The Archdiocese of New York (where I consider it a privilege to be counted a member) has recently received some criticism for its low number of priestly ordinations this year. This past Saturday, Cardinal Dolan ordained two new priests at St. Patrick’s Cathedral–one a diocesan priest and the other a priest for the Franciscan Friars of the Renewal. While this number is small and unsustainable for a diocese that serves over 2 million Catholics, there is good explanation for this year’s low number, and even greater reason for optimism for the years to come. In a January 2012 interview with Catholic New York, New York’s vocations director, Fr. Luke Sweeney, explained the low number for this year noting that “the seminary formerly had a five-year program: one year of philosophy and four of theology. In 2006 the U.S. bishops asked for two years of philosophy; inserting the extra year caused a “gap year” in which there were no candidates.”
While dissidents within the Church may try to use this year’s low numbers in New York to bolster their calls for women’s ordination and a removal of the celibacy requirement for priests, the latest data from the Center for Applied Research in the Apostolate (CARA) reveals that ordination rates to the priesthood are at a 20 year high. Last month, in a Wall Street Journal op-ed titled “Traditional Catholicism is Winning,” Anne Hendershott and I argued that there are real signs of renewal within the priesthood. Moreover, these priests are attracted to the priesthood because they are fully committed to the teachings of the Church and desire a lifestyle that demands them to be counter-cultural.
In our forthcoming book, Beyond the Catholic Culture Wars (Encounter Books), my coauthor and I survey a number of dioceses across the United States that are experiencing an upward trend in their vocation rates. The two common characteristics of these dioceses is that they are led by bishops that are committed to a bold and courageous defense of orthodox Catholicism, and they are making vocations a number one priority within their dioceses through building strong vocation teams that are actively recruiting new priests. This is certainly the case in New York, where Cardinal Dolan’s enthusiastic defense of Church teachings has been showcased to the entire nation as a result of his battle with the Obama administration over the recent HHS mandate. But, it is also evident in the great work that Fr. Luke Sweeney is doing as vocations director of New York that I can personally attest to, as I have witnessed his efforts over the past few years. While seminary structural changes limited the ordinations this year, here’s what critics of the New York archdiocese have failed to mention: New York will likely ordain eight men to the priesthood next year, five men in 2014, and ten or more new priests in 2015.
New Yorkers–and the rest of the nation–should expect to see much more of this type of growth under the leadership of Cardinal Dolan and Fr. Sweeney in the years to come.
May 23rd, 2012 | 2:27 pm
Am I alone in finding it surprising that a mere one year of philosophy was formerly though sufficient?
It reminds me of the story of Cardinal Newman, who met a young man, a recent convert, who had started studying for the priesthood. Newman asked him about his Greek studies and the young man replied that he did not foresee any difficulties there, as he had been awarded first-class honours in that subject at Oxford. “Very commendable,” replied Newman, “but don’t you think a clergyman should aspire to something more than a gentleman’s knowledge of Greek?”
The same could be said of philosophy.
May 23rd, 2012 | 5:07 pm
It is upsetting to me, a convert at age 16 who is now 80, to see the Church is such a stalemate. It would not even be new to ordain women. There have been female Catholic priests in the far past. I also believe Mary Magdalene was a priest just as the other Apostles were.
Jesus made changes in the standing religion of the time, He said He came to fulfill the religion of His Father. I believe, after 2000 years, there could be changes made in His current Church.
May 23rd, 2012 | 6:40 pm
There is one parish in Manhattan that produces vocations. Archbishop Dolan would do well to look up the pastor there and do EVERYTHING he says.
Fr. Sweeney is a good priest and a good vocations director but the vocations crisis is most acute in NYC.
Too many mediocre or downright terrible parishes. A chancery bureaucracy that makes the DMV look effective.
May 23rd, 2012 | 9:21 pm
Barbara,
You are mistaken. There have NEVER been women priests in the Catholic Church. Asserting such does not make it so.
Regarding the newly ordained diocesan priest in New York, the writer forgot to mention that the young priests first Mass was a Missa Solemnis according to the 1962 missal. Now that’s what I call Traditional Catholicism winning.
JM
May 24th, 2012 | 12:08 am
Barbara Paul, the claim that there have been women priests in the past is utterly false, as is your believe that Mary Magdalene was a priest. The Church teaches infallibly that only men can be priests, and that can never and will never change. If you refuse to accept that teaching (or any other Church teaching, for that matter), then you place yourself outside the Church.
May 24th, 2012 | 9:15 am
The requirement for two full years of philosophy in Seminary formation has been in place since 1917, was renewed in 1983 but has been universally ignored. Fides et Ratio began the move away from institutional fideism and with the 2011 decree (http://tinyurl.com/PhilosophyDecree) from the Vatican, intellectual formation for priesthood has finally begun to take on its proper shape. Congratulations New York archdiocese on taking a hard but necessary step. As a seminary instructor elsewhere, I know only too well how difficult it is to get seminarians to take their philosophy studies seriously.
May 24th, 2012 | 10:45 am
I entered a major seminary in 1964 as a first philosopher, and although we had many hours of philosophy, it was a) taught as doctrine to be accepted, or b) a refutation of straw men, which refutation would fail miserably in dealing with the adherents of these philosophers. I speak only of my own experience, and, wisely, my diocese shortly after I left, removed its seminarians from that institution. But the fact remains that course hours do not a philosopher make, and unless the priest has a good grounding in philosophy, his task in an increasingly educated society becomes more difficult
May 24th, 2012 | 11:56 am
If you refuse to accept that teaching (or any other Church teaching, for that matter), then you place yourself outside the Church.
Dave,
What do you mean by “place yourself outside the Church”?
May 24th, 2012 | 12:15 pm
“Dave,
What do you mean by “place yourself outside the Church”?”
David, which word are you having difiiculty with? It seems pretty clear to me: if you cannot accept what the teaches infallibly to be held by all then you wilfully ‘place yourself outside the church’.
May 24th, 2012 | 1:49 pm
Per David Nickol’s:
“Dave,
What do you mean by “place yourself outside the Church”?”
Let’s look at the comment in question that provoked Dave’s accurate response-
“It is upsetting to me, a convert at age 16 who is now 80, to see the Church is such a stalemate. It would not even be new to ordain women. There have been female Catholic priests in the far past. I also believe Mary Magdalene was a priest just as the other Apostles were.”
Putting aside the Mary Magdalene-was-a-priest meme but noting we moved on from that tissue of whoppers decades ago and now current wisdom espouses that Mary Magdalene was Jesus’ wife, the upset commentor’s support for female priests suggests she at the very least is sympathetic to one of the beliefs/main goals of Call to Action, if not an actual member of Call to Action or one of their fellow travelers groups. Perhaps she and David Nickol are not aware of just how “inside the Church” Call To Action’s beliefs are viewed by those “inside” the Church:
“FEB 2009 LINCOLN, Neb. (CNS) — The Vatican has upheld Bishop Fabian W. Bruskewitz’s decision 10 years ago that membership in Call to Action ‘is totally incompatible with the Catholic faith’ and results in automatic excommunication for Catholics in the Diocese of Lincoln.”
And:
“DETROIT, Michigan, October 13, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Archbishop Allen Vigneron of Detroit has warned Catholics in his flock about a planned meeting by an umbrella organization of dissident Catholic groups, including groups that promote the normalization of homosexuality, women’s ordination, and other liberal issues.
The American Catholic Council (ACC) has planned a national gathering in Detroit during June 11-12, 2011, the weekend of Pentecost, when the archdiocese traditionally carries out priestly ordinations.
“ACC has been joined by several dissident Catholic groups, including the homosexualist groups New Ways Ministry and DignityUSA, as well as Call to Action, Voice of the Faithful, and the Women’s Ordination Conference.
“In a statement posted on the archdiocese’s website Tuesday, Archbishop Vigneron noted that some members of the archdiocese had contacted him with concerns about the ACC meeting.
“Although ACC’s stated purpose is to ‘respond to the Spirit of Vatican II,’ the archdiocese said that, ‘in fact, the goals proposed are largely in opposition to the teachings of the Second Vatican Council and the Holy Spirit, which inspired the Council.’
“Vigneron’s office noted that some speakers and groups at the planned event ‘espouse positions which are clearly contrary to Catholic faith, leading to alienation and estrangement from the Church.’ Vigneron instructed Catholic facilities not to host any meetings associated with ACC and priests not to endorse the group. The archdiocese also stated that the prelate ‘has asked the organizers to cancel their plans for this national gathering that distorts the true Spirit of Vatican II.’
“‘The archdiocese wishes to commend and embrace all true efforts at Church renewal – the American Church Council’s agenda is not such an effort,’ stated the archdiocese.”
May 24th, 2012 | 2:12 pm
“There is one parish in Manhattan that produces vocations.”
Would that be Fr. Rutler’s parish, by chance?
May 24th, 2012 | 2:18 pm
“But the fact remains that course hours do not a philosopher make, and unless the priest has a good grounding in philosophy, his task in an increasingly educated society becomes more difficult.”
Dan is certainly right here. Even two years of philosophy seems inadequate, to be honest – especially if those two years are not sufficiently rigorous, with a strong grounding in Thomism as well as the appeal and weaknesses of modern idealistic, phenomenological and analytic philosophy.
There are a few seminaries that have really adequate philosophy programs. Kenrick-Glennon in St. Louis is one. But there aren’t all that many others yet, though there are signs that this is starting to change.
May 24th, 2012 | 3:23 pm
Recusant,
It is not clear to me what either Dave or you mean by “putting yourself outside the Church.” I don’t think repeating the same words makes them any clearer. Are you saying a Catholic who doesn’t believe a particular teaching of the Church is no longer a Catholic, is a heretic, is an apostate, is excommunicated, is in mortal sin? All of the above? And must the teaching in question be infallibly declared? There is, in Catholic teaching, a “hierarchy of truth.”
May 24th, 2012 | 3:31 pm
“There is one parish in Manhattan that produces vocations.”
There are nine other counties in the Archdiocese — Staten Island, the Bronx, Westchester, Rockland, Orange, Sullivan, Ulster, Putnam, Dutchess. Do any of the other parishes produce vocations?
May 24th, 2012 | 6:22 pm
David
John Paul ii closed the book. He spoke from the chair, declared the church has no power to ordain women. Case closed. People have the civil right to believe that which is false, but when you do that you put yourself outside the church. Which means, strictly speaking, you are adhering to heresy. If you do that knowingly you have excommunicated yourself. She may not know jp2 closed the book on it, so maybe she didnt excommunicate herself.
May 24th, 2012 | 7:28 pm
I am also a convert at age 55. To be Catholic means to embrace ALL that Holy Mother Church proposes for our belief, even if we find it difficult to do or hard to understand. That means that to willfully persist in refusal to give the assent of faith to a doctrine of the Church–and the statement by JPII that the Church has no authority to ordain women seems as close to infallible teaching as you can get–means rejecting the authority and teaching of the Church in the matter. In the old days, that would have been called heresy (stubborn, post-baptismal refusal to accept Church teaching). It was clear to me that to become Catholic meant to embrace ALL Church teaching, not just those parts I liked. In my mind, I have a word for those who pick and chose among Catholic beliefs and who oppose Church teaching publicly–the cafeteria faithful–and that word is Protestants….
May 24th, 2012 | 7:56 pm
I’m not going to get into it about Mary Magdalene (who did first proclaim the gospel of the resurrection) or how much philosophy one needs (I had the equivalent of two years before theology, but, seriously, haven’t found it terribly useful in the 30 years of ministry since), but I do want to take exception to the title of this piece. ‘Traditional Catholicism winning’? Who gets to define what ‘traditional’ means? (I find that some find me way to the right, and others way to the left.) Who gets to define ‘winning’?
Are we engaged in a contest, or a war? Aren’t we all in the same church, hoping to arrive in the presence of God in heaven?
If we keep breaking ourselves down, calling each other ‘losers’ (which is only logical if there are ‘winners’) what we are not doing is winning the world to the gospel.
May 24th, 2012 | 10:07 pm
David Nickol,
You say:
“It is not clear to me what either Dave or you mean by ‘putting yourself outside the Church.’ I don’t think repeating the same words makes them any clearer. Are you saying a Catholic who doesn’t believe a particular teaching of the Church is no longer a Catholic, is a heretic, is an apostate, is excommunicated, is in mortal sin? All of the above? And must the teaching in question be infallibly declared? There is, in Catholic teaching, a ‘hierarchy of truth.’”
A Catholic who doesn’t believe a particular teaching of the Church is at most a heretic and at least in mortal sin, objectively speaking. It doesn’t matter if the teaching isn’t “infallibly declared” (e.g. ex cathedra).
This link explains it all: http://www.ewtn.com/library/Theology/SUMMARY.HTM
May 25th, 2012 | 3:47 am
Mrs. Jackson.
Glad to see you mention ” Call to Action. ” This organization used to be an annual event in the K.C metro area. I thought it had died out decades ago. I can attest it was very liberal and attracted many locals who were like minded. I always suspected it had something to do with the fact that the National Catholic Reporter is headquartered here. But I am profoundly greatful it has not appeared here for a long time.
May 25th, 2012 | 4:03 am
Dan,
Sorry your experience with philosophy was so negative. Of course there is philosophy and they there is Philosophy. Philosophy with a calpital P needs to be based on the Philosophy of St. Thomas Aquinas, and must cover the basic areas of Metaphysics, the Pholosophy of God, Cosmology, Epistomology, Psychology, ( Philosophical phylosophy – i.e. the soul, etc.), and ethics.Thomas covers all these but he is usually not studied directly but in survey form and of course there are good and bad sources for these. It is difficult to understand how one could study theology without a solid grounding in Philosophy. I think many priests suffer from a lack of solid formation here. Of course one can make up for it by self study – if one has time for it, a big if.
May 25th, 2012 | 8:38 am
“There are nine other counties in the Archdiocese — Staten Island, the Bronx, Westchester, Rockland, Orange, Sullivan, Ulster, Putnam, Dutchess. Do any of the other parishes produce vocations?”
Based on the ordinations and seminary figures… no, they do not.
New York’s vocations pipeline is pathetic, especially compared to even smaller dioceses in the East.
May 25th, 2012 | 9:09 am
Putting aside the women’s ordination debate, which is a distraction, I would like to point out that the author is correct. There is an increase in vocations to the priesthood and the men answering that call are primarily orthodox, traditional Catholics. My son was ordained last year and he certainly fell into that category.
However, I would add that this is traditional with a small “t” as opposed to with a big “T”. This is not a revival of Traditionalism but rather it is a movement away from the heterodoxy and “liberalism” of the past fifty years. It is also true that up until recently, some bishops refused to admit orthodox men into their seminaries, with the result that vocations plummeted since there were (and are) fewer vocations among “liberal” Catholics. Now that the episcopate has become more orthodox, they are admitting orthodox men into the seminaries and vocations are increasing.
May 25th, 2012 | 9:11 am
John Paul ii closed the book. He spoke from the chair, declared the church has no power to ordain women.
Jay,
I am not really so much interested in the ordination of women as I am in what demands assent and what does not. But to the best of my knowledge, there are only two papal statements that are agreed to be ex cathedra infallible pronouncements—the Immaculate Conception and the Bodily Assumption of the Blessed Virgin. My understanding is that Ordinatio Sacerdotalis was not an infallible declaration by the pope, but according to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the faith, a restatement by John Paul II of a teaching that was deemed already to be infallible. Exactly by what reasoning the CDF has for holding it to be infallible I don’t know, but obviously it is a very weighty statement even if there is no airtight case for its infallibility.
May 25th, 2012 | 9:32 am
A Catholic who doesn’t believe a particular teaching of the Church is at most a heretic and at least in mortal sin, objectively speaking. It doesn’t matter if the teaching isn’t “infallibly declared” (e.g. ex cathedra).
Dave,
There is a problem here (more than one, actually), and that is how to know whether something is a teaching of the Church. For example, when I was in Catholic school, I am sure I would have been in deep trouble if I had said I did not believe in Limbo (for unbaptized babies). Now we find out that the existence of Limbo has never been an official teaching of the Church.
What are we to make of the post above titled Is Vatican II Completely Binding on Catholics? Why is that even a question?
To take another example, John Paul II was very clear about capital punishment, saying in Evangelium Vitae
The Catechism makes the same statement. And yet many conservative Catholics feel free to disagree.
May 25th, 2012 | 12:52 pm
Traditional Catholicism is Winning”
Sigh. Winning against what? Winning against others in the Church? Are we to see fellow Catholics, of whatever stripe, as adversaries?
We are one Church, one people, one faith. Language of division by “traditionalists” is as wrong as when it is used by “progressives.”
Properly understood, there is no “traditional Catholicism,” there is only Catholicism.
May 25th, 2012 | 3:26 pm
I, OTOH, think that two years of philosophy and four years of theology is going overboard in emphasizing reason over faith. Better to take at least one of those years and spend them in learning how to preach effectively, how to lead and inspire people, and how to manage a parish and a budget. We produce too many diocesan priests who are overly-intellectual and have the personality of a bookish librarian. We need men who can be challenging, personable leaders, and who are on fire for the Faith, and who can stimulate others to be the same way.Hell, let ‘em spend a year watching Billy Graham videos if they need to.
May 25th, 2012 | 3:49 pm
Bender, I agree that the labels put in the dual form liberal/traditional Catholic is wrong. Simply put: To be a Catholic is to be traditional, for the Faith (and the Bible) comes to us by tradition, passed on through the generations. Saint Vincent of Lerins put it well when he said that the Faith is that which has been held by the Church “always, everywhere, and by all.” There are no new doctrines, only new ways of communicating doctrine. Catholic means “universal” and the Faith is universal not only geographically by chronologically. I speak, of course, in general terms. The cross was planted in America long before Columbus came and also in Asia long before St. Francis Xavier.
May 25th, 2012 | 5:26 pm
Linus, my experience with philosophy in the seminary was rather positive on the whole, but negative in some serious regards. My experience in a Catholic college (St. Francis, Brooklyn) was a joy.
May 26th, 2012 | 7:46 am
If the projections in the post are accurate, we’ll have about 25 new priests over a 4 year period out of the Archdiocesan seminary. Now i know the seminary has recently combined with two other diocesan seminaries. Does the 25 number reflet the combined total of the three dioceses or just the priests for NY
We’re looking about 7 new priests a year? Our Archdiocese goes beyond NYC, as others mentioned; there are 10 counties, 400 parishes. How many new priests a year would we need to adequately staff the parishes and how many of those priests need to come out of the Archdiocese seminary?
I imagine it must be a lot more than 7.
May 27th, 2012 | 10:58 pm
On philosophy…I consider myself more Thomistic, because most of my reading is based on Thomas Aquinas’s works. But let’s not forget everyone else; it is unwise to ground oneself so narrowly.
Links
Blogs
Find Us
Contact