<ß Click to return to main document

 

*  9.

The priests express their thanks to the foundress of the Daisy Movement, Mrs. Louise Ward, at the occasion of the 25th anniversary of the movement (2006)

 

                          Table: statistics of received messages

  1

        2

3

4

      5

      6

        7

   #

Name of the diocese

Priests

Sent

Answers received

Portion

of the diocese

Percenta-ge of  messages

..1

Alexandria Cornwall

45

43

Bish. + 2

  6.666 %

  1.785 %

..2

Amos, QC

37

41

Bish. + 2

  8.108 %

  1.785 %

  3

Baie-Comeau,QC

52

46

Bish. + 3

  7.692 %

  2.380 %

  4

Bathurst,NB

59

42

       1

1.694 %

  0.595 %

  5

Chicoutimi

211

174

       2

  0.947 %

  1.190 %

..6

Gaspé, QC

58

60

Bish. + 2

  5.172 %

  1.785 %

  7

Gatineau

84

78

        1

  1.190 %

  0.595 %

  8

Hearst, ON

30

28

       2

  6.666 %

  1.190 %

  9

Joliette, QC

128

111

       4

  3.125 %

  2.380 %

10

Mt-Laurier

40

31

       4

10.000 %

  2.380 %

11

Montréal, QC

1241

1214

2 Bishop

     25

  2.175 %

16.071 %

12

Nicolet, QC

159

157

     14

  8.805 %

  8.333 %

13

Ottawa, ON

317

350

       5

  1.577 %

  2.976 %

14

Québec, QC

773

736

Bish. + 7

  2.328 %

10.714 %

15

Rimouski

122

118

        4

  3.278 %

  2.380 %

16

Rouyn-Noranda,QC

34

34

        4

11.764 %

  2.380 %

17

Ste-Anne-de-la-Pocatière

102

92

Bish. + 7

  7.843 %

  4.761 %

18

Saint-Hyacinthe

202

170

Bish.+15

  7.920 %

  9.523 %

19

Saint-Jean-Longueuil   

128

129

Bish.  + 6

  5.468 %

  4.166 %

20

St-Jérôme, QC

163

138

2 Bishop

       7

  5.521 %

  5.357 ?

21

Sherbrooke

301

287

     10

  3.322 %

  5.952 %

22

Trois-Rivières,QC

165

173

     9

  5.454 %

  5.357 %

23

Valleyfield

85

93

     10

11.764 %

  5.952 %

24

      ?

--

47

       0

 

.

25

Letters FdR

 

 

       4

 

 

26

Totals-1

4536

4392

2 Bishop

156priest

 

100   %

27

Gifts but no message

4536

4392

  43

 

 

28

Totals-2

4536

4392

 211

 

 

29

Deceased

 

4392

  78

 

 

30

Moved

 

4392

118

 

 

31

Totals-3

4536

4392

 

 

 

  1

         2

3

4

      5

      6

        7

   #

Name of the diocese

Priests

Sent

Answers received

Portion

of the diocese

Percenta-ge of  messages

 

Notes

 

1.    Column 3: the numbers of column 3 come from the Canadian Catholic Church Directory, 2006.

2.    Column 6: the numbers of column 6 express a relationship between the numbers of columns 5 and 3.

3.    Column 7: the numbers of column 7 indicate the relationship between the total number of messages received (168, lign 27 in column 5) and the number of answers received from the concerning diocese.

4.    There are two (2) ways to calculate the results of the letters sent out to priests: either according to the number of messages received or according to the number of answers received.
(1) the percentage of the messages received is 168 / 4392 = 3.825 % (168: lign 26, column 5; 4392: lign 26, column 4);
(2) the percentage of answers received is 211 / 4392 = 4.804 %
(211: lign 28, column 5; 4392: lign 28, column 4).

5.    The average of the number of messages received per diocese is 168 / 23 = 7.304 (168: lign 26, column 5; 23 dioceses).

 

Observations and questions

 

1. The number of priests per diocese

 

The third column of the table shows the number of priests of each of the 23 dioceses where the Daisy Movement exists. The numbers have been taken from the 2006 Directory of the Catholic Church of Canada: 

Montréal                             1,241

Québec                                 772

Ottawa                                   317

Sherbrooke                           301

Chicoutimi                             211

Saint-Hyacinthe                    202

Trois-Rivières                       165

Saint-Jérôme                        163

Nicolet                                   159

Joliette                                   128

Saint-Jean-Longueuil            128

Rimouski                                122

Sainte-Anne-de-la-Pocatière102

Valleyfield                                85

Gatineau                                  84

Bathurst                                    59

Gaspé                                      58

Baie-Comeau                          52

Alexandria Cornwall                45

Mont-Laurier                            40

Amos                                       37

Rouyn-Noranda                      34

Hearst                                      30

 

Going over this list, we can easily see that the first two archdioceses have moore than 700 priests. The next two archdioceses number in the 300s. After this there are two dioceses numbering in the 200s. Seven (7) dioceses have 100 or more priests. Two archdioceses are in the 80s. The remaining eight (8) dioceses count between 59 and 30 priests.

 

What consequences can we draw from these statistics? It is said that numbers do not lie. But they keep silence. They certainly keep their secrets. They don’t mention the extend of the territory of each diocese. They do not mention whether the priests live in a town or in the countryside. The numbers do not tell if the locality is a large or small town or a village.

 

These numbers also keep silence about the population where the priest works. Is the population stable or changing, multi-ethnic or uniform? Is there religious or linguistic pluralism or not? Is the population aging or young? The numbers are silent. And how about the population’s density?

 

I am not a sociologue and therefore I have no competence in this  matter. Does the economy influence the religious domain? The kind of professions or jobs do they make their influence feel? So many questions we can ask and the numbers hide or ignore the answers.

 

Is the pastoral strategy of one diocese the same as that of another diocese which has very different features? The television, radio and newspapers tend to make culture uniform. But the mentioned points above do they not go in the opposite direction?

 

2. Column number 4

 

The numbers of column number 4 (letters sent to the priests) are the least trustworthy. In our case, this does fortunately  make little difference. We immediately see the disparity between columns 3 and 4, the number of priests in the diocese and the number of priests receiving the letter. When the address did not provide the abbreviation of the diocese, we ignored where to place the location.  That explains lign 24 of the table. Moreover, a blind person who directs volunteers cannot check their work. So we have received return mail which had been incorrectly addressed.

 

3. The harvest

 

According to our caluculations, the everage of the received messages is 7.304 (see note 5).

 

Nine (9) of the twenty-three (23) dioceses where the Daisy Movement has been implanted have more than the everage (7.304).

Montréal                                 27 (colonne 5)

Québ         ec                        18

Saint-Hyacinthe                     16

Nicolet                                    14

Sherbrooke                10

Valleyfield                 10

Saint-Jérôme                           9

Trois-Rivières                          9

Sainte-Anne-de-la-Pocatière  8

 

Fourteen (14) dioceses have less than the average (7.3):

Saint-Jean-Longueuil             7

Ottawa                                     5

Baie-Comeau                         4

Joliette                                    4

Mont-Laurier                           4

Rimouski                   4

Rouyn-Noranda                      4

Alexandria Cornwall               3

Amos                                      3

Gaspé                                     3

Chicoutimi                  2

Hearst                                     2

Bathurst                    1

Gatineau                    1

 

It is remarkable that the archdiocese of Montreal which has no coordinator since October 2002 (death of Mr. Georges Roy) gives the impression of great vitality by the clergy toward the Daisy Movement. Let us remember this observation and check it in the light of the diocesan percentages, in the fourth point.

 

In ten (10) dioceses, the bishop has also sent a message.

Alexandria Cornwall

Amos

Baie-Comeau

Gaspé

Montreal

Québec

Sainte-Anne-de-la-Pocatière

Saint-Hyacinthe

Saint-Jean-Longueuil

Saint-Jérôme

 

Even two (2) bishops have answered in

Montreal

Saint-Jérôme

 

4. The diocesan portion of the messages received

 

Column number 6 shows the percentage of the diocesan portion:

Rouyn-Noranda                             11,764 %

Valleyfield                                       11,764 %

Mont-Laurier                                   10,000 %

Nicolet                                               8,805 %

Amos                                                8,108 %

Saint-Hyacinthe                               7,920 %

Sainte-Anne-de-la-Pocatière          7,843 %

Baie-Comeau                                   7,692 %

Alexandria Cornwall                        6,666 %

Hearst                                               6,666 %

Saint-Jérôme                                   5,521 %

Saint-Jean-Longueuil                      5,468 %

Trois-Rivières                                   5,454 %

Gaspé                                               5,172 %

Sherbrooke                                      3,322 %

Rimouski                                          3,278 %

Joliette                                              3,125 %

Québec                                             2,328 %

Montréal                                           2,175 %

Bathurst                                            1,694 %

Ottawa                                              1,577 %

Gatineau                                           1,190 %

Chicoutimi                                        0,947 %

 

 

Column 5 (observation 4) gives the number of real answers. Here, according to column 6, we adjust this number according the capacity in each diocese, that is, according to the total number in each diocese, which witnesses of the vitality of the Daisy Movement in any given diocese.

 

Thus, the archdiocese of Montreal, which seemed to give such a favourable number in the previous observation, stands no longer at the top of the list and shows a rather weak percentage.

 

5. Column 7, the percentage of the messages received

 

Montréal                                                   16,071 %

Québec                                                    10,714 %

Saint-Hyacinthe                                        9,523 %

Nicolet                                                        8,333 %

Sherbrooke                           5,952 %

Valleyfield                             5,952 %

Saint-Jérôme                                             5,357 %

Trois-Rivières                                            5,357 %

Sainte-Anne-de-la-Pocatière                   4,761 %

Saint-Jean-Longueuil                               4,166 %

Ottawa                                                        2,976 %

Baie-Comeau                                            2,380 %

Joliette                                                        2,380 %

Mont-Laurier                                              2,380 %

Rimouski                                                    2,380 %

Rouyn-Noranda                                        2,380 %

Alexandria Cornwall                                 1,785 %

Amos                                                          1,785 %

Gaspé                                                        1,785 %

Chicoutimi                             1,190 %

Hearst                                                        1,190 %

Bathurst                               0,595 %

Gatineau                              0,595 %

 

6. Was this effort a worthwhile exercice?

 

Note number 4 indicates that we have collected 3.825 % messages and 4.804 % answers. Does this low percentage show us a  sufficient participation of the priests? We cannot state it. The consulted professionals (inquiries and fund raising) could not help us. The purposes were too different. Personally I am satisfied with the obtained results.

 

7. The future of the Daisy Movement

 

In the summer of 2006  the Daisy Movement passed from its first quarter century to its second quarter century. It has been implanted in several dioceses since some 15 years. Which Petals and which diocesan coordinators will still be there in 25 years? Perhaps only the recently ordained priests. But will these have younger Petals praying for them?

 

The above table and these observations do they allow us to say something about the health of the Daisy Movement, about its quality of life, about its future? Where do we stand today? Can we look forward five or ten or even fifteen years? Several dioceses have had the movement implanted about fifteen years ago. The Daisies have grown fifteen years older in the meantime. The diocesan animators also. What can we foresee? Will there be someone to take over?

 

Every diocesan coordinator has a rather precise vision of his diocese. Can he, from his diocesan viewpoint, express himself about the entire movement in the twenty-three dioceses?

 

In the dioceses where there is no more coordinator death slowly enters. And what to do in the dioceses where the animator is merely a title bearer without any action?

 

In the dioceses of Joliette and of Rouyn-Noranda a new animator has come forward after his predecessor had disappeared and there was no link between the two. In the dioceses where the movement is still flourishing, what will there be in ten of fifteen years from now?

 

Personally, I believe that the table and these observations which we can draw from it do contain some elements allowing us to answer for the health and the future of the movement. But I also think that these details are insufficient. Moreover, there are other factors which are absent from these data.

 

It is easy and pious to say: let the Holy Spirit do his work. But does he not count on our collaboration?

 

8. Our participation to the Holy Spirit’s action

 

I see five (5) points where we can work with the Holy Spirit. And, as we know, he will not act without us; let us go over these five (5) points.

 

8.1 Forgotten priests

 

In my communications with priests in 2006, I made a surprising discovery: there are three (3) groups of forgotten priests:

·        Retired diocesan priests (at the seminary, at the bishop’s house or in a pavilion)

·        Religious priests living in community

·        Missionary priests who have come back (p.m.é., M.Afr., etc)

 

The implantation of the Daisy Movement in a given diocese is a work which merits our admiration. It is an arduous and long work. The easiest is to provide a Daisy to the parish priest. The pastor has received his Daisy. How about his predecessor who now is retired in the pavilion for older priests? He has been forgotten. Who will give him a Daisy? He can still live many years…

 

I live in a religious house where there are several priests. Only since one month the others also have a Daisy after so many years.

 

In September 2006, I received an e-mail from a «Missionnaire d’Afrique» (M. Afr.) residing in another diocese than mine: “Next October 25 I’ll reach the age of 86 years and only yesterday I have learnt the existence of Daisies! I wonder who has given you my address. It must be because someone loves me much and finds that I need to be taken care of by at least one Daisy. It is right. I need that people pray for me and I accept that people look after me and give me as many Daisies as you can find for me. I thank you for it.”

 

I have found someone to organize a Daisy for him. Later on, I have sent it to the coordinator of his diocese.

 

How many other missionaries who have come back home after many years spent in foreign missions do not have a Daisy except when they had one already when they left? They have been forgotten.

 

Is there not a need to check the three groups of priests that we have mentioned to know if they indeed have a Daisy?

 

8.2 Putting life back into the Daisies

 

Are our Daisies alive, dynamic? Ideally speaking, the eight (8)persons who form a Daisy, that is the priest and the seven (7) Petals or prayer partners, are a little spiritual family. Are there good communications between these eight (8) persons? Some priests send, from time to time, a letter to their Petals. The priest can make a phone call to the Petal of the day to thank that person who prays for him that day. Do the Petals phone to their adopted priest to ask him about his health and inform about any news? Does the Daisy sometimes meet around the Eucharistic table? Do they think to invite their priest at home? Or as a group at a restaurant? I have the impression that this rarely occurs. Does the Daisy’s organizer maintain the unity among the Daisy’s members? Or are they without any contact among themselves? They need to receive new life.

 

8.3 Rejuvenate the Daisies by twenty years right now

 

Aging is a fact of life, both for priests and Petals. The older priests and their prayer partners will disappear more or less at the same time. But the priests of 30 to 40 years who have a Daisy much older than themselves will one day loose the prayer support. To correct this, I propose that we give to these younger priests another Daisy composed of people of their own age.

 

Besides, the diocesan animator should make sure to have a team ready to replace him and to continue his work. Once a year, of course, at the annual celebration of the Eucharist, there  is a strong team: greeters at the three doors of the cathedral, animators, the choir, the collection, the booth to sell a Daisy pin or other symbol, team to distribute the booklet for the ceremony, guides to direct people to their seats, publicity team, decoration team, alter service, etc. But after this great annual event, the animator can die or take sick, etc. Has a group of people been prepared to take over at any time?

 

8.4 Nomination of a diocesan coordinator

 

The chancellor of one diocese writes me that the Daisy Movement does not exist in that diocese. Yet I have in hand a list of sixteen (16) Daisies in that diocese. It is true that diocese has no animator. It also happens that the title bearer does absolutely nothing for the movement. What should we do? The prayers of the Daisies render the priest better and holier. Through his influence the priest, in turn, renders the parishioners better and holier. Which (arch)bishop does not want to have good and holy priests at his side to work in his diocese? Is he not interested in the holiness of his priests and the diocesan people? Can the (arch)bishop not nominate and remove any person in his territory that has a “diocesan” function? Is it not his right and duty? Can he not ask him for a report on his work done?

 

Wherever there is no competent and committed coordinator, I propose that the (arch)bishop creates a salaried position so that someone will take care full-time of the Daisy Movement. This goes against the movement’s tradition, I know it. But what is more important? A salary or the vitality of the Daisy Movement? The holiness of his flocks?

 

8.5 Updating

 

It seems to me that it would be useful at every quarter of a century to make an in-depth revision of the entire movement. If needed, the necessary updates should be make.

 

Sorel, December 2007.

 

 

 

Francis de Ruijte, ofm

95, chemin Sainte-Anne

Sorel-Tracy, QC  J3P 1J6

Phone: (450) 742-7299

Fax: (450) 743-7666

E-mail: Francis.de.Ruijte@paxetbonum.net

 

<ß Click to return to main document