Isaac Padinjarekuttu What Ails Priestly Formation Today?

(June 2008)
After many years of teaching in the Jnana Deepa Vidyapeeth in Pune the author makes some reflections on the problems of priestly formation in India and suggests ways of improving the outcome of this long process. His analysis should be of much interest to Seminary teachers and trainees, to religious superiors and to bishops and persons responsible for the training of leadership in the Church. The Second Vatican Council's decree on the Training of Priests. Optatam Totius, begins with the words: The Council is fully aware that the desired renewal of the whole Church depends in great part upon the priestly ministry animated by the spirit of Christ...1 If so, priestly formation should be given a prime place in the Church. Unfortunately, programmes of priestly formation are floundering in their objectives and there is widespread discontent both among formators in seminaries and those who are being formed. Wellintentioned programmes, like the Charter of Priestly Formation mostly remain on paper. Time may have come to ask some questions regarding the efficacy of seminary formation and to seek remedial measures. Perhaps the place to begin with is the institution of Seminaries itself. The Seminary In today's usage the term seminary designates a special type of 'school' dedicated to the spiritual, moral, and intellectual formation of the clergy. It is derived from the Latin word seminarium, which was commonly used to describe a place where young seedlings were prepared for eventual transplantation. Its first official usage dates back to the Council of Trent, which did not invent the term but took it over from the writings of the period.2 The Council of Trent made the seminaries compulsory where the future ministers of the Church are "rightly brought up, educated in religion, and trained in ecclesiastical studies and religious practices." It was common knowledge that the clerics of the pre-Reformation period were not adequately trained in theology. In the report of the preparatory commission on clerical training it was pointed out that one of the most horrible evils in the church was the ordination of the intellectually and morally unprepared, and suggested measures for it, namely, better supervision before conferring holy orders, and that each bishop should have in his cathedral church a master or professor to whom was entrusted the intellectual and moral formation of young clerics.3 This is the context of the Tridentine seminary legislation of July 15,1563, in canon 18 of the reformatory decrees. It is fundamentally a return to the ancient practice of grouping candidates for the priesthood around their bishop and having them thus formed morally and intellectually under his supervision. But now it entailed the complete isolation of the candidates from their environment for the entire training period so that they may not succumb to the "world's pleasures, and are brought up from adolescent years onwards in an orderly way." Soon after the council the decree was implemented. No doubt the system helped in the subsequent decades and centuries to revitalize the moral and spiritual formation of the clergy. But at the same time, an absolutization of the Tridentine decree also took place, which was seen as the final solution to all problems of clerical formation rather than as a beginning. Its theological presuppositions were very narrow. There was no reference to Jesus and his ministry in the decree. It was exclusively focused on the celebration of the Eucharist. Leadership in the Christian community was not given any major place in the Tridentine discussion. The strictly orthodox, celibate priests trained in the newly established seminaries became the bulwarks of Roman Catholicism and its centralized system in subsequent centuries. But the Enlightenment, the French Revolution and Secularization which engulfed Europe had their impact on seminaries too. Some clergymen demanded a more liberal approach to formation which was vehemently resisted by the Church. This was clearly seen in the Modernist crisis. In spite of the fact that Pope Pius X was truly concerned about the renewal of pastoral care and, therefore, wanted a reform of seminaries, the impression cannot be done away

with that the anti-modernist campaign was a sort of police system of surveillance and espionage, and was based on an overestimation of obedience at the cost of a free exchange of opinions in seminaries. Totally unconcerned with the new world that was taking shape around him, the Pope produced a seminary system which increased its inherent weakness of being an educational system leading to a ghetto life without contact with the outside world. Individual priests who wanted to bridge the gap between the church and its theology and the modern world and its temper were considered radicals and were condemned. The scholastic orientation of theological studies was imposed and strict rules were enforced in seminaries with the result that the antiquated system of the strictly secluded seminary training continued in the church. The worker-priests movement in France would have been an ideal way to break free from that system but it was condemned as an aberration. This was the context of the second Vatican Council. The Council decree Optatam Totius on the training of priests did not call into question the structure of the seminary in any way. But the openings provided by the other documents of the council like Lumen Gentium, Gaudium et Spes, etc., caused a theological discussion on priesthood which challenged many of the traditional concepts hitherto held to be unassailable. The answers of the Church did not satisfy many clergymen and that resulted in a massive resignation of clergy in the years immediately following the council in many countries of the world.4 In spite of several initiatives taken to spruce up the formation of the clergy after the council, in general there was a feeling that priestly training had lost touch with the day-to-day world. The curriculum of studies was considered inadequate for the pastoral task that awaited the seminarians outside. The latest initiative, the 1990 Synod of Bishops treated the topic The Formation of Priests in the Circumstances of the Present Day. The post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Pastores Dabo Vobis5 is a remarkable document in many respects because it addresses many issues that concern the formation of priests in the contemporary world. The most important contribution of this document, to my mind, is that it presents the priest as a mature and integrated human being who should be able to present the gospel vision to the world through his words and deeds. The Seminary System in India The seminary system did not exist in India before the arrival of the Portuguese. The Thomas Christians had the Malpanates where priestly training was done after the model of the ancient gurukulavasam. This was abolished by the Portuguese and the seminaries were imposed on the Church, a purely western institution.6 The abolition of the Malpanates has contributed a great deal toward the westernization of the Indian church. With the introduction of a western system, the traditions and history of the community were suppressed for centuries. The Malpanates saw to it that there was constant touch between the trainee and the teacher and the trainee and the community. In the Latin Church in India, the seminaries established after the Council of Trent continued to be in the hands of European Religious Orders where the role of the diocesan clergy was undervalued and their training left much to be desired. For centuries they even refused to accept Indians into their Orders on purely racist grounds. Their programme of studies had nothing to do with the Indian context. It was totally foreign and fitted well into the uniform Roman system of priestly training. Perhaps it gave a more systematic training, but who were these priests trained in these seminaries? They were agents of westernization. What is Wrong with the Seminary System? Since its emergence more than four hundred years ago, the institution of the seminary has remained an integral part of the Catholic ecclesiastical structure. No one has seriously challenged its basic structure ever since. One reason for this acceptance has been that the seminaries generally improved the intellectual and spiritual formation of the clergy. The Second Vatican Council has asserted that seminaries are necessary for priestly formation (OTA), and it is reasonable to conclude that this basic structure will remain unchanged for some time to come. But it must be said that seminaries produce a rather unified priestly group in the church and have become the main agent of uniformity and centralization in the church although the Council had in principle given freedom to Episcopal conferences to draw up their own programme of formation "so that priestly training will always answer the pastoral requirements of the particular area in which the ministry is to be exercised (OT, 1). This is the only way to rectify some of the inherent drawbacks of the seminary system today, but it has hardly taken place in practice. As a result seminary formation continues in our country to be antiquated and out of touch with reality. Let me illustrate this point. There has been no dearth of initiatives by the Indian Church to improve seminary

formation in India,7 leading to the Charter of Priestly Formation for India in 1988 and 2004. The All India Seminar of 1969 set the tone for all the subsequent initiatives when it said that the seminarians should not be isolated from the mainstream of life.i In the research seminar The Indian Church in the Struggle for a New Society it was said that seminary formation in India was not situation-oriented, and therefore, a field oriented training should be given and for this purpose the methodology of teaching and the curriculum should undergo a radical change.ii The Charter of Priestly Formation for India (1988) says that at every stage of their formation, the seminarians should be in touch with the societal, cultural, and religious realities in which they are ....iii But what happens, unfortunately, is that the first part of formation is creating a gulf between seminarians and the world, and the second part, in fact the rest of life, is an attempt to bridge that gulf.iv That the lack of touch with the life situation of the people is a major problem in seminary formation was adequately brought to light by the various studies undertaken on formation in India. Take for example the national survey, which was the basis for drawing up the Charter of Priestly Formation (1988). The survey says that about two-thirds of all the respondents are of the opinion that the seminary was so sheltered from the mainstream of life that the seminarian lost touch with ordinary people and their problems.v Another survey concludes: For an adequate and fruitful formation, future priests should be exposed to the socio-economic, socio-political and cultural realities of Indian life while living in the seminary. They should come into contact with people in their concrete situations and their spiritual and material needs and aspirations through reflective analysis of these situations.vi Bridging the enormous gap between expectations and reality in this regard is the first and foremost step in any effective change in the formation system in India today. This may entail a radical change in the very structure of the seminary system and the values it propagates. This may mean a creative adaptation of the ancient gurukulavasam. This would call for a transition from the foreign idiom to the Indian idiom in seminary formation because our cultural consciousness is heavily overlaid with foreign elements since our formation has been in terms of a foreign idiom.vii The seminary system was imposed on the country after destroying an indigenous structure. What goes on in the name of formation in the seminaries is simply the transmission of a foreign culture. And our consciousness is so overlaid with these foreign elements even today that for all practical purposes we are still under its oppressive yoke with a curriculum which is largely irrelevant. The above mentioned national survey says that the majority of respondents think that the theology they were taught was largely irrelevant to the pastoral needs of India today and only less than a third of them feel that seminary formation gave them a deeper understanding of India and its culture.viii There has to be a radical change in the academic system of the seminaries from the prevailing Western model to one that is theologically and pastorally relevant to Indian spirituality, culture and life style.ix This is not enough. The educational principle itself must undergo a change. It must be adult centred (andragogical) as distinct from child centred (pedagogical).x Theological education premises on fostering adult learning. Unfortunately, too few institutions design their methodology based on an adult model of learning. In an adult learning environment the student and the teacher mutually assess needs and negotiate goals. The learner is encouraged to contribute to the learning processes by virtue of his or her life experiences. The adult learner explores things that are important to him or her to apply them to developmental or life tasks. Evaluations are conducted mutually with a view to their use for setting future goals. These principles provide a good adult learning environment and offer a good model for future adult interactions for ministers.xi This is fostered best in the pastoral field and in smaller groups and that is why field education must be an essential part of priestly formation. Only in the field the students are in touch with issues of personal and spiritual growth and societal change and these are precisely the areas of growth needed for ministry. What are the Goals of Priestly Formation? This change will happen only if the goals of priestly formation are redefined. If it is to form a pliable, obedient, apparently celibate, moralizing, and authoritarian clergy who will perform an essentially sacramental function, today's formation programme can continue without much change. While this may delight a large number of bishops and people, it may not satisfy the educated laity whose world of growing expectations differ considerably from that of the vast majority of ordinary people. And it is reasonable to expect that education will spread and improve in the coming years. Therefore, a new paradigm should emerge in priestly training. A paradigm that is worth considering for training of future ministers is that of spiritual leadership.8 Who are spiritual leaders? They are not people who have learned facts and mastered techniques but who have experienced the reality of being freed by the Gospel, who have personally glimpsed meaning in the midst of a fractured world and who can communicate this meaning to others.9 Formation should enable a person for 'professional ministry' as a spiritual leader. Many bishops and superiors have problems with the word professional because they

tend to think that it somehow diminishes the importance of the notion of vocation, that it is not for the Church but for the valueless corporate world. But what is meant by it in fact is that the priest should be provided with specific skills which give him confidence and a sense of identity among his peers and help confirm his calling. These skills include integrated studies in different theological subjects, with preparation for expertise in such performance based disciplines as teaching, preaching, counselling etc.10 They must possess good managerial skills, conflict resolution skills and skills in interpersonal relationships. Some Observations and Suggestions If spiritual leadership is the matrix for priestly formation today, the entire formational programme of a seminary must be geared to the education of a student for professional ministry as a spiritual leader. Let us look critically at the formation imparted today. No other organization invests so much in terms of human and financial resources in the formation of its personnel as the Catholic Church does. Few other professions require so many long years of formation as the Catholic priesthood. However, it is a fact that in spite of the enormous investment of time, money and personnel, priestly formation in India today fails to bring up mature and balanced priests who are able to provide the kind of spiritual and moral leadership that is expected of them.11 In invite all those who are involved in formation to look at the following facts:12 1. One cannot be a good and effective priest, if one is not a good human being. The Church lays great stress on human formation (cf. the document of Vatican II on priestly formation, Pope John Paul II's Post-Synodal Exhortation, Pastores Dabo Vobis, The Charter of Priestly Formation for India, etc.). The priestly ministry will not be effective if the person of the priest does not command respect as a person of honesty, integrity, justice and fairness. A large number of Catholics today do not believe that their priests are honest men, men of integrity, justice and fairness. This is based on the findings of studies conducted in various parts of the country.13 2. There is a crisis of values in our seminaries today. Actions which show lack of sincerity and honesty, copying in exams, cheating with assignments, plagiarism, misappropriation of library books, thefts, and other abuses are common in seminaries and formation houses today. There is lack of respect for the rights of others and a lack of sensitivity to the feelings of others. There is a culture of striving for high grades in examinations at any cost rather than for intellectual growth. 3. The cultural situation of our country may help us to understand the crisis in values in the seminaries today. Our country is in a state of moral disintegration. The idealism of the leaders of our freedom struggle and the moral integrity of the founding fathers of the Republic have disappeared. Naked power struggle, corruption, amoral business practices, scandalous life of our leaders, etc., are daily news in the country. Similar attitudes are easily condoned in many seminaries with the excuse that it is difficult to separate the seminary from its cultural context. 4. The family and family upbringing play a crucial role in the growth of a person. The family background of our seminarians may help us to understand the crisis in values in seminaries. What are the values that have been internalized by seminarians during childhood? What role does the financial background of the family play in the life of the seminarian? What role does the family play in the character and present values of the seminarian? For the sake of numbers, bishops and religious congregations continue to recruit young men without proper screening and expect the seminary to work the miracle of transforming them all into good priests. 5. The formators in seminaries face a crisis of values, too. Many of them are not able to give the spiritual and intellectual leadership that they are called upon to provide. Many of them are not convinced of their role as formators and are not willing to sacrifice their personal predilections for the sake of the common goal. There is a wide gap between their words and actions. The criteria employed for choice of formators leave much to be desired. We urgently need to take concrete and practical steps to form priests who are good human beings because only such persons can provide spiritual leadership. What are these steps? Besides implementing the many decisions that the Church has taken (the recommendations of the Charter of Priestly Formation, for example) in letter and spirit, let us consider the following suggestions:

1. Help the seminarian to make a passionate commitment to personal growth. Aware of the impact of the family and the country on him, he still has to realize that he is responsible for his growth. Help him to strive for a balanced growth of the whole person. Academic excellence without corresponding human and emotional maturity is useless. Human formation should be given adequate importance in the seminary. 2.Take intellectual formation seriously. Studies have shown that there is a serious erosion of the credibility of the clergy particularly among the educated laity.14 We are slowly meeting a Catholic laity who are educated who are part of the powerful intellectual movements outside the seminary and the parish. To be isolated from them would be perilous. Priestly training and theological preparation would do well to inculcate in the students a profound thirst for knowledge and understanding. 3. Formation should take place in the midst of people and situations. If the seminary's top priority is 'protection' of the students from the world, if it isolates theology in a vacuum, if seminarians are not encouraged to do theology in the midst of people and their culture, it may still be praised by its superiors, but it will be difficult to justify its existence before God.15 4. Cultivate a spirituality that humanizes. In the seminaries there is plenty of piety, but not enough spirituality that liberates and humanizes. Spirituality is a combination of praying and living. Seminaries nurture a compartmentalized spirituality - one that places God-directed goals at the centre and relegates other-oriented and self-oriented goals to the periphery.16 A genuine spirituality is measured by the fruits of the Spirit (Gal 5:22-23; 2 Cor 3:17). He who follows Christ becomes more of a human being (GS 41). 5. Seminaries should be equipped with staff members who are life-giving and growth promoting. The administration of seminaries should be formative; administrators should be aware of the fact that every action of theirs is either formative or de-formative. They should treat students like adult human beings and involve them in decision making.17 Studies have shown that many formators do not come across as exemplary and inspiring role models. Many students question their integrity, sense of fairness and competence. The acquisition of academic grades does not necessarily mean that a person will have the requisite spiritual and human resources to be a good formator.18 6. Make use of smaller groups for formation.19 Interacting in smaller groups encourages transparency, non-aggressive confrontation and self- knowledge through disclosure. This key recommendation, made already in 1988, has not been adopted by most seminaries in India till today. In order to do this, seminaries should have adequate number of committed staff who are willing and capable of interacting with young men and listen to them patiently. One wonders whether large seminaries where hundreds of people are housed together, practically cut off from the real world as in a green house, is the right way to form spiritual leaders for the 21st century. Formation is education and education is growth, recognizing the uniqueness of the person and his or her individuality, where personal fulfilment and self-actualization are attained. These are essential for the selfidentity of the minister. This is not achieved by the present day seminary system. There are even institutions like the national seminary which is an anachronism and relic of the past. It answered a concrete historical need a century ago. It is high time that in a country like India such institutions be abolished. Regional training in small groups under learned teachers with little or no separation from the world outside should be the normal way of seminary training. Specialized institutions where specific aspects of the ministry are taught could be maintained where people come for a limited period. ___________________
Notes
1

Optatam Totius, Introduction, "Decree on the Training of Priests" of the Second Vatican Council. Hereafter Vatican II documents will be quoted with abbreviated title and number from Austin Flannery, OP., Vatican Council II. Mumbai: St. Pauls, 1999. 2 "Seminary", New Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. 13, The Catholic University of America, Washington, DC, 72. 3 James A. O'Donohoe, Tridentine Seminary Legislation. Its sources and Its Formation Louvain: University of Louvain, 1957, 23. 4 It is estimated that some 50,000 priests left active ministry with or without dispensation between 1964 and 1986. See Adrian Hastings, ed., Modern Catholicism, London: SPCK, New York: Oxford University Press, 1991, 246.

5 Post-Synodal Exhortation Pastores Dabo Vobis of His Holiness John Paul II to the Bishops Clergy and Faithful on the Formation of Priests in the Circumstances of the Present Day. Mumbai: St Paul Publications. 1992. 6 See Xavier Koodapuzha, Bharathasabhacharitram, Kotayam: Oriental Institute of Religious Studies, 1988, 589-601. 7 See S. Arulsamy and S. Singaroyan, Guide to the CBCI CCBI Documents, New Delhi: Conference of Catholic Bishops of India (CCBI). 2000, 225-35. 8 All India Seminar: Church in India Today. New Delhi: C.B.C.I. Centre, 1969, 316. 9 D.S. Amalorpavadass, ed. The Indian Church in the Struggle for a New Society. Bangalore: NBCLC, 1981, 964-6. 10 See p. 21 of the Charter of Priestly Formation for India, 1988. 11 Kuncheria Pathil. "Rethinking Theological Education in India: New Models and Alternatives. A Discussion with Sebastian Kappen", Jeevadhara, 14 (July 1984), 285. 12 Paul Parathazham, "Catholic Priests in India: Reflections on a Survey", VJTR. 52 (1988), 385. 13 Mathew Vallipalam, Priestly Formation in the Changing Society of India. Bombay: St Paul Publications. 1989. 302. 14 M. Amaladoss, "Towards an Indian Theology: Some Methodological Observations," in Amaladoss et al., Theologizing in India, Bangalore: Theological Publications in India, 1981, 48. 15 Parathazham, "Catholic Priests in India ", 384. 16 Vallipalam, Priestly Formation in the Changing Society in India, 302. 17 Malcolm S. Knowles, "Adult Learning Processes: Pedagogy and Andragogy," Religious Education, LXXII (March-April 1977), 211. 18 John P. Wagenhofer, "Spiritual Leadership: A Matrix for Ministerial Education," in Robert J. Wicks, ed., Handbook of Spirituality for Ministers. New York: Paulist Press, 1995. 539-40. 19 Ibid., 531-44. The following ideas are adapted from the above article which is worth considering by educators in seminaries. 20 Ibid., 531. 21 Ibid., 536. 22 Paul Parathazham, "Vocation and formation of Priests and Religious in India: an Empirical Study," Jnanadeepa (3 (July 2000) 5. 23 Isaac Padinjarekuttu, Ministry of Priests: Historical Perspectives and Theological Responses, Thomas Manjaly, Peter Haokip and James Thoppil, eds., Towards Building Up the Local Church. Shillong: Oriens Publications, 2004, 27-31. 24 Paul Parathazham, "Vocation and Formation of Priests and Religious in India: An Empirical Study" and John D'Mello, "What Kind of Culture are Our Seminaries Producing?" Jnanadeepa (3 (July 2000) 5-62. 25 Paul Parathazham, "Issues in Formation: A Question of Credibility", VJTR 58 (1994) 701-15. 26 lbid., 263. 27 Parathazham, "Vocation and Formation", 38. 28 Charter of Priestly Formation, 5.2. 29 Parathazham, "Vocation and formation", 38-9. 30 Charter of Priestly Formation, 5.1.

Ref.: Vidyajyoti Journal of Theological Reflection, Vol. 69, n. 12, December 2005, pp. 904-914.