In face of the decrease in the number of priests and the free fall in the number of seminarians.
Archbishop Héctor Agüer
Emeritus of La Plata, Argentina
Buenos Aires, April 2, 2025
 |
| Courtyard of the Metropolitan Seminary of the Immaculate Conception Buenos Aires, Argentina (Villa Devoto) |
On numerous occasions I have referred to a crucial issue for the Church: the formation of candidates for the priesthood. Today, I do it once again, without pretending, of course, to exhaust the subject, with this article. And I do so on the twentieth anniversary of the departure of St. John Paul II, who lived his seminary life “clandestinely” because of Nazism and Communism that ravaged his native Poland. And who, as Pope, together with the then Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger -later his successor, Benedict XVI- did so much to repair, in part, the mess of the post-conciliar period.
The decrease in the number of priests (406,996, worldwide, in 2023; 734 fewer than in 2022, according to official figures of the Holy See) is worrying; as is the free fall in the number of seminarians (according to the same Vatican statistics, there has been a steady decline since 2012; and it went from 108,481, in 2022, to 106,495, in 2023). On the other hand, the number of bishops increased from 5353 in 2022 to 5430 in 2023. In Rome's haste “to leave everything well tied up” for the times to come, friends of the same stripe continue to be appointed. The sterility typical of progressivism with regard to priestly vocations does not seem to apply to episcopal vocations. Especially if -despite the persistent criticisms of “careerism”- they come from known climbers.
I entered the Major Seminary of the Immaculate Conception, of the Archdiocese of Buenos Aires, during the sessions of the Second Vatican Council. While still a young priest, I was entrusted with the organization of the Diocesan Seminary of San Miguel, in the suburbs of Buenos Aires, and I was its rector for a decade. I left there when St. John Paul II appointed me auxiliary bishop of the unforgettable Cardinal Antonio Quarracino, in Buenos Aires. As coadjutor and as Archbishop of La Plata I visited the “St. Joseph” Major Seminary on a weekly basis; on Saturdays I offered a conference and then celebrated Mass. In those interventions I explained, over the course of a year, the decree Presbyterorum ordinis, on the life and ministry of priests; I did it twice in that extensive period of twenty years of service in the archdiocese. I always spent my vacations in February with the seminarians at the “San Ramon” country house in Tandil, so I had time to speak at length with each one of them. On the other hand, during the year I was available at their request, whenever they wanted or needed to see me. As a professor at the Faculty of Theology of the Catholic University of Argentina, I was given the opportunity to deal with candidates to the priesthood, from different dioceses, who were studying there.
I have studied extensively the above-mentioned conciliar document, as well as the decree Optatam totius, on priestly formation. I indicate this personal background because assiduous reflection and varied experience enable me, at this point in my life, to attempt a synthesis on priestly formation according to Vatican II. And also to propose, for the future, in the face of the present vocation crisis, ways to overcome it.
***
This work contains criticisms of the prolongation of the so-called “spirit of the Council” in the Church's human reality, which is going through one of its most difficult periods. I have received confirmation of this judgment in the book “The Day is Now Far Spent”, by Cardinal Robert Sarah, merciful former Prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments. It is an extraordinary work of lucidity, sincerity, and courage. Hope always entails a certain amount of joy, but if it is authentically theological, it also entails clarity of reasoning, realism, and tears. The anguished prayer of old Israel is also that of the New: Why have you broken down its hedges so that all who pass by may plunder it... they have cut it down, they have set it on fire (Ps 79:13, 17).
The Vineyard, mysteriously devastated with the permission of Divine Providence, is the Church of Christ. Moreover, according to the teaching of the Gospel, the pastoral function includes the difficult and dangerous task of driving the wolves away from the flock; it is a bad tactic to try to befriend them or, worse, to feed them.
In my opinion, the Second Vatican Council comprises three phenomena, which are often confused, to the detriment of a correct interpretation. The first is the historical event, globally considered: its convocation by John XXIII, the subsequent preparation, the work of the commissions that elaborated the outlines to be proposed to the Fathers, the development of the debates in the hall - St. Peter's Basilica - the contrast between different theological and pastoral positions, the interventions of Paul VI and the conclusion. It will be necessary to take into account, above all, the documents approved by that Council, which wanted to be pastoral and not dogmatic, and the design for the renewal of the Church - the aggiornamento, as it was said at the time to the point of being a bitter repetition - as well as its reception and application of the reforms decided by the Holy See. Aggiornamento means “updating”: the intention of that assembly, as the Church has done many times throughout her history.
The second dimension is given by the conciliar documents; rigorously speaking, this is the Council, always considering - I insist - that the Council defined itself as pastoral and not dogmatic, even if it did not lack in its constitutions and in other magisterial genres some dogmatic matter, especially doctrine already established previously. The theology of the Council naturally reflects the theology of the twentieth century and the movements of biblical, liturgical, theological, and spiritual renewal, which proposed a “return to the sources” with numerous initiatives and various publications. The approved documents must be distinguished from the subsequent dispositions of the Holy See to carry out the reforms. With regard to our subject, priestly formation, there is abundant post-conciliar legislation, as well as manifestations of the Supreme Pontiffs in encyclicals, homilies, and catecheses.
In addition to the two identities that I have attributed to Vatican II, namely, the historical fact of its realization in a complete consideration and the final documents, there is what has come to be called “the spirit of the Council.” I take this expression here in a pejorative sense. The denomination has almost fallen into disuse, but for half a century it was the banner of progressivism, of all the doctrinal and practical arbitrariness that opened painful wounds of division in the ecclesial body, explicit or hidden schisms, which altered the continuity of life reflected in the homogeneous development of Catholic truth --which must always proceed in eodem scilicet dogmate, eodem sensu, eademque sententia, as the golden rule of all authentic renewal, as St. Vincent de Lerins expressed in his Commonitorium. Heterogeneity, alteration, is error, and eventually heresy. As at so many other crossroads in her history that has already brought her into her Third Millennium, the Church of Christ is moving towards the Parousia of the Lord comforted by the Holy Spirit, guided by her pastors and by the continuous witness of the saints: martyrs, confessors and virgins.
The “Spirit of the Council” and the denigration of the Church.
One of the most harmful results of the so-called “spirit of the Council” has been the self-denigration of the Church. Forgetting the profession of faith that proclaims her to be holy, the Church has been made responsible for the division of mankind. Such holiness is not only reflected subjectively in the holiness of so many of her members, but it shines out objectively because she is the Body of which Jesus Christ, the God-man, is the Head, because she possesses in an infallible and indefectible way the revealed truth and the Eucharist, that is to say the Most Holy and source of all holiness, which is also communicated in the other sacraments. What the misguidance of those years rejected was the absolute character of Christian truth. Pluralistic ideology ignored the Word of the Lord: he who is not with me is against me, and he who does not gather with me scatters (Mt 12:30). The attack on Christian truth, which the Church possesses as a grace and communicates with love, is a blasphemy against the Holy Spirit (cf. Mt 12:31 f.).
The “spirit of the Council” implied that any priest, invoking it, could do whatever he wanted, for example, in the liturgy. And not only bishops, but entire Episcopal Conferences were allowed to disagree with Rome, as happened in the case of the encyclical Humanae vitae. Texts of “neo-Catholic” theologians - to give them a name - circulated in the seminaries and in the Faculties of Theology, with the damage that can be statistically proven: thousands of priests all over the world abandoned the ministry. A situation analogous to that of the first years of the twentieth century in sinu gremioque Ecclesiae, in the depths of ecclesial life, which St. Pius X described and condemned in the encyclical Pascendi dominici gregis, against the movement called modernism, was then verified. The progressivism of the years of Vatican II, whose repercussions last until today, has the same roots. Bishop Gijsen of Roermond (Holland), a man who remained faithful, pointed out that the Church in his country was in fact a Church distinct from the Roman Church; there were different “types” of Catholicism. Paul VI spoke of the self-demolition of the Church, the House of God into which the smoke of Satan had entered, and of the harsh winter that came instead of the expected spring. The dogmatic, moral, liturgical and spiritual crisis has become a permanent state; it is no longer a krisis, it is more appropriate to call it decadence. At present, we dispense with invoking the “spirit of the Council”; there is no need to do so. However, some advocate another revolution in the Church, suggesting that the work of Vatican II already was. I cannot evaluate this suggestion as anything other than criminal folly. Will we now begin to speak of the “spirit of synodality”?
In some sectors it is proposed to give the Church a “polyhedral” identity, in order to accommodate diverse and alternative expressions of Catholic unity and its demands. This pretension makes of the Catholic Church a movement, just as in Argentinean politics the Peronist movement has lasted for 80 years; whose current president seems to be the Roman Pontiff.
A year after the conclusion of the Council, several authors sounded the alarm. Among them Jacques Maritain (the “last” Maritain, already back from some of his positions), in a magnificent book: “The peasant of the Garonne. An old layman questions himself about the present time”. The myths return periodically, and take on new value with other formulations. It is in this way that in our days the Church should shudder with joy to be “on the move” and to play a leading role in the “culture of encounter” and to commit herself, on an equal footing with other religions, to foster “universal fraternity”, even though, as I have already mentioned, “the spirit of the Council” is no longer mentioned. False slogans, mythologized, that conceal the opposite and spread confusion among the faithful.
What are seminarians to learn?
Basically, candidates for the priesthood should prepare themselves to live in familiarity with the Triune God and to forge a special friendship with Jesus, to whom they will one day be configured in the priesthood. It is a matter of living secundum formam Evangelii. Let us think about the meaning of the notion of form in the hylemorphic theory; therefore, the reference indicates the soul; to be grounded in faith, hope and charity in order to attain the spirit of prayer, the vigor of the other virtues and the zeal to win all men for Christ. And, of course, to venerate with filial trust the Blessed Virgin, whom the Lord has left us as our Mother. Spiritual formation entails an ambition of totality; nothing must be left half-finished. The total exercise of love extends from Christ to the Church, which is inseparable from Him. As St. Augustine teaches in his Commentary on the Gospel of John: to the extent that one loves the Church of Christ, one possesses the Holy Spirit (Tractatus 32, 8).
It also postulates the growth in a fuller maturity, associated with the mastery of the body and spirit, and as a consequence the perception and enjoyment of the Evangelii beatitudinem happiness, the joy that the Gospel provides. The priest must be a full man, master of himself. Self-control and maturity are equivalent to stability of mind under the rule of charity, to temper the character, which will allow the right use of freedom and a sincere and unreserved pastoral experience. It is important to point out that the concepts of maturity should not be restricted to the psychological dimension alone. Certainly, this must be ensured, which can be helped by the corresponding professional recourse when it is necessary, but here it is above all a matter of a spiritual level of realization of the person, of natural and supernatural order, which includes intelligence, affectivity, will and the healing dynamism of grace. Who fully reaches this maturity? I think that the saints; we - at least I do - are moving towards this goal, sometimes with difficulty, climbing the slope, we advance gradually; the joy that is proper to hope alleviates the fatigue, which is not spared, and sustains us in moments of discouragement.
I have known young people who were mature at an early age, and old people who were tiling. The psychologistic reduction of the concept of maturity, which is stripped of the natural and supernatural breadth proper to Christian anthropology, was and still is very frequent. Maturity invites us to think about freedom: the sign of authentic maturity is the healthy and prudent exercise of freedom. That of the Seminary must be a formation in freedom and for freedom. A very valid observation: discipline, external order, is indispensable in the Seminary, but it must become internal aptitudo, an intimate conviction to embrace order, and for supernatural reasons. Discipline should not be dispensed with - as was done in many places in the crazy post-conciliar years - since it is a necessary instrument; it is art, method, rule of the disciple's life, but with the care that it is not reduced to external and pharisaical observance. Today, in some places, it is an instrument used by superiors who are despotic progressives, to silence or crush the spontaneous inclination of numerous seminarians to live according to the great ecclesial Tradition. And those who end up being expelled; or cancelled and postponed indefinitely in their Ordination, for “being structured and rigid”, “not giving the profile”, or “not being sufficiently pastoral”. Unsustainable arguments that only speak of pure and simple ideology.
It is currently fashionable to speak in tongues about joy, but very little is said about the cross, penance and mortification. Or rather: there is no talk at all. The contagion of “exitism” makes us forget the demands of the Gospel, when in reality it is through its acceptance that we can attain the beatitude that the Gospel itself offers. We want a Christ without the cross. It is not the first time in the history of the Church that recourse has been had to this distortion of the truth about the Christian life, which expressly contradicts what St. Paul teaches in his Letters, and what the saints have witnessed by their lives. In some current orientations, the old heresies of Gnosis and Messianism are emerging.
Celibacy and chastity
Through the gift of celibacy, which is at the same time a continuous task, the priest gives to the Lord an undivided heart, to love everyone as he loves them; it is necessary to ask for it humbly and always. Those responsible for formation should not be silent about the difficulties that the candidates will have to face, but without considering almost exclusively the dangers; the renunciation of marriage is done in order to a greater love, and with a view to the Kingdom of heaven. It is also necessary to warn about the risky contingencies that threaten the priest's chastity, especially in today's society, according to the conciliar documents. This was said 60 years ago! What would we have to warn about today, after decades of “sexual revolution”, in a society that exhibits without any modesty, with popular protagonists, its ostentatious taste for fornication, and even unnaturalness?
The question of celibacy is taken up again in Presbyterorum ordinis. There, in number 16, a very eloquent expression of the value and excellence of celibacy is formulated by the use of five comparatives: facilius, liberius, expeditius, aptiore, latius; four adverbs and an adjective. Celibacy is embraced in order to unite oneself more easily to Christ, without competition; to dedicate oneself more readily to the service of God and of men, because one gives oneself more freely to the Lord; to be more apt to receive a more extensive paternity. If this argumentation was not necessary in the context of a culture strongly marked by Christianity, despite the fact that there was no lack of deviations and sins, later, and now, it has become necessary to strengthen convictions, to overcome doubts, to respond to criticism. The theological reasons for priestly celibacy refer to the profound unity that exists between the mission of the priest and the mission of Christ: to raise up a new humanity through the work of the Spirit and to give life to a universal family of God's children, born not of flesh and blood but of the divine Spirit (cf. Jn 1:13).
Lately there has been a new onslaught against what Pius XI called “the shining pearl of the Catholic priesthood” (Encyclical Ad catholici sacerdotii, n. 34). Now with the misleading purpose of ordaining married men to the priesthood, the viri probati, in the illusory solution of alleviating the lack of vocations in many places. It is a mask of the lack of faith and an expression of the ruin caused in the Church by the tenacity of progressivism. A recent case is that of the Synod of the German Church, and numerous voices of the “synod on synodality”. I point out a parallelism, although the issues are of different caliber: the celibacy of the clergy is rejected, as well as the ecclesial doctrine on birth control. Moreover, progressivism relativizes in general all the truths of the faith.
As the encyclical Sacerdotalis caelibatus teaches, the candidate to the Priesthood must look at a serene, convinced and free choice of the commitment to be assumed. Unfortunately, people do not believe in the celibacy of priests; much less now, when a hypersexualized culture reigns.
In Optatam totius we read: Young people should not be kept in the dark about the real personal and social difficulties they will have to face in their choice, so that their enthusiasm will not be superficial and fatuous; but along with the difficulties, it will be right to emphasize with no less truth and clarity the sublime nature of the choice, which, if on the one hand provokes in the human person a certain physical and psychological emptiness, on the other hand brings an interior fullness capable of sublimating it from the depths (n. 69). This is a beautiful page of supernatural realism, of Catholic realism. The correct approach to the question of priestly celibacy requires a broader context: the vindication of the fully human value and beauty of the virtue of chastity, protected by the sixth precept of the Torah, assumed by the Gospel message and clarified by the apostolic writings of the New Testament. The current tendency in many environments of the Church is to silence the Commandments of the Law of God - so well exposed in the Catechism of the Catholic Church -, especially ignoring the sixth in the pastoral and catechetical praxis; it is unpleasant to remember it in a society that has naturalized debauchery.
In recent years, the case of priests guilty of the abominable crime of sexual abuse of minors has given rise to new attacks against celibacy. The media is trying to generalize this behavior in the clergy, when statistics show that in the vast majority of cases this perversion is registered in family environments, in a more or less 80 percent, without counting other agents. Another problem is not faced: the extension of homosexuality in the clergy of some dioceses, with the aggravating circumstance that such persons are linked among themselves, with the consequences that are easy to foresee. With all respect and delicacy, young men should be removed from the path to the priesthood in whom one can see what is an undeniable impediment: celibacy requires full virility in order to freely renounce the beauty and richness of Christian marriage. I have already spoken of another attack, indirect this time, against the value of celibacy: the insistence on sponsoring the ordination of married men, the viri probati, for ideological, pseudo-theological or pragmatic reasons, the scarcity of vocations. The reason for the shortage is another: that already indicated, the lack of appreciation for chastity. This problem extends to the family order, to the neglect of inculcating conjugal chastity in Christian spouses. Luther, wherever he is, will be rubbing his hands together.
Al agitar la necesidad u oportunidad de consagrar presbíteros a hombres casados fundándose en una presunta tradición de la Iglesia primitiva, se omite, por ignorancia o por manipulación ideológica, señalar una dimensión importantísima de la situación originaria. Los Apóstoles dejaron todo para seguir a Jesús; no es razonable pensar que los que estaban casados llevaron consigo a sus mujeres. La tradición apostólica indica que los varones casados asumidos en el ministerio presbiteral vivían en continencia, aun cuando habitaran con sus esposas en la misma casa. Esta tradición apostólica adquiere carácter canónico en los concilios de comienzos del siglo IV, a partir del de Elvira (Illiberitano), celebrado entre los años 300 y 303, fecha incierta. El canon 33 prescribía a los obispos, presbíteros y diáconos, o a todos los clérigos asumidos en el ministerio, abstenerse de sus cónyuges y engendrar hijos; quien lo hiciere debía ser privado del honor de la clericatura (cf. Denzinger 119).
I have gone to great lengths to deal with this particular question because it reveals what is the most serious problem of the Church today: the ruin of faith, the loss of faith, which is replaced by immanentist postures and social action. This calamity totally contradicts the mission that the Risen Lord entrusted to the Apostles, as we read in the final verses of the Gospel according to St. Matthew, and in the appendix of Mark's Gospel. It is surprising that it is not noticed how the surreptitious attempt to alter this essential mission of the Church leads to its ruin; this is evident in the nations of old Christianity, and is proven by the statistics of the Church's history.
The value of study
In Optatam totius on the orientations for studies, the humanities are mentioned first of all; this expression humanistica institutio refers to the human letters, which are distinguished from the “divine letters”, the Sacred Scriptures; it is about classical and modern culture, which in the past, in general, was cultivated in the Minor Seminary, which was in the academic order a sort of specialized baccalaureate. How does one make up, even minimally, for the lack of literature, art, music and science, when the previous education did not provide it? This aspect of formation has been neglected to the extreme, mainly because of a populist pastoralism.
Vatican II aspired that priests should be cultured persons; it expressly refers to humanistic, scientific and language formation. It occurs to me that, beyond what can be implemented curricularly, it would not be difficult to arouse the interest of young people through various initiatives, especially to look at this fabulous collection of wisdom and beauty gathered, century after century, by humanity and by the Church. Interest, curiosity, and even more, love, passion. My warning: a cultured person is not the same as a “cultured” or “cultosic” person, who displays the superficiality of a dilettante. Perhaps in this field it would be appropriate to facilitate personal or group inclinations, to favor their development. Even the simplest of the young people in formation can be cultured persons, who have developed with effort and humility the gifts they have received in order to offer the Church a pastoral service open to all, without prejudice and inspired by charity.
The hatred for Latin
It is appropriate, at this stage of the work, to say something about the hatred for Latin, which has its roots in the pretexts of renovation exhibited in the 60's; to this is added the inclination to despise what is ignored. Latin -so important for writing and speaking well in Spanish, and for thinking with logical coherence- is a language that is in itself difficult to acquire, if one does not dedicate the necessary time to it.
Unfortunately, they persist in reducing the curricular hours of Latin where its study is preserved; the pretexts are always the same, more than pretexts, prejudices. In this way, seminarians are denied direct access to Latin culture and the possibility of reading and enjoying the Holy Fathers of the West in their original language. As far as liturgical use is concerned, it is not clear why a priest cannot celebrate Mass in Latin, or keep in it the recitation or chanting of parts of the ordinary that the faithful can recite or sing. This has become impossible. The same is true for Eucharistic hymns such as the Pange lingua and the Tantum ergo, which were fully popular; they have been banished arbitrarily, only out of repudiation of Tradition. Post-conciliar documents of the Holy See recommended the establishment in seminaries of scholae cantorum and polyphonic choirs, which could preserve and transmit the treasures of liturgical music. Where they existed, they were despotically suppressed.
The cultural decadence of Argentina has penetrated into the Church: the clearest proof of this can be seen in the universal reign of the guitar -punished more than played- and in the lamentable canticles that have been imposed in replacement, for example, of the Psalms and other excellent compositions that were peacefully in use. Something analogous can be said of the organ. The basic issue is the respect for liturgical and sacred music and for Tradition in it.
To these outrages are added the arbitrariness of prohibiting the celebration of the Eucharistic liturgy versus Dominum, and the reluctance to grant authorization to use the extraordinary form of the Latin rite according to the Missal of John XXIII (1962). Benedict XVI's motu proprio Summorum Pontificum has been fiercely criticized, and where possible has been flouted in practice. Unfortunately, the present Pope, adhering to progressive prejudices, has corrected with another motu proprio (Traditiones custodes) the traditional and ecumenical initiative of his illustrious predecessor, and tries to define what it means to follow Tradition. It is to be feared, then, a worsening of the liturgical devastation (if this is still possible!). In the orientation of the present Pontificate, social action is more important than the worship of God. It is undeniable, in any case, how especially the younger ones revalue Tradition: the more the celebrations of the Mass are multiplied, the more it is fought against.
Philosophical studies
In this regard, Vatican II affirms that the purpose is to acquire a solid and coherent knowledge of man, the world and God, based on the philosophical patrimony of perennial validity (Optatam totius, 15). Although St. Thomas is cited as a teacher in theological studies, the expression the philosophical patrimony of perennial validity can be referred mainly to Thomism, without forcing the meaning of this textual reference. Allow me to insert here some personal recollections. One of my teachers, Father Julio Meinivielle, instilled in me that St. Thomas must be studied directly in his texts, not in manuals.
The conciliar decree does not omit to mention modern and contemporary philosophy, which have profoundly marked Western culture. In a seminary curriculum one can only aspire to evoke synthetically the thought of the principal authors, but this could be done by including a good selection of their texts. From these beginnings, the most interested students can approach, with the teacher's guidance, complete readings of some particularly significant text. I am thinking, for example, of works by Henri Bergson, such as “Essay on the Immediate Data of Consciousness”, “Laughter”, or “Four Essays on the Spirit in its Carnal Condition”. Or going back to the 19th century, Soeren Kierkegaard's “The Concept of Anguish”, “Aesthetic Studies” and “Dialogues on Love”. The purpose of these studies is to awaken in students a love of truth, which must be rigorously sought, observed and demonstrated, while at the same time honestly recognizing the limits of human knowledge (Optatam totius, 15).
The problem of truth is posed today in a more serious and grave way than it was sixty years ago, due to the massive diffusion and cultural contagion of relativism and constructivism. Truth? Let's put it simply: Either it is considered unattainable, because it does not exist, or everyone has his own, or it is constructed by “opinion formers” or “influencers”. If the future priest is trapped in this opinionated circle, he compromises his future preaching and his ability to guide the faithful in the mist that creates confusion even in ecclesial circles. Properly assimilated, Thomistic philosophy offers as fruit a well-armed head that is at the same time free and curious about the totality of knowledge, with the possibility of objectively recognizing the values that can be found in contemporary authors, as well as judging their errors.
Theological studies
Vatican II recognizes Sacred Scripture as the soul of all theology: universae theologiae veluti anima esse, and there is no lack of reference to the patristic tradition of the “two lungs” of the Church, East and West, with their rich diversity. The aim of dogmatic theology is to illustrate as fully as possible the mysteries of the faith, to deepen them and to discover their connection by means of speculation, Sancto Thoma Magistro. The Council said, therefore, that the master of theological studies must be St. Thomas Aquinas. In the following decades, from the sixties onwards, the “theologies of...” have multiplied: of creation, of the world, of work, of liberation, of the people (Latin American or Argentinean), of the environment, etc. It is necessary to dedicate ourselves with greater depth and relevance to the theology of God. That is theology, as its name indicates: discourse on God.
Today, in many theological universities there are professors who affirm that “St. Thomas is no more”, discredit his work and that of his commentators and scholars who take Aquinas as a reference, as if the philosophical tradition of Thomism had not contributed anything new and did not have something to tell us today through those who are inspired by it. It is not a question of repeating St. Thomas; Thomism is not “the same”. It is enough to cite the work of Cornelius Faber, in philosophy, and that of Jean-Hervé Nicolas, and so many others, in theology. In such a negative judgment one can only see ignorance, misunderstanding and partisanship.
After dealing with dogmatic theology, the conciliar decree quickly mentions the other disciplines of the curriculum: moral theology, canon law and ecclesiastical history. In the field of moral theology, the rejection of the encyclical Humanae vitae triggered a merciless criticism of its foundations and the dissemination of study texts that diverted the judgment of several generations of priests. St. John Paul II's Veritatis splendor should be carefully studied in seminaries.
The essential importance of the Liturgy
Regarding the Sacred Liturgy, in its point 16, Optatam totius considers it as the first and necessary source of the genuine Christian spirit. And Sacrosanctum Concilium affirms that the liturgy is the summit of the Church's activity, the sacramental contact with God, and at the same time is the source from which all her strength flows (n. 10), This formula is justified, since the apostolic works are ordered so that, once made children of God by Baptism, all may gather in unity and praise God, participate in the Sacrifice and eat the Lord's Supper (ibid.).
The Church is not an NGO to ensure that people have land, housing and work; to fight against global warming and the deforestation of the Amazon, even if its Social Doctrine aims at ensuring the validity of an authentic justice in society. Its essential purpose is to ensure that men and women and peoples believe in Christ, live in God's grace and move towards Heaven.
The liturgical celebration is a sacred action par excellence. Here comes the problem: the liturgy is a sacred reality; the Council continually calls it sacred liturgy.
Sacredness implies that the beauty and solemnity of the rites visibly and audibly convey that they are Christ's actions, and not subjective fabrications of the celebrant, the “liturgy team” or the handful of faithful pompously labeled “the community”. The rhythm of an entertaining show or the “religious fervor” of a soccer game should not be introduced into that sphere that objectively communicates with heavenly glory - let us remember the end of the prefaces of the Eucharistic prayer. Believe it or not, there is no lack of those -bishops included- who maintain that there is no longer any difference between the sacred and the profane. A man of the Stone Age would be scandalized by this frivolous appreciation, denied by the phenomenology of religions. Sacred is linked to sacrament, sacrifice, mystery. Christ, by his paschal mystery, established the new, eschatological sacredness and introduced it into the profane world as a transfiguring foretaste of heavenly life. As St. Leo the Great taught, what was visible in our Redeemer has passed into the sacramental rites, the mysteries of worship....
Many of the faithful do not understand that the Holy Mass is the sacramental presence of the sacrifice of Jesus; a reductive idea of the “community meeting”, of the “common banquet” has been imposed. It has happened among us that a bishop celebrated Mass on the beach, with a beach habit on which he hung a stole, a small tablecloth on the sand, and the chalice replaced by a mate! And cases like this, unfortunately, are multiplying day by day. Bad examples for seminarians, and a mockery of the severe conciliar prescription: “that no one, even if he is a priest, should add, subtract or change anything in the liturgy on his own initiative” (Sacrosanctum Concilium, 22). The diseducation of priests and faithful and the devastation of the liturgy have been the bitter fruit of the imposition of the alleged “spirit of the Council”.
It is surprising that, in this third decade of the 21st century, the prejudices of the last century, which produced so much havoc in the liturgy, continue and multiply. For example, displacement, if not prohibition of the organ, of Gregorian chant and of classical and modern polyphony. Enrique Rau and Fathers Catena, Bevilaqua and Lombardi, bad taste has spread and products that privilege syncopated rhythm over melody are widely used, with insipid, sentimental lyrics that are alien to the Mystery being celebrated; to these evils must be added the abolition of silence. The displacement of the Tabernacle and the Cross has allowed the enthronement of the priest, “president of the assembly”, as he is called, and not a humble minister of Christ to make present his sacrifice, but often a showman who directs the spectacle. I do not dwell on other impositions of the authoritarianism of those who pretend to be “updated” and “advanced”.
Bishops and priests are not just social leaders, much less ideologized agitators, like those who abounded in the 60s and 70s of the last century, to the ruin of the Church and society. Apostolic preaching draws its strength from the sacrifice of the Eternal High Priest, Jesus Christ, so that the congregatio societasque sanctorum is offered to God as a universal sacrifice. St. Augustine's “The City of God” speaks beautifully of this “congregation and society of saints”.
Relativism, the arbitrary manipulation of the sacramental order, the unworthy secularization of priestly life, the populist confusion between popular piety and superstition, the disrespect installed in the chairs of the formation centers and the negligence of those who by office should watch over and correct, explain the undeniable setback of the Church in Argentina, as in other countries, according to the different characteristics of place and time. The negative situation is prolonged. Among us, every year, hundreds of people baptized in the Catholic Church go on to integrate the various evangelical groups, or at least they frequent them; in these groups they are told about Jesus and salvation, which is what the poor expect first and foremost.
How did we arrive at the painful generalization of carelessness, the ruin of the sense of the sacred and the intrusion into this sphere of arbitrariness, vulgarity, decadent expressions of gestures and music? Apparently, those of the “spirit of the Council” did not read the texts of the Council, such as point 5 of Presbyterorum Ordinis: let priests strive to properly cultivate liturgical science and art. I emphasize: science and art. The preparation, the propensity, begins in the Seminary, where authentic “professionals” of divine worship, that is, liturgists, should be formed. That this is not being done, or is done minimally and in few places, explains the general situation, and the habituation of the faithful to whatever they are given.
The priest is a minister of Christ's mercy; he speaks little of it, practices it, lives it. The “mercifulness” that is officially spread forgets what St. Thomas so accurately expressed: justice without mercy is cruelty; mercy without justice is the mother of dissolution.
Populism and pastoralism are capable of circulating attractive slogans and often have an effective propaganda apparatus, but they will only produce emptiness and disappoint young people who are looking for a solid formation. One of the most absurd measures in the seminaries is to send the students of the last year of the theologate - or even before - to live in the parishes; and even to interrupt, for a time, their studies. And those of the first courses to do the same thing on weekends; in this way the pastoral formation that the seminary should give is dislocated and the formands are handed over to the clergy, who are not necessarily composed of men who are experts in pastoral leadership, as true teachers. All this in the haste to make them “put beard in chalice”, as the Spanish saying gallantly expresses. What is indeed a good thing that I myself experienced in 1972, is that deacons, before ordination to the priesthood, exercise their ministry and live in parishes.
Another prejudice that refuses to die is the opposition that is usually imposed between doctrine or study and pastoral practice, always to the detriment of the former, as well as the resistance to send the most intellectually and spiritually gifted students to specialize in higher centers, so that the diocese has priests who have a higher scientific formation, which enables them to meet the different needs of the apostolate, as recommended to the bishops in number 18 of Optatam totius. This mania reveals the inability to forge a well-formed and united presbyterate; where all the members, with humility and fraternal love, can work harmoniously in the most diverse environments, according to the talent and choice of each priest.
As for public image, a characteristic tic of progressivism is to prohibit seminarians from wearing the cassock, and not to look favorably on priests who wear it, suspected of “conservatism”; it would always be more “closer to the people” to wear rags and wear long hair. The ecclesial “rift” has reached such ridiculous extremes.
Concern for the People of God means diligence, careful attention, which includes concern and often some anguish. These complex feelings invite, already in the seminary, to cultivate an intimate friendship with Jesus Christ and to rest confidently in his Heart. This implies working passionately for the Gospel. One must live for the Church and not use her to lead a more or less comfortable life, without any major problems.
I think the caution offered by Cardinal Robert Sarah in “It's getting late and it's getting dark” is very timely: No human effort, no matter how talented or generous, can transform a soul and give it the life of Christ. Only the grace and cross of Jesus can save and sanctify souls and grow the Church. To multiply human efforts, to believe that methods and strategies have by themselves efficacy, will always be a waste of time; only Christ can give His life to souls; He gives it to the extent that He Himself lives in us and has taken full possession of us. So it is with the saints. Their whole life, all their actions, all their desires are inhabited by Jesus. The measure of the apostolic value of the apostle lies solely in his holiness and in the density of his prayer life.
The strategy, the surest and most effective methods are prayer, adoration, communion of life with the Lord, charity for all. In short, this is what the Seminary must inculcate in young men who aspire to the priesthood. And all its efforts must be directed to accompany them on that ascending path, from Galilee to Jerusalem, where the cross and the resurrection take place, so that the vision of God - to the extent that we can approach it on this earth - enlightens them and enlightens their pastoral work.
From Jesus Christ, return to the sources
This synthetic work -I repeat-, based on what I studied, taught and lived as a priest and bishop, was born from pain and also from hope. Pain because I love the Church, and it grieves me to see her in her steep decline, especially in the last twelve years. And hope -which, as I have already expressed, always carries with it a share of joy, but also of clarity of reasoning, realism and tears- because I notice that, at the same time, in sectors still in the minority, but increasingly significant, there is an attempt, from Jesus Christ, to return to the sources; to orthodoxy and Tradition. And it is there where I see, with clarity, authentic paths for the future.
Contra facta non valent argumenta: from the official statistics of the Holy See, with which we began these lines, a relationship was established in the number of vocations in secularized countries with progressive clergy, and in the number of religious institutes that respect and care for orthodoxy and Tradition. The figures are convincing: Spain, one seminarian for every 17, 5 priests; France, one seminarian for every 19, 5 priests; Italy, one seminarian for every 15, 3 priests; and Germany, one seminarian for every 34, 5 priests. Vocations among traditional congregations, on the other hand, range from 0.65 seminarians per priest to one seminarian for every 2.35 priests. In order to maintain a stable number of priests in a diocese, a minimum of one seminarian for every five active priests is necessary. Categorical figures that exclude any ideological manipulation.
From the progressive officialism it is disdainfully affirmed that the “tradis” have vocations because they “brainwash the young people”, as if they were incautious and ignorant; easy prey to any deception. You should read what Joseph Ratzinger - Benedict XVI says in chapter four of his “Jesus of Nazareth”, about the priestly consecration of the Apostles, which is continued in the ministers of Catholic worship: “They must be immersed in Christ, they must be clothed in Him, and thus they are made sharers in His consecration, in His priestly commission, in His sacrifice”. Nothing less than that! For this, in the Seminary, the young men must be prepared.
