this guy's sharp!
Of course, some are troubled by the good news of young, highly qualified, and orthodox seminarians enthusiastic about their vocations as future priests. As the article notes, liberals are worried:
[S]ome worry their moral certitude may create rifts with those who ignore Rome's teachings on church attendance, sex, birth control and divorce and who are increasingly vocal in their demand for a role in church governance.
This observation is quite revealing. Why would "some" be worried about the orthodoxy of future priests? Well, we all know the answer: because "some" reject orthodox Catholic belief and are intent on undermining orthodox belief. One sociologist--a specialty that I firmly believe no thinking person would miss if it disappeared entirely from the academic world--opines that there is a worrisome "generational divide in the U.S. priesthood." It is a blessing that such a generational divide exists precisely because the earlier generation of priests is riddled with so many false vocations. For it is indeed a false vocation when a priest does not pass on the moral teachings of the Church to his flock. Woe to such a priest or bishop or cardinal on the day of judgment because much will be demanded of him to whom much has been given. I, for one, welcome this generational divide in the priesthood and am happy that the mortality statistics favor the newer, orthodox generation of clergy.
I'm personally quite worried about the Church's leadership after John Paul II passes on... Under his leadership the Church "settled down" and it took on a new vibrancy. Would his successor be similarly courageous to uphold the Church's teachings fully knowing that teachings may not be popular with the people?