrate ugly and/or banal liturgy of either Form, nor will I be able to be some sort of shrink. I think I would be physically sick if I was required to do so. I do not want to be a social worker. I do understand that part of a priest's job is to counsel and I embrace that, but, correct me if I'm wrong, the main goal of a priest's entire vocation is to ensure that souls are kept pure to be worthy to enter Heaven and to give glory to God.
The thing that most drew me to Catholicism (I am a convert) is the unparalleled depth of the deposit of Faith, particularly how beautiful and intellectual it is, which was a cause for great joy. However, the thing that nullified much of that for me was the fact that, at least in my own opinion, the Church currently has an extremely hard time EXPRESSING that deposit of Faith and thus, Her identity. I was being taught quite orthodox belief in RCIA, yet I didn't see these beliefs lived through the liturgy! How moronic and full of hypocrisy! The core of Catholicism, the beliefs and faith of the Church, is very beautiful. But from my own experiences, the Church has a very hard time putting those beliefs into concrete and effective messages particularly at Mass. I'm not sure I want to be part of that problem.
So yes, I can say that the diminishing of Catholic identity, particularly in the liturgy and particularly that of the priest, is extremely unattractive to prospective candidates to the priesthood.
"Larger families would encourage at least one of their children to consider a vocation."
Do we know if there is data to suggest that more priests came from larger families?
"Sunday Mass was rather non-participative but highly spiritual for the laity."
On what do you base your "highly spiritual" claim?
"All of the above collapsed almost overnight in the late 1960's..."
Is there any evidence to support the claim that this cultural change happened "overnight"? Is there ANY major cultural change in human history that happened "overnight"?
PI, the style of being Church changed a bit slower in Augusta at St. Joseph Church, but yes, overnight (within the span of 1966 to 71, six brief years, although as a teenager it seem a lot longer, there was a major sea change in our parish life, and as far as liturgy/music went, it was not for the better. And as for a democratic approach to the church and parish councils there was more bickering, dissension and outright ugliness that was not experienced prior to the Church telling them that the parish council was a democratic organization. In the seminary 1968 was a major, major year of dramatic changes. For St. Mary Seminary in Baltimore from one year to the next it was so dramatic and what happened so incredible that people reflecting back on it can hardly believe it actually happened.
Yes, big families create more vocations, that's a no-brainer. And not being rich and materialistic does too.
I went to a Catholic school in the 70's, and I come from a family of six children.
As a preteen, I saw Sisters shed their habits, and couldn't respect those who did that. I experienced sing-along folk Masses and the dilution of Catholicicty (is that a word?
I vividly remember going home from either Mass or Catholic school and thinking about a vocation as a Nun. It seemed like signing up for life-long prison. No Way!
I never considered it again.
~SL
To the 18 year old young man, today is quite different than back then in the dark ages of the 1970's! Priestly identity is much clearer now and seminary training is much better. A priest is primarily a man of prayer, preaching the Word and celebrating the sacraments especially the Most Holy Eucharist or the Mass. However, he needs to be organized; he needs organizational skills and he needs to involve people in the life of the parish, but he also needs an ability to delegate. He should have a heart for the poor and the needy, the most needy lost souls. He should have a desire to teach, since he will be participating in the teaching ministry of the bishop. He should be somewhat well rounded, have some hobbies and recreational desires. Clearly though, a young man needs to test his vocation. Is he called to monasticism which is a different calling than diocesan priesthood or to a more active religious life? It takes prayer and discernment with others in the Church, family and friends.
In the one country (France) for which I've seen comprehensive current statistics, traditional Catholics produce priests at over 3 times the rate of ordinary practicing Catholics. In the U.S. diocese with which I'm most familiar, the disparity is much greater than this.
When I almost accidentally attended my first Catholic Mass as a "good Methodist boy" in the 1950s, this single Mass changed my life. It was clear to me that the priest was actually DOING SOMETHING. I didn't know exactly what he was doing, but it seemed IMPORTANT. Whereas the Methodist ministers I'd know were mainly just SAYING THINGS.
And the role of the mainstream Catholic priest today has been reduced to that of the Methodist minister. An essentially feminine helping and talking role. As compared to the essentially masculine role of the traditional priest who stands before God offering sacrifice for the sins of men.
When boys see the EF priest as manly, but not the OF priest, they react accordingly. It affects both the number and the kind of priests who result.
Henry hits the nail on the head. You need look no further than the SSPX and FSSP which churn our vocations at rates out of all proportion to their numbers. You don't need to be a math genius to draw a line between the fact that they never abandoned the traditional faith, and they have no vocations crisis. While Dioceses around the world consolidate, sell and shrink, the FSSP and SSPX both continue to grow.
You'd have to be a liberal in complete denial of reality to not see it (enter Pavlov's Dog).
The charismatic alleluia community in Augusta has produced a huge number of vocations. Like the ssxp and other intentional communities these produce more vocations and so do homeschoolers. It is the level of spiritual intensity whether expressed in guitar music and an exuberant charismatic community or a quiet gregorian chant community.
I concede the point about Augusta's Charismatic Group, although I wonder it their success translates broadly outside their own group. Meaning, while FSSP and SSPX Communities universally produce higher ratios of Vocations, I wonder if Charistmatic groups do as well, or if it's hit or miss, or if Augusta is unique. I have always been very skeptical of Charismatic Groups, expecially after watching my parents get caught up in one in Florida that bordered on heretical. But I confess that my exposure to Fr Ferguson made me pull back on those opinions somewhat, he was a product of that group, was he not?
Notice in the bottom picture, the one with con-celebrating Priest wearing a clown face, what they are using for a Chalice. Glassware.
So there really is more than one clown in the picture after all.
Wouldn't it be grand if the Pope appointed Pin and I to travel around from Parish to Parish with a copy of the GIRM and a Tazer and use the later on any Priest who violated the former. LOL (it's a joke)
But I confess that my exposure to Fr Ferguson made me pull back on those opinions somewhat, he was a product of that group, was he not?
If I remember correctly, he was not. Although, there are a couple seminarians in our Diocese who are products of that community.
The charismatics have nothing on the SSPX and the FSSP in terms of vocations, though. In the near future, we will be back to Traditional Catholicism simply because there will be no priests that weren't ordained by a traditionalist group. Deo gratias!
No not Fr. Justin but Frs. Dan Firmin, McKeon, Van Alstine,
By and large, I consider the charismatic groups to be a bad thing and probably heretical as in Montanists and Enthusiasts. I get sick of seeing their handiwork in our Masses with people making oracular gestures and holding hands and raising their arms up as if performing some kind of rapture drill.
Perhaps our authority to Tazer can be extended to the laity with those annoying hand gestures :)
Post a Comment