Archbishop Aguer: Our vocations crisis must be addressed. Here is what I propose

Editor’s note: This is Part 1 of a multi-part series addressing the decline in the number of Catholic priests and seminarians worldwide.

(LifeSiteNews) — On numerous occasions I have referred to a crucial issue for the Church: the formation of candidates for the priesthood. Today I take it up again, without pretending, of course, to exhaust the subject with these articles. And I do so on the 20th anniversary of the passing of St. John Paul II, who clandestinely studied for the priesthood because of the Nazism and communism that ravaged his native Poland, and who, as pope, together with then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger – later his successor, Benedict XVI – did so much to repair in part the chaos of the postconciliar period.

The decrease in the number of priests – 406,996 worldwide in 2023, 734 less than in 2022, according to official figures of the Holy See – is worrying. So 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 5,353 in 2022 to 5,430 in 2023. In Rome’s haste “to get everything in order” for the times to come, birds of the same feather 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 Immaculate Conception Metropolitan Seminary in 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 then 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 discussions, over the course of a year, I explained Presbyterorum ordinis, a decree on the life and ministry of priests. I did that twice in an extensive 20-year period 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. During the year, moreover, I was available at their request whenever they wanted or needed to see me. As a professor in the Faculty of Theology at the Pontifical 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 aforementioned conciliar document, as well as Optatam totius, a decree on priestly formation.

I mention my personal background because careful reflection and a variety of experience enable me at this point in my life to attempt a synthesis on priestly formation according to Vatican II and, looking to the future, to propose ways to overcome our present vocations crisis.

This work includes criticisms of the prolonging of the so-called “spirit of the Council” in the present reality of the Church, which is currently living through one of its most difficult periods. I have received confirmation of this judgment in The Day is Now Far Spent by Cardinal Robert Sarah, merciful former prefect of the Dicastery for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments. It is a work of extraordinary lucidity, sincerity, and courage.

Hope always entails a certain amount of joy, but if it is authentically theological, it also entails a clarity of reasoning, realism, and tears. The anguished prayer of the 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, set it on fire” (Ps. 79:12, 16). The vineyard, mysteriously devastated with the permission of divine providence, is the Church of Christ. Furthermore, according to the teaching of the Gospel, the pastoral function includes the difficult and dangerous task of driving wolves away from the flock; it is a bad strategy to try to befriend them or, worse, to feed them.

In my opinion, the Second Vatican Council comprises three phenomena, 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 drew up outlines to be proposed to the Council Fathers, the development of the debates in 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 intended to be pastoral and not dogmatic, and the design for the renewal of the Church – the aggiornamento, as was said at the time ad nauseam – as well as its reception and application of reforms decided by the Holy See. Aggiornamento means “updating” – that was the intention of the assembly, as it has been many times throughout the history of the Church.

The second dimension is given by the conciliar documents themselves. Strictly speaking, that is the Council, keeping in mind – I insist – that it defined itself as pastoral and not dogmatic, even though dogmatic matter was not lacking in its constitutions and other adopted magisterial genres, especially doctrine previously established. The theology of the Council naturally reflects the theology of the 20th 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 the subject of priestly formation, there is a wealth of postconciliar legislation as well as statements by Supreme Pontiffs in encyclicals, homilies, and catecheses.

In addition to the two identities I have attributed to Vatican II, there is what has come to be called “the spirit of the Council.” Here I take this expression as a pejorative. The label has nearly 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, expressed or disguised schisms that 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” (“in the same dogma, the same meaning, and the same judgment”) as the golden rule of all authentic renewal, as St. Vincent of Lérins expressed in his Commonitorium. Heterogeneity, or alteration, is error and eventually heresy.

As she has been at so many other crossroads in her history, already brought to her third millennium, the Church of Christ is moving toward the Second Coming of the Lord, comforted by the Holy Spirit, guided by her pastors and the continuous witness of the saints: martyrs, confessors, and virgins.

To be continued in Part 2…