Contraception is not the problem
I would like to thank my great and good friend Jeff Duntemann for crediting me with an idea he had, but I didn't go where he went with it. ;-) As far as I can tell, contraception (birth control) is NOT an issue that keeps young men out of the seminaries and the Roman Catholic priesthood.
For most Roman Catholics, it is not even an issue at all, but what we used to call a "Yes, Father" issue -- when the priest starts to rant, you say: "Yes, Father", and proceed to turn off your ears until the rant ends.
Most lay Catholics worldwide agree with Earl Butz, Sec'ty of Agriculture in the Ford Administration, who got into an enormous heap of trouble by opining in 1974 that: "He no play-a da game, he no make-a da rules." The Encyclical "Humanae Vitae" was, indeed responsible for the abrupt crash in lay respect for Roman authority, but the priest shortage predates it by about 5 years, and continues today, much after the ruckus about it has subsided.
In my experience, the Roman Catholics who rally around "Humanae Vitae" are those who use it as a touchstone of loyalty to the Magisterium of the Church -- all of them solid, middle-of the road people who would have populated Parish Councils, Holy Name Societies and Altar Guilds in the 1950s. They are devout, somewhat scrupulous, and the sort who scrimped for enough to build the Catholic School System, and then send their children there.
Roman Catholics today are that denomination who hate their bishops. That hate has been fomented by rabble-rousing reformers -- chiefly priests and nuns, with a sprinkling of lay ideologues -- who actively and vitriolically oppose nearly everything about traditional Catholicism. Capitalizing on the issue of birth control, they took (and still take) exception to almost everything the Church teaches. It is no accident that the devout, middle-of the road RCs identify themselves as "loyal to the Magisterium" (The Church hierarchy -- specifically the bishops and the Papacy).
For one who grew up in the comfortable certainties of the Faith of the 1950s Roman Catholic Church, and its cultural urbanity, solidity, and sense of almost 2 millenia of history, I find the screeching flame wars of the modern organization jarring, off-putting, and scandalous. I suspect that the layman in the pew, if he or she is not a participant in the billingsgate, is equally put off -- and thus less likely to send a son off to become the focus of the ire and angst in another parish.
This is not to say there were not real evils in the 50s RC Church -- there were and are -- mostly centered around the idea of Papal Supremacy and paternalism -- the idea that the Church as an institution has the right to control church members right down to the level of individual conscience. I, necessarily, as an Old Catholic, do not share that idea.
The laity need to have a voice in the Church -- at every level from the parish on up -- to provide expertise (finacial, for one) in areas the clergy lack them, and to counterbalance the clericalism and bureaucracy of the hierarchy. They do NOT need to vote on "what we are going to beleive this week" -- that is Congregationalism, not Catholicism, but they DO need to be aware of what is being done with the monies collected and disbursed, and have forceful input on the conduct and abilities of priests. This needs to percolate up to the Diocesan level, also.
As Jeff remarks, modern Churchgoers (leaving out Calvinists and other Fun_DUH_mentalists) are generally quite will-educated, and fiercely protective of their own consciences and free will. Attempts to drive Catholicism back into the Middle Ages, or worse yet, late Roman Antiquity, are bound to fail.
What RC lay people are NOT getting is good, well-prepared speakers in the pulpit, who explain and enliven the faith. RC homiletics has been a weak point for more than a century, and the acrimonies of modern Roman infighting have just made it worse.
So contraception is not a "real" reason for the RC priest shortage -- albeit there are fewer Catholic boys around to be candidates for the priesthood. The real real reason is that both RC boys and their parents do not see their local parish priest as a role model (when they see him at all), and do not see the priesthood as being a prestige job. It is a boring (judging from the sermons) side-line to real life.
St. Phillip Neri, where are you when we need you? Where are the Hounds of God (Domini Canes -- Dominicans -- Order of Preachers) when we need them?
(I can't claim that my preaching is all that good, but I keep it short, and notice a lack of eye-rolling and snoring, so I guess I am not doing too badly.)
For most Roman Catholics, it is not even an issue at all, but what we used to call a "Yes, Father" issue -- when the priest starts to rant, you say: "Yes, Father", and proceed to turn off your ears until the rant ends.
Most lay Catholics worldwide agree with Earl Butz, Sec'ty of Agriculture in the Ford Administration, who got into an enormous heap of trouble by opining in 1974 that: "He no play-a da game, he no make-a da rules." The Encyclical "Humanae Vitae" was, indeed responsible for the abrupt crash in lay respect for Roman authority, but the priest shortage predates it by about 5 years, and continues today, much after the ruckus about it has subsided.
In my experience, the Roman Catholics who rally around "Humanae Vitae" are those who use it as a touchstone of loyalty to the Magisterium of the Church -- all of them solid, middle-of the road people who would have populated Parish Councils, Holy Name Societies and Altar Guilds in the 1950s. They are devout, somewhat scrupulous, and the sort who scrimped for enough to build the Catholic School System, and then send their children there.
Roman Catholics today are that denomination who hate their bishops. That hate has been fomented by rabble-rousing reformers -- chiefly priests and nuns, with a sprinkling of lay ideologues -- who actively and vitriolically oppose nearly everything about traditional Catholicism. Capitalizing on the issue of birth control, they took (and still take) exception to almost everything the Church teaches. It is no accident that the devout, middle-of the road RCs identify themselves as "loyal to the Magisterium" (The Church hierarchy -- specifically the bishops and the Papacy).
For one who grew up in the comfortable certainties of the Faith of the 1950s Roman Catholic Church, and its cultural urbanity, solidity, and sense of almost 2 millenia of history, I find the screeching flame wars of the modern organization jarring, off-putting, and scandalous. I suspect that the layman in the pew, if he or she is not a participant in the billingsgate, is equally put off -- and thus less likely to send a son off to become the focus of the ire and angst in another parish.
This is not to say there were not real evils in the 50s RC Church -- there were and are -- mostly centered around the idea of Papal Supremacy and paternalism -- the idea that the Church as an institution has the right to control church members right down to the level of individual conscience. I, necessarily, as an Old Catholic, do not share that idea.
The laity need to have a voice in the Church -- at every level from the parish on up -- to provide expertise (finacial, for one) in areas the clergy lack them, and to counterbalance the clericalism and bureaucracy of the hierarchy. They do NOT need to vote on "what we are going to beleive this week" -- that is Congregationalism, not Catholicism, but they DO need to be aware of what is being done with the monies collected and disbursed, and have forceful input on the conduct and abilities of priests. This needs to percolate up to the Diocesan level, also.
As Jeff remarks, modern Churchgoers (leaving out Calvinists and other Fun_DUH_mentalists) are generally quite will-educated, and fiercely protective of their own consciences and free will. Attempts to drive Catholicism back into the Middle Ages, or worse yet, late Roman Antiquity, are bound to fail.
What RC lay people are NOT getting is good, well-prepared speakers in the pulpit, who explain and enliven the faith. RC homiletics has been a weak point for more than a century, and the acrimonies of modern Roman infighting have just made it worse.
So contraception is not a "real" reason for the RC priest shortage -- albeit there are fewer Catholic boys around to be candidates for the priesthood. The real real reason is that both RC boys and their parents do not see their local parish priest as a role model (when they see him at all), and do not see the priesthood as being a prestige job. It is a boring (judging from the sermons) side-line to real life.
St. Phillip Neri, where are you when we need you? Where are the Hounds of God (Domini Canes -- Dominicans -- Order of Preachers) when we need them?
(I can't claim that my preaching is all that good, but I keep it short, and notice a lack of eye-rolling and snoring, so I guess I am not doing too badly.)
posted by Sam'l B. at
5:29 AM
0 Comments
