Joining the Priesthood

I know that the majority of those reading this are, for many good reasons, not thinking of becoming priests. They are already married; would not be happy without a spouse, children and grandchildren; are too old, turned off on the church and its leadership because of recent scandals; reject too many of the church’s teachings. They want the church to ordain women and see the church today as irrelevant.

But all of us have a stake in the continuance of the priesthood—though not necessarily as it is presently constituted—and it is in the common interest to discuss the role of the priest in the community and ask how good young men can be encouraged to take on this servant-leadership role.


I hold out the possibility of great changes because I have experienced them. Perhaps the time has come for the Spirit to leave His/Her nest again and stir things up.

When I entered the Society of Jesus at Saint Andrew on Hudson the summer of 1957, I was a 24-year-old Fordham graduate just out of the U. S. Army in Germany. I had been attracted by the Jesuits who taught me at St. Joe’s Prep in Philadelphia and at Fordham and who had been writing to me about my future for years. And I was struck by the America editor, Robert C. Hartnett, S.J., who had the courage to criticize the red-baiting Senator Joseph R. McCarthy. I had consulted family friend Fr. Gerard Sloyan, a well known theologian, on the choice between the Jesuits and the diocesan clergy, and he asked me how important it was for me to have the support of a religious community, as against living in a rectory with only two or three other priests. That settled it.

When I entered the New York Province (one of 10 provinces) at Saint Andrew on Hudson, there were 30 novices in my year and another 30 in second. Vocations were so high in those years that New York had just built a new philosophy seminary at Shrub Oak in Westchester County with a double-sized sanctuary because we would need all that floor space for the men to prostrate themselves during the rite of ordination.

Of the 60 novices nearly all were 17, right out of high school, with only about a half dozen having been to college or in the service. As much as I loved my younger brothers, I was very glad I had “seen the world,” including a year in Paris, before locking myself away in the beautiful Hudson River countryside.

Then half-way through, the novice master announced that the new Pope John XXIII had called the Second Vatican Council to "update" the church. The world had changed, the church had been left behind and had to catch up.

By the time I was ordained in 1967 the church had changed dramatically, and we had prepared for it during theology at Woodstock College by reading the Council documents, being briefed by men who had been there, and by experimenting with the liturgy to find new and better ways of making Christ present to the congregation. We were closing seminaries in the woods and moving to both Catholic and secular university campuses, and Jesuit faculty began wearing shirts, coats and ties to break down artificial clerical barriers between priests and people.

This summer 31 young men joined the Jesuits—nationwide. New York, New England, and Maryland Provinces have consolidated. Three of the 31 are from New York. Obviously the difference between the attraction to the Jesuit life between 1957 and 2010 is startling. But there are other remarkable differences.













In the 1950s the priest was a high status member of the community. Yes, Father. Clericalism, often in a generous way, was running high. Father wearing his Roman collar in a restaurant might have his bill picked up by a good Catholic at another table. A collar-wearing priest waiting in line at a theater might be moved to the head of the line. Most of that has faded.

A different breed is moving in. Of the 31 Jesuits entering the average age is 25.8. Seven are over 30, only two are 18. Twenty-our have been to Jesuit high schools or colleges. Twenty-three have already done some sort of ministry, either in the Jesuit Volunteer Corps or other work with the poor. Eighteen have traveled to other countries, some spending several years abroad, like the one who spent two years teaching English in rural China. Nearly all are athletes: they run, bike and swim. There’s one from Harvard Law School and another who has played polo. Another graduated from Boston College in 2008, spent a year as an Oregon Province novice, left the Society and coached high school cross-country, returned to Boston College for graduate studies and rejoined the Society. He also plays the Irish fiddle.

If history repeats itself, about half of these 31 men will leave. We shall see. But their resumes suggest we are attracting good men. What happens to them will be determined by how Society of Jesus and church at large respond to the many who are leaving not just the religious life but the faith itself because of: their refusal to accept Humanae Vitae on birth control; women’s reaction to the block against their ordination; unprepared sermons that ignore the people’s needs; and perhaps the silence of the church on the critical issues of our time. These issues might include the unjust distribution of wealth, unjustified wars, the search for meaning during a public intellectual dialogue dominated by the “new atheists” or fundamentalists still at war with modern Biblical criticism and the theory of evolution.

Why would anyone want to be a priest at a time like this?

1. He’s needed. Jesus looked over the crowds and mourned that they were “sheep without a shepherd.”

2. It’s an extraordinary opportunity to learn, through service, what love really is, to give and receive it, and make friends for life who may never substitute for the family one might otherwise have raised but will bring overwhelming happiness.

3. In certain parts of the world, as Jesuits and Archbishop Romero learned in El Salvador, to be a good priest is to face death. No one should join the religious life in order to become a martyr, but he should know of the risks. To stick one’s neck out in Afghanistan, Mexico, or New York—any place where the Gospel threatens the status quo—is to risk your livelihood, your reputation, or your life. All the more reason to be a priest.

Raymond A. Schroth, S.J.

Comments are automatically closed two weeks after an article's initial publication. See our comments policy for more.
Knud Rasmussen
7 years 10 months ago
I'm surprised that no one else has commented on Fr. Schroth's strange assertion regarding "the silence of the church on the critical issues of our time. These issues might include the unjust distribution of wealth, unjustified wars,   the search for meaning during a public intellectual dialogue dominated by the 'new atheists' or fundamentalists still at war with modern Biblical criticism and the theory of evolution."

Haven't the last several popes and the U.S. Catholic bishops spoken out forcefully on issues of economic justice? Indeed, they have. Senior prelates have also spoken out against the U.S. invasion of Iraq and other instances of unjustified aggression. The last two popes and numerous Catholic intellectuals have also played a vigorous role in debates regarding faith and reason and have offered an intelligent alternative to the extremes of the "new atheists" and the "fundamentalists" that Fr. Schroth has referred to. That all of this has happened without Fr. Schroth taking notice is rather surprising, to say the very least.
we vnornm
7 years 10 months ago
Vince, good question that deserves to be asked, again and again: what is the charism in those who stay? bill
7 years 10 months ago
"Anyone who does not think that a loyal Catholic today must be ready to live a martyr’s life is living in a dream".

John Hardon SJ
Bill Mazzella
7 years 10 months ago

Thanks for a thoughtful post. The world has changed indeed. But what you do not mention are the  underlying reasons for priests leaving. There is a disenchantment as a seminarian continues in formation. He begins to realize that there are a lot of priests who seek a more comfortable life than what he was led to believe. Certainly this was true before Vatican II. But Vatican II allowed people to leave whereas before that the opprobrium attached to leaving was too heavy for some to leave. Secondly, you do not address the essence of the priesthood or presider as servants. The pre-Vatican II priest received immense adulation and privilege but that hardly qualified as a good presider in the Lord. The office of priesthood does not seem to exist in the early church. This came later especially from the fourth century onward with all its pomp and circumstance. So there are questions of theology here.

Of course, there would many more ministers to preach the word and serve the community if bishops would accept women and married Catholics. No question many priests have been wonderful examples. So have "lay persons" notwithstanding the lack of publicity. The recognition that we all are the servants of God seems to make your post incomplete. It is a new world indeed and our baptismal mandate needs much clarification. Should you not examine that more thoroughly? 
Vince Killoran
7 years 10 months ago
I don't know Dave-this seems to be about more than obeying and wearing the right clothes. And, thinking for yourself and obedience are not necessarily at odds with each other (if you understanding the full meaning of "obedience").

I would focus on those who join & stay.  The priests, brothers, and sisters are much more competent and mature on average than the pre-Vatican II cohort.  As for greatly reduced numbers, we should look at the highe number of clerics in the mid-twentieth century as an anomoly.


The latest from america

 Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano, then nuncio to the United States, and then-Cardinal Theodore E. McCarrick of Washington, are seen in a combination photo during the beatification Mass of Blessed Miriam Teresa Demjanovich at the Cathedral Basilica of the Sacred Heart in Newark, N.J., Oct. 4, 2014. (CNS photo/Gregory A. Shemitz)
In this third letter Archbishop Viganò no longer insists, as he did so forcefully in his first letter, that the restrictions that he claimed Benedict XVI had imposed on Archbishop McCarrick—one he alleges that Pope Francis later lifted—can be understood as “sanctions.”
Gerard O’ConnellOctober 19, 2018
Kevin Clarke tells us about his reporting from Iraq.
Olga SeguraOctober 19, 2018
For U.S. Catholics, every synod is also a valuable reminder—and corrective—that it is not all about us.
The EditorsOctober 19, 2018
For decades, the U.S. church has gifted its public servants with the social teachings and magisterium of the church.
Christopher Jolly HaleOctober 19, 2018