For Its Size, The Church in Myanmar is Producing More Priests than Anywhere Else

Every three years CARA calculates diocesan ordination rates in the United States, which are published in The CARA Report. This post looks globally at national ordination rates for diocesan priests. This is done with the most recent available ordination data for 2015, 2016, and 2017 and Catholic population data for 2017 from the Vatican’s Annuarium Statisticum Ecclesiae. The table below lists countries in rank order by number of Catholics to ordinand ratios. While we analyzed data for every available country the table only includes those that satisfy the following qualifications: 1) has a population of at least 100,000 Catholics, and 2a) a total of at least nine ordinations in the three years examined or 2b) has at least one ordination in each of the three years.

Brazil is one of the countries with more than 1,000 ordinations in the most recent three years for which data is available. India also ordained more than 1,000 men. The difference between the two countries is that there are 22 million Catholics in India compared to 175 million in Brazil. Thus, India had 14,433 Catholics per diocesan ordinand compared to 137,846 Catholics per ordinand in Brazil. India is producing more priests (1,523 from 2015-17 compared to 1,269 in Brazil during the same period) with a smaller Catholic population.

The countries creating the most new priests relative to the size of their Catholic population include: Myanmar (8,193 Catholics per ordinand), Thailand (10,514 per ordinand), Togo (12,381 per ordinand), Vietnam (12,843 per ordinand), and Bangladesh (12,967 per ordinand). This includes four Asian countries and one African country.

The United States comes in just above the middle of the pack with 52,869 Catholics per ordinand. Just ahead of the U.S. is Great Britain, where many more new priests per Catholic are ordained than in neighboring Ireland (52,867 Catholics per ordinand compared to 117,404 in Ireland).

		Ordinations
Rank	Country	2015	2016	2017	Total	Catholics per Ordinand	Catholics
1	Myanmar	21	29	33	83	8,193	680,000
2	Thailand	15	9	13	37	10,514	389,000
3	Togo	61	53	54	168	12,381	2,080,000
4	Vietnam	163	183	189	535	12,843	6,871,000
5	Bangladesh	8	7	15	30	12,967	389,000
6	Mali	12	6	5	23	13,130	302,000
7	Eritrea	4	4	8	16	13,625	218,000
8	India	490	531	502	1,523	14,433	21,981,000
9	Romania	35	30	32	97	14,897	1,445,000
10	South Korea	118	102	145	365	15,704	5,732,000
11	Sri Lanka	40	27	27	94	16,936	1,592,000
12	Ukraine	81	113	91	285	17,330	4,939,000
13	Guinea	1	4	11	16	17,625	282,000
14	Israel	4	6	7	17	17,765	302,000
15	Ghana	61	62	82	205	18,317	3,755,000
16	Senegal	23	4	14	41	19,268	790,000
17	Egypt	6	4	4	14	19,286	270,000
18	Japan	11	7	9	27	19,852	536,000
19	Botswana	1	2	2	5	22,800	114,000
20	Cameroon	86	116	88	290	22,976	6,663,000
21	Equatorial Guinea	6	24	9	39	23,282	908,000
22	Malta	3	9	5	17	24,353	414,000
23	Syrian Arab Republic	2	3	4	9	24,444	220,000
24	Taiwan	5	3	1	9	24,778	223,000
25	Bosnia and Herzegovina	7	7	2	16	25,125	402,000
26	Burkina Faso	40	30	46	116	25,405	2,947,000
27	Benin	40	53	36	129	28,450	3,670,000
28	Nigeria	319	342	347	1,008	28,646	28,875,000
29	Sweden	1	2	1	4	30,000	120,000
30	Sierra Leone	1	6	3	10	31,300	313,000
31	Slovakia	36	43	45	124	32,331	4,009,000
32	Solomon Islands	1	2	1	4	32,750	131,000
33	Ethiopia	12	12	3	27	33,556	906,000
34	Rwanda	37	59	60	156	35,449	5,530,000
35	Zimbabwe	16	19	18	53	36,811	1,951,000
36	Indonesia	64	61	96	221	37,068	8,192,000
37	Poland	327	339	327	993	37,325	37,064,000
38	New Zealand	10	2	4	16	37,438	599,000
39	Lebanon	24	19	14	57	37,579	2,142,000
40	Chad	10	18	4	32	39,594	1,267,000
41	Croatia	40	23	26	89	41,000	3,649,000
42	Gabon	10	5	7	22	44,000	968,000
43	Iraq	1	9	3	13	45,308	589,000
44	Albania	6	2	3	11	46,000	506,000
45	Congo	14	16	25	55	47,691	2,623,000
46	Burundi	41	37	60	138	49,065	6,771,000
47	Pakistan	3	14	11	28	49,393	1,383,000
48	Czech Republic	28	25	13	66	50,182	3,312,000
49	Great Britain	37	32	36	105	52,867	5,551,000
50	United States	503	447	436	1,386	52,869	73,277,000
51	Madagascar	32	56	58	146	56,390	8,233,000
52	Italy	342	336	308	986	58,738	57,916,000
53	Papua New Guinea	11	19	10	40	60,650	2,426,000
54	Serbia	2	2	2	6	66,667	400,000
55	Uganda	79	112	82	273	67,220	18,351,000
56	Australia	46	27	24	97	69,268	6,719,000
57	Zambia	19	31	28	78	70,910	5,531,000
58	Belarus	6	6	7	19	76,789	1,459,000
59	Slovenia	8	10	2	20	76,950	1,539,000
60	El Salvador	30	23	14	67	78,463	5,257,000
61	Haiti	31	35	34	100	80,380	8,038,000
62	Central African Republic	7	5	11	23	80,826	1,859,000
63	Kenya	76	56	54	186	80,952	15,057,000
64	Malaysia	9	3	3	15	81,133	1,217,000
65	Latvia	1	3	1	5	82,400	412,000
66	Hungary	21	25	22	68	88,074	5,989,000
67	Colombia	157	180	180	517	89,238	46,136,000
68	Tanzania	55	66	57	178	89,792	15,983,000
69	South Africa	10	13	19	42	92,643	3,891,000
70	East Timor	1	8	3	12	101,500	1,218,000
71	Portugal	25	34	30	89	102,697	9,140,000
72	Dem. Rep. of the Congo	167	140	124	431	104,942	45,230,000
73	Spain	158	130	110	398	109,060	43,406,000
74	Paraguay	13	28	19	60	109,900	6,594,000
75	Germany	60	79	74	213	112,437	23,949,000
76	Costa Rica	7	13	15	35	112,886	3,951,000
77	Peru	103	81	60	244	116,861	28,514,000
78	Ireland	19	16	12	47	117,404	5,518,000
79	Hong Kong	1	2	2	5	120,200	601,000
80	Mexico	314	309	312	935	121,089	113,218,000
81	Honduras	28	17	14	59	122,949	7,254,000
82	Malawi	16	18	13	47	124,149	5,835,000
83	Canada	44	32	44	120	135,067	16,208,000
84	Ivory Coast	69	58	54	181	135,751	24,571,000
85	Brazil	471	348	450	1,269	137,846	174,926,000
86	Nicaragua	13	23	3	39	146,026	5,695,000
87	Angola	34	31	43	108	151,852	16,400,000
88	Switzerland	5	9	7	21	163,619	3,436,000
89	Austria	11	11	9	31	165,194	5,121,000
90	Uruguay	6	2	8	16	168,063	2,689,000
91	Bolivia	15	27	14	56	172,232	9,645,000
92	Venezuela	67	42	49	158	174,677	27,599,000
93	Dominican Republic	24	14	16	54	178,370	9,632,000
94	Mozambique	14	16	12	42	181,452	7,621,000
95	Philippines	147	170	146	463	186,566	86,380,000
96	Puerto Rico	9	1	5	15	188,400	2,826,000
97	Ecuador	21	36	20	77	189,545	14,595,000
98	Argentina	86	66	62	214	194,266	41,573,000
99	France	69	88	83	240	202,671	48,641,000
100	Guatemala	20	20	20	60	225,883	13,553,000
101	Netherlands	7	8	6	21	226,190	4,750,000
102	Panama	7	5	4	16	226,813	3,629,000
103	Lithuania	3	5	3	11	232,727	2,560,000
104	South Sudan	8	8	7	23	270,217	6,215,000
105	Cuba	8	5	11	24	283,125	6,795,000
106	Sudan	2	1	1	4	298,250	1,193,000
107	Chile	19	6	11	36	377,833	13,602,000
108	Belgium	10	3	6	19	431,158	8,192,000

In addition to the countries listed above, there are a number of other countries of note with fewer than 100,000 Catholics that have at least nine ordinations in the three years examined or at least one ordination per year. In fact, remove the minimum 100,000 Catholics requirement and Nepal shoots to the top of the list with 2,667 Catholics per ordinand (3 ordinations; one each year with a total Catholic population of 8,000). Other countries that would appear if the Catholic population restriction is removed while the other requirements are maintained include: Samoa (3,444 Catholics per ordinand), Niger (3,833 per ordinand), Liechtenstein (5,600 per ordinand), Denmark (7,833 per ordinand), Kosovo (11,000 per odinand), Kiribati (16,750 per ordinand), and Fiji (21,333 per ordinand). However, these ratios are, in part, a function of having very small Catholic populations. At the same time it is still remarkable that Catholics in these nations are consistently choosing to become diocesan priests.

Last we looked in 2017, the top U.S. dioceses for Catholics per ordinand were Nashville (4,678 Catholics per ordinand), Crookston (5,348 per ordinand), Covington (6,455 per ordinand), Lincoln (6,506 per ordinand), and Knoxville (6,912 per ordinand). Check out The CARA Report in the near future for updated diocesan rankings. 

Image courtesy of Billy Lopue.

---

Note: The Vatican includes Ireland and Northern Ireland as Ireland and Great Britain includes England, Wales, and Scotland.

What Should You Eat On Friday?

(Image not intended as an answer to the question above. Not an endorsement!)

CARA’s national surveys indicate that more than six in ten self-identified adult Catholics in the United States will abstain from eating meat on Fridays during Lent. Unlike many of the other trends we track, this is not a practice in decline and is just as likely to be done by young adult Catholics as their elders. It also fits well in the social media age where people can have fun posting images of their non-meat foods. If you run a food establishment that is open for business on Fridays during Lent you are also likely financially concerned about the impact of 31,995,000 Catholic consumers (extrapolating from the survey data) looking for something to eat made of something other than meat.

Last Lent I gave up meat for the whole season. I am sure I just wasn’t doing vegetarianism “correctly” but I have to say it was the least healthy I have ever felt. When Lent ended, I went on a high protein diet (lots of meat) and now feel much less likely to die any time soon. Therefore, this Lent I had to think about what in the heck am I am going to eat on the days where I have to abstain from meat again (all Catholics, ages 14 or older, are called to abstain on Ash Wednesday and Fridays during Lent).

This question called for some statistical analysis. The most challenging meal for many working age Catholics might be lunch. You aren’t at home and there likely aren’t any parish fish dinners available at this time. This often means one might buy a quick meal from a restaurant. I dug into the 2019 non-meat offerings at national fast and fast-casual chains and our findings might surprise some. I assume that a Catholic diner is looking to skip the meat but get as much protein (and fiber) as they can as a nutritional goal. I also assume they look to keep calorie and carbohydrate counts reasonable and minimize fat (...well maybe not keto Catholics), sodium, and sugar. Unfortunately taste is too subjective to be considered.

Although it varies by activity level, the average American needs around 2,000 calories per day and should try not to exceed 65 grams of fat and 2,300 milligrams of sodium. A healthier intake of sugar would be about 35 grams per day. To keep the comparisons fair, one Lent-friendly meal per establishment is evaluated and the base meal is a fish sandwich and medium fries (drink excluded). Some of the restaurants offer neither so the closest equivalent is considered in these cases. How do the menus this Lent stack up within these guidelines? I ranked them all on each nutritional outcome and the figure below shows the average rank (i.e., a lower rank indicates a better outcome given my assumptions) for each meal and establishment.

For me, someone looking to eat somewhat healthy and get as much protein as possible, Panera Bread’s tuna sandwich on focaccia with potato chips might be ideal. It is ranked overall as the 5th “healthiest” option this year (quotations are used because I am a doctor but not that kind of doctor…) providing 800 calories, 43 grams of fat (66% of daily limit), 75 grams of carbohydrates, 30 grams of protein, 1,520 milligrams of sodium (63% of daily limit), 5 grams of fiber, and 6 grams of sugar.

The “healthiest” option overall, given my assumptions, would be a Subway’s 6-inch tuna sandwich on Italian bread with potato chips. It is only 610 calories (no cheese but your choice of any vegetables allowed), but it has significantly less protein than Panera at 21 grams. On the positive side, Subway also offers less fat (35 grams), fewer carbs (53 grams), and lower sodium (780 milligrams).

The next “best” option to Subway may surprise—it’s the original fast food Lent offering. McDonald’s Filet-O-Fish with medium fries is surprisingly lighter than many other options. This meal comes in at only 610 calories with 35 grams of fat, 82 grams of carbohydrates, 21 grams of protein, 780 milligrams of sodium, 6 grams of fiber, and 5 grams of sugar.  Outside of elevated fats these nutritional targets measure close to 1/3 of what one would expect in a day’s eating. This was a meal specifically designed for the Catholic consumer in 1960s Cincinnati. Nutritionally, it is still not a bad option.

Which meal meets or exceeds some generally recognized daily nutritional goals? It’s one where there was not an equivalent to the fish sandwich and fries and this may have made it a less than fair comparison. If you wanted Chipotle you might order a sofritas burrito bowl (also including beans, rice, fajitas, cheese, salsa, lettuce, and sour cream) with a side of chips and guacamole. This amounts to 1,530 calories with 79.5 grams of fat, 165 grams of carbohydrates, 38 grams of protein (best of any meal evaluated), 2,800 milligrams of sodium (exceeding daily total maximum), 27 grams of fiber (best of any meal evaluated), and 14 grams of sugar. So if you are looking for maximum protein and fiber this is the choice but it comes with some other less desirable outcomes. This could also be a better option by cutting out the chips and guacamole and keeping the cheese and sour cream out of the burrito bowl. This option would only provide 545 calories, 15.5 grams of fat, 21 grams of protein, 81 grams of carbohydrates, 1,770 milligrams of sodium, 14 grams of fiber, and 9 grams of sugar. But would this be a meal that is really an equivalent to a fish sandwich and fries? It’s probably a bit too far on the lighter side.

While KFC does not appear to have a meat-free Lent option (unless you are lucky enough to be in Guam), Chick-fil-A does. A fish sandwich joins the lineup (at participating locations) for Lent. While the sandwich does not have complete nutritional information from the company, it appears to be similar, based on other sources, to McDonald’s once one factors in the side of fries. It comes in as the third “healthiest” relative to the recommended daily values. If you want a more calorie packed (and flavorful?) fish sandwich and fries you could try Wendy’s, Burger King, or Arby’s. These all exceed 850 calories, 100 carbohydrates, 40 grams of fat, and about 1,500 milligrams of sodium or more. Arby’s comes in with the highest numbers for the fish and fries meal for fat, carbs, sodium, and sugar (…this is the franchise with the tag line “We have the meats!” so it may not surprise that it is not likely the first option for a Friday during Lent).

Hardee’s and Carl’s Jr. have offered a beer battered fish sandwich in the past. However, as of Ash Wednesday, it was not an option that was active from their menu windows online. Instead, under their “Better for you options” they currently offer a Veg It Thickburger, which appears to be a toppings loaded burger without the meat. We utilized this for our analysis (with medium fries). The fish sandwich from previous years would have been less “healthy.” Taco Bell also requires some selective ordering. We went with the Cheesy Bean and Rice Burrito with Nacho Fries for the analysis. It offers the lowest protein option but ranks second highest in fiber.

As we have noted in the past, Catholics are a relatively healthy bunch in the United States. Hopefully, our review of 2019 offerings helps you make some menu decisions this year. A recent scientific study showed that knowing what you are consuming may be one of the easiest steps to maintaining your health. 

McDonald’s background image courtesy of michaelgoodin.

Where the Parish Doors Have Closed … and Opened

One of the most common news stories about the Catholic Church in recent years involve parish closures. These events often gain local attention and time from time get coverage nationally. When the story is national, the closure(s) sometimes seems as if this is something generalizable. The national data (for territorial Latin rite dioceses) seem to fit this characterization with the Church now operating 1,437 fewer parishes than it had in 1971.

Note: Figure excludes parishes in Eastern rite eparchies

What often gets lost in these stories (and in the national numbers) is that closures are a much more regional and local phenomenon. CARA has often referred to a “Tale of Two Churches” (1, 2) where pastors in different parts of the country tend to be worried about different things (keeping the lights on vs. finding space for more pews and parking spaces).

The net loss of parishes has been most heavily concentrated in dioceses in a handful of states. Really two states lead the pack in reducing their numbers of parishes. Pennsylvania has reduced its number of parishes by 532 since 1971 and New York by 500 during the same period. Other states have experienced increases in parishes, offsetting some of these losses including Texas, which has added 293 parishes, Florida which has added 165 parishes, and Arizona and New Mexico (the Diocese of Gallup crosses state lines) which added 121. The states in blue on the following map (click the map to see a larger version) have fewer parishes now than they had in 1971 and those in green have more now than in 1971.

The pattern in parish losses and gains follows economic and social mobility changes in the country more generally. The Sunbelt in the South has attracted population growth while the Rustbelt in the Northeast and Midwest have seen population drains over the decades. The Catholic Church, diocese by diocese, has responded to these changes by closing parishes in areas with losses and opening them in the states where population gains have occurred. It is important to note that these population gains have also included new arrivals from outside the United States as well.

In some urban dioceses that attracted the first waves of Catholic immigration from Europe in the 19th and 20th centuries, churches were built to serve the needs of people from particular countries like Italy, Poland, Germany, and Ireland. In some cases, parish buildings were built in close proximity to each other in cities catering to the language and culture of the specific immigrant groups needing pastoral care and access to the sacraments. Now many years removed from this immigration and often with Catholics having left long ago for the suburbs or the Sunbelt, parish buildings are underutilized. This is part of the story of what happened with some of the parish closures in areas of New York, Pennsylvania, and Massachusetts. In some other areas, shortages of priests have led to reorganizations that involve parish closures and clergy being assigned to administer multiple parishes. However, there are limits to how many parishes a single priest can realistically administer geographically. Finances also play a role. Since 2000, the average Catholic family has given $10 a week to their parish. In some cases, the number of these active families present in parish communities are not sufficient in numbers to make the operation of a parish viable in the long-term. Closures here have also been made due to this lack of funding.

In many ways, it has been easier for the Church to close parishes than build new sites. While growth is evident throughout the South (outside of Louisiana) and West, the Catholic population of this region has increased much more quickly than new brick and mortar construction. Nowhere is this more evident than in Georgia where the Catholic population has increased from about 110,000 in 1971 to more than 1 million today (+858%). While the state has added 67 parishes during this period, the number of Catholics per parish has increased from 1,396 in 1971 to 7,235 in 2018.

States with fewer Catholics today than in 1971 include Pennsylvania (-17% fewer), Rhode Island (-17%), Michigan (-16%), Vermont (-16%), Massachusetts (-14%), Louisiana (-10%), Ohio (-9%), Connecticut (-9%), Illinois (-4%), North Dakota (-2%), and Wisconsin (-2%). Other than Georgia, states with significantly more Catholics now than in 1971 include North Carolina (+922% more; 73,600 to 752,500), Nevada (+635%), South Carolina (+582%), Utah (+370%), Florida (+298%), Tennessee (+285%), and Virginia (+265%).  
 
New York has experienced no real net growth nor loss in the total number of Catholics residing in the state. Thus, there is more to the story of parish closures in New York than simple population change. Here, the geographic distribution of this population and of the parishes (particularly in urban areas) is likely central. It is also important to note that even with the net loss of 500 parishes in New York, there remains 1,203 parishes open and the number of Catholics per parish has only increased modestly from 4,048 in 1971 to 5,743 today. By comparison, in Nevada, a state that has gained 20 parishes since 1971, the number of Catholics per parish today is 12,639.

Parish photo courtesy of Massachusetts Office Of Travel & Tourism.