Update

[CruxOfTheMatterAgain]

Hi, I was here a few years ago under the name CruxOfTheMatter, which account I think I shut down.

However, I've been getting back into actively discerning again in my life and on a whim came back here tonight.

To my surprise, I saw that one of my posts from almost two years ago had recently been active, and in a quite controversial way, to the point that the thread was closed.

Apparently some user named "alleros" was under the impression that I was talking about his order [Correction, apparently alleros is a woman, she said "We women" in one of the posts in that thread] or some order she knows.

I want to clarify, first of all, that based on what I've been able to discover about alleros from her posts here, I think he was simply mistaken.

Based on what I can glean about her and where she is, she couldnt possibly be talking about any of the groups I was talking about, let alone an actual member.

One, I was talking about several groups (at least 3 specifically that I visited) so to try to pin my descriptions to "insulting" one is not a fair accusation. I was describing a pattern I noticed (a pattern based on specifics, of course) not a specific one of the groups singled out.

Second, I've read my posts again and definitely did NOT say anything that could have revealed the groups with any certainty at all. I must clarify that even my description of any of the groups as having a "monastery" was not meant in the precise sense of the term necessarily, merely a group of male religious who arent diocesan. Not even necessarily contemplative. The men were monkish in their personalities, I never said they were actually monks. Though, even if I had, there are LOTS of monastic or pseudo-monastic communities in the world, I never said anything that would single any one out.

It seems rather paranoid of her, therefore, to say it is "easy to figure out" which group I meant and "obvious" who I was talking about. This isnt true at all, I left out almost all details. The most specific I got, looking back on the posts, was saying that one group had a daughter foundation I visited with 4 residents at the time, which I'm sure describes plenty of communities, especially in this age of so many groups to choose from.

However, it is disturbing, then, that alleros reacted as she did. It seems to confirm all my old fears. I didnt give any specific details about who any of the groups were, so if she "recognized" them in my description...it must have been the bad things she was recognizing in whatever community SHE was talking about. Which raises several issues. One, it means that these sorts of things are more widespread than I had hoped. Two, it means that she sees such traits in whatever community she was talking about (besides revealing some of them himself in his paranoia), and yet instead of critiquing them, is defending them and promoting all the sorts of "secrecy" and blind-acceptance of such things that are some of the very things that disturbed me.

You dont seem to know what groups I am actually talking about, alleros, but I have every right to anonymously and discretely discuss my experiences discerning here, yes, including the BAD experiences here. I dont need to limit that to a spiritual director, though I did talk to him about it too. I was very discreet, but I am allowed to ask in general terms if anyone has shared similar experiences. You reflect the very attitudes I saw in many of these men that scared me away from discernment for a long time. Your reaction was, frankly, bizarre and paranoid, and says more about you and whatever community you were thinking of than about me or the ones I was referring to.

I thank the user nunsense for the level-headed reply, which says it better than I can:
[quote]But I don't think you really need to be quite so condemning of someonewho was simply stating his own experiences and how he interpretedthese. Your reaction seems a little defensive and hyper-sensitive, andunless he is talking about your own community, this seems a little overthe top. If it is indeed your community being described here, then alittle self-evaluation might be in order, just in terms of how thecommunity might be coming across to some people. I am not saying he isright, just that he is entitled to his opinion based on hisexperiences, without being judged as lacking in charity for describingthem. I think he came across as more confused and disillusioned thananything else, wanting to find a "home" but unable to do so. He reallyneeds some compassion here.[/quote]

Edited November 7, 2009 by CruxOfTheMatterAgain

[CruxOfTheMatterAgain]

Anyway, on to my actual topic...

I'm currently discerning a call to the priesthood. I pretty much decided that Community religious life probably ISNT for me.

I need a lot of independence. I've been to college, I've lived on my own. To suddenly be asked to live in an institutional setting with all sorts of rules about what I cannot do and when I can leave and where I can go...sort of is a disturbing idea to me.

I'm hoping to find an orthodox seminary that treats their men like independent [u]adults[/u], instead of like children at a boarding school. Of course, a seminarian would be expected to attend class and group events like liturgy, meals, etc...but as someone who has lived independently and self-directed for some time now, the idea of going back to a suffocating atmosphere of interference with even my free time and strictly scheduling everything I must do is just very unappealing.

I know permanent deacons (and married former protestant ministers) get to train in such a way that they are still allowed to have their own lives and be independent. Once they FINISH seminary, diocesan priests seem to get a lot of independence in terms of arranging their own lives (as long as they fulfill their duties, of course). Secular institutes seem to live more like that (though I dont think they train you for priesthood).

But does anyone know any seminaries that would be more free and independent and treat me more like an adult in terms of living my life, like I was treated at University (and, frankly, at home before that even)? Many seminaries, even diocesan, seem to be very cloying and sorta repressive still, like it's boot-camp or something. Curfews, limits on going off-campus, limits on outside contact, remote locations, etc.

That whole atmosphere really creeps me out and cramps my style. I know in the past (and still in the Ethiopian Church) they did apprenticeships as the way to train priests. Does anyone know any seminaries that are not so Institutional?? Perhaps somewhere set in an urban area where there would be a lot to do and see with seminary friends on weekends or during free times? Somewhere where they dont try to micromanage your life or keep you controlled at every moment of the day?

Edited November 7, 2009 by CruxOfTheMatterAgain

[HisChild]

First of all, welcome back.

I do not know how different the seminary for diocesan priesthood would be different than formation for religious life. You may be able to find a seminary that addresses the requirements you have. However, might I be so charitable as to say that the whole point of having various limits placed on you is not to repress your individuality, but it is a way for you to die to your old ways so that in Christ you are a new man. It is a way to remove self-centered habits and help to imbue you with the cloak of Christian selfless giving. These ways also are a way of helping the discerner/seminarian as well as those overseeing you, be it a spiritual director or instructor, see how malleable you are with giving up your time to the needs of your parishioners placed in front of you. Can you imagine your pastor saying 'I want to be a little independent this weekend and take a long drive instead of offering Mass. You'll have to find someone else this weekend.' Expectations, like curfew, are also a way of helping the seminarian to understand that truly they are not their own men anymore. They will belong to the church, in obedience to the Bishop of their diocese and have to recognize very consciously that all their actions, whether in cassock, collar, or in secular clothing is a reflection on the Church as a whole. It might seem repressive to you, but in all these rubrics you see in seminary life all assist those forming and those being formed to discern whether a man is suitable for the life of a priest and if he's seeking this life with right intention.

Yes, I am a woman and you might be thinking, 'what does she know?' but this was explained to me by a wonderful man and priest when I was in a religious community and we spend some time on a seminary campus taking classes with some seminarians.

[CruxOfTheMatterAgain]

Thank you for your kind advice.

Yes, I understand that some of the rigors of seminary life are to help a seminarian die to self and learn what sort of commitment he will be making but, at the same time, there is the question of whether that really prepares priests for the "real world" where they will be living alone in many cases and have to be VERY self-directed with their time.

It's not about skipping Mass to take a long drive, but rather that IF you do everything you're supposed to do...then why interfere beyond that? If a priest says his Mass and hears confessions and attends to all the meetings and business he's supposed to...then it's really no one's business how he spends his free time, as long as it isnt in an immoral way. Why are seminarians treated differently and why does there seem to be a double standard when it comes to married seminarians (ie, deacons and former protestant ministers) than the celibate ones? The atmosphere in some places I have seen has been rather patronizing. Like, I could see treating high schoolers that way...but adult men? I dunno...

[Thomist-in-Training]

What she said. If you want to live your life your own way, seminary isn't the place to go. And, I don't think the fact that one enjoys living alone is an indication that one doesn't have a vocation to religion. (I'm not saying you [i]do[/i]. But any kind of vocation, it's not about what you like, in the end, is it? That's the whole point. You [i]might [/i]like it too in some ways, but mostly, it's about what Our Lord likes for you. Did He like undergoing His Passion? Not really, except because He loved us. That is a little strongly phrased and rantish, but true, I think.)

ON THE OTHER HAND, Two of my friends just entered seminaries and one at least does have more freedom than I was expecting. I was sort of, "Since I'm a girl, are there different standards of communication now?" and he was like, "not really."

[CruxOfTheMatterAgain]

Could you PM me with information on which seminary it is?

It's not that I like to be alone (just the opposite, really) or want to live life "my way"...but I am very much an American I guess when it comes to independence and individuality and the idea of Big Brother breathing down my neck all the time...just doesnt sit well with me anymore. There was a time in my life when I was sort of a mental-fascist and would have liked that idea, but I've grown up since then and the idea of having inconsequential decisions micromanaged as if I were a child just really irks me now. And I dont see why seminaries should have to be like that, at least the diocesan ones, but many do seem to have a vibe like that.

Edited November 7, 2009 by CruxOfTheMatterAgain

[HisChild]

I understand what you mean... and as my first response post got lost in internet land, I'll try again.

I've heard wonderful things about the [url="http://www.pcj.edu/intro/intropage.html"]Josephinum[/url].

And while it has been many years, I've been to [url="http://www.archny.org/seminary/st-josephs-seminary-dunwoodie/"]St. Joseph's[/url] in Dunwoodie, NY when we had to take classes. This was when Cardinal O' Connor was alive, but I'm sure it's still wonderful now.


Have you seen this link about all the [url="http://consortium.villanova.edu/statements/seminaries.htm"]US Seminaries?[/url]

At any rate, good luck. I'll keep you in prayer!

[CruxOfTheMatterAgain]

Hmm...thank you for the link to the US seminaries list.

Does anyone know anything about the Catholic Theological Union in Chicago?? I'd never heard of it before, but it looks like it might be more the sort of place I'm talking about. Lay men and women, and religious sisters, etc, apparently all study there too (which is good, as I like a less homogenous atmosphere) and they talk as if people preparing for priestly ordained ministry can go there, and yet it is not the Seminary for the archdiocese of Chicago. Does anyone know what sort of group would send their candidates to priesthood to the CTU or what it's all about??

Edited November 7, 2009 by CruxOfTheMatterAgain

[Thomist-in-Training]

I don't know, this doesn't seem like it would be my first choice if I were a man:


[quote]Join us at the first-annual Peace Groove
A beautiful fall night. A fabulous venue. A popular swing band. Food, fun and friends.
Where else would you want to be?

Join The Alan Gresik Swing Shift Orchestra, a popular Chicago band featured in the movie Return to Me, and Jerome McDonnell, host of Chicago Public Radio’s Worldview, for an evening of music in support of Peacebuilders Initiative.

Peace Groove is the first annual gathering of friends and supporters of the [b]Peacebuilders Initiative, a program of the Bernardin Center at Catholic Theological Union[/b]. Join us for dancing, hors d’oeuvres, drinks, and a silent auction on Friday, November 13, 2009 from 7 to 11 p.m. in Preston Bradley Hall at the Chicago Cultural Center, 78 E. Washington St, Chicago. Reservations are $100 per person. To purchase tickets or sponsor the event, please visit www.peacegroove.org. For more information call 773.371.5434.

Since 2001, more than 330 youth from the Chicagoland area have participated in Peacebuilders Initiative. This innovative program prepares youth for active leadership roles in peacemaking and reconciliation. They bring the theology and ministry they experience back to their schools, neighborhoods, and parishes through student-led peace-building projects.[/quote]

----------------------------------

It looks like it's a grad school, so maybe the kind of place a diocese might (?) choose to send certain people who'd already got their undergrad and who they wanted to have further studies in a certain area.

[Thomist-in-Training]

Oh--this explains it more. Actually they were founded as a seminary for religious--not diocesan. Now they also accept other random people who want theologicalish grad degrees.

[quote][b]founding mission of preparing religious community seminarians for priesthood, [/b]Catholic Theological Union has become one of the foremost graduate education centers in the world for preparing lay men and women to serve the Church and society. Spurred by a renewed appreciation of the lay vocation at the Second Vatican Council and by a critical need to sustain the Church’s extraordinary commitment to service through its parishes, schools, hospitals, chaplaincies, social service centers, and a host of other works of justice, mercy, and compassion, a new generation of men and women have been inspired to lead lives of dedication to the values and mission of the gospel.

With the support of its twenty-five sponsoring religious communities, numerous foundations, and the generosity of its friends and donors, CTU is committed to expanding its scholarship capacity in order to provide the Church with well-prepared, highly motivated, and competent lay men and women. These students preparing for a life of service are truly “witnesses to hope” and deserving of our support. This All Saints festival will celebrate the grace of the lay vocation, give thanks for all who have supported this cause, and be an inspiration to recommitment in the service of the Church. Please join us.[/quote]

[CruxOfTheMatterAgain]

[quote]I don't know, this doesn't seem like it would be my first choice if I were a man:[/quote]

Lol. I actually take that event as a good sign in terms of being the sort of place I'm talking about.

I mean, the fact that they are apparently so liberal is rather disturbing, as I myself am very traditional and orthodox.

But, at the same time, I think I could stomach it. I mean, it's not like you're [i]required[/i] to attend these events.

On the other hand, the very fact that they exist is to me a sign that this place isnt all repressed and dull and stuff. The fact that they are having a Swing Band with dancing, hors d'oeuvres, and drinks and arent all wringing their hands like old women over whether that is too decadent or going to corrupt everyone...makes me believe that it is the sort of open, personable, independent atmosphere I could handle.

Would I necessarily attend the gala personally? No, not really my kind of thing. But that it's the kind of place that can have one and not have everyone freak out means they arent the repressed wet-blankets that I'm really trying to avoid. On the contrary, it sounds like a pretty fun atmosphere.

There is a cafeteria, but it doesnt seem like there are any required scheduled meals. And it doesnt look like students are bound to attending any sorts of (presumably awful) liturgies together, but St John Cantius is only 15 minutes drive...!

Edited November 7, 2009 by CruxOfTheMatterAgain

[humbleheart]

A few years ago I was absolutely sure that I was going to be a religious sister. I knew exactly what sort of convent, too. I gave a lot of thought to my personality and tastes when I was making my 'decision', until I came to the uncomfortable realisation that what I wanted might not be what I needed.

I was trying to turn the religious life into a career choice. As a result, many of the stipulations and preconditions that I was laying down inside my head were at odds with the spirit of the life. I get that feeling with some of the things you've written as well, particularly with what you say about 'liking a more homogenous atmosphere' and trying to work out which diocese would send you to your university of choice. Once you are ordained a priest, you could be sent anywhere. Anywhere. What if you don't like the atmosphere or the demographic of the parish where you're placed after ordination? You could be there for decades, and you would have a sacred responsibility to stay there.

This is why holy obedience is so important in the seminary, even though diocesan priests don't take a formal vow the way monks do. There is every chance that during your ordained ministry, you are going to be asked to do something (probably several things) that you don't like and wouldn't have chosen personally. You will need to accomplish the work that you're given with genuine love and warmth and care, even if you don't particularly like the parish you're in or the priests you're working with or some other aspect of the job. It's difficult to learn how to do something you dislike in a loving way, but humbly taking direction from superiors in a seminary and living with a group of people whose personalities might not mesh well with yours is a very good way of learning. It's nothing to do with Big Brother trying to take away your independence and individuality. It's what it takes to become a good priest.

[quote name='CruxOfTheMatterAgain' date='07 November 2009 - 06:23 AM' timestamp='1257571410' post='1997594']
Would I necessarily attend the gala personally? No, not really my kind of thing. But that it's the kind of place that can have one and not have everyone freak out means they arent the repressed wet-blankets that I'm really trying to avoid. On the contrary, it sounds like a pretty fun atmosphere.

There is a cafeteria, but it doesnt seem like there are any required scheduled meals. And it doesnt look like students are bound to attending any sorts of (presumably awful) liturgies together, but St John Cantius is only 15 minutes drive...!
[/quote]

Think about this. Are you seriously proposing to study for the priesthood alongside these men, but not attend liturgies with them or go to their social events? Praying in community is important, even if the liturgy isn't traditional or even particularly beautiful. These men would be seminarians just like you and you would need each other's prayers and companionship. You can't set the terms on which you give those two things.

As for shared meals, think about all the times that such meals appear in the Bible. They are a wonderful expression of community. You're prepared to study at this place because you like the atmosphere, but you don't even plan on eating with the people who study there too?

[organwerke]

[quote name='CruxOfTheMatterAgain' date='07 November 2009 - 05:42 AM' timestamp='1257565366' post='1997532']
However, it is disturbing, then, that alleros reacted as she did. [/quote]

Maybe you are right.
But I confess I have often the same feeling reading you.
It looks like in your opinion faults belong always to someone else.
I can understand you are looking for an open-minded seminarian reality, I can understand and I also share your opinion that some religious institutions are sometimes a little too rigid...
For example, I would have recommended to you the MC Fathers (founded by blessed Mother Therese of Calcutta) -osr, also, the Rogationists Father (founded in Italy, in the US they are here: rcj.org/home2/component/option,com_congregation/rub,province/task,view/Itemid,131/p_id,6/lang,it/): I know some of them and they all look like very cheerful, natural, friendly and...OK!), but they are both religious and you don't like...
Of course there are many other seminaries that are nearer to your ideal.
But, if you are so convinced to enter a seminary where you haven't to accept ANYTHING you don't like...do you think you will ever find what you are looking for?

Edited November 7, 2009 by organwerke

[Nunsense]

I guess my question is whether or not you have a spiritual director helping you with this? You are trying to make all these decisions based on what you think you want, but it might be that someone outside your head could see things a little more clearly, especially a priest who has been through what you are going through.

I just started seeing a wonderful new spiritual director, an FSSP priest, and he told me things about myself that were spot on, but that I hadn't really thought about deeply. And he has given me advice about my discernment that just feels so right for me at this point in time.

Researching and gathering information about a lot of different places is ok, but then take all this to someone who can help - not only advise you about the practical aspects of becoming a priest, but someone who will also guide your soul. My prayers are with you.

[CruxOfTheMatterAgain]

[quote]'liking a more homogenousatmosphere'[/quote]

To be clear, I said I like a LESS homogenous atmosphere.

[quote]Once you are ordained a priest, you could be sentanywhere. Anywhere. What if you don't like the atmosphere or thedemographic of the parish where you're placed after ordination? Youcould be there for decades, and you would have a sacred responsibilityto stay there.[/quote]

I think this is a romanticized view, to a degree. I know lots of priests, and trust me, there is plenty of wheeling-and-dealing and "negotiating" about assignments, salaries, etc.

In my dioceses, apparently, a priest who has enough of his own money saved up is pretty much allowed to go on leave or retire whenever he wants as long as he doesnt expect the diocese to pay him during that time.

The romantic view of this all as some sacred thing with pure-motives and sheer selflessness is a great ideal...but in reality, the day to day running of the "business" of the Church is much more petty, trivial, and mundane.

[quote]It's nothing to do with Big Brother trying totake away your independence and individuality. It's what it takes to become a good priest.[/quote]

Again, I think this is romanticized. Plenty of men go through this process and DONT come out as good priests. If anything, I would say it has been a spectacular failure in the past 40 years, letting a lot of defective psyches through.

The number of priests who arent REALLY being celibate is apparently scandalously high, and many priests are in therapy for other things (alcoholism, drug addiction, depression, anxiety, etc).

It seems to me that they still care more about whether a man can be an obedient conformist than about any other criteria. There are lots of good normal guys I know who have told me they couldnt stand being institutionalized like that, but who I know are more mature than a lot of the stunted adolescent psyches I've met in numerous seminaries.

Are my motives entirely pure? I doubt anyone's are. But I really want to serve Christ and His Church, help people spiritually, as a priest. Many men are in seminaries running from sexuality. Many men are in seminaries because they crave discipline and obsessive rigidity or authoritarianism. Many are just looking for an easy job or to be taken care of (priests can make their work as hard, or easy, as they choose in most places...the maximum effort can be heroic, but the minimum requirements can be very little, frankly).

Compared to all those unhealthy motives, I think my desire to be treated as an independent American adult instead of treated like some adolescent at boot-camp or boarding-school...is just fine.

[quote]But, if you are so convinced to enter a seminary where you haven't toaccept ANYTHING you don't like...do you think you will ever find whatyou are looking for?[/quote]

I was able to find a University that met all my personal needs. If I went into a secular career, I'd be able to find one that met all my needs. Why should that be so unbelievable in a seminary? Why must they all be so rigid, especially when that hasnt seemed to guarantee anything about the psychological quality of the men emerging (if anything, it is has created a clerical culture severely turned in on itself)?

Edited November 7, 2009 by CruxOfTheMatterAgain

[humbleheart]

[quote name='CruxOfTheMatterAgain' date='07 November 2009 - 06:03 PM' timestamp='1257613431' post='1997744']
I think this is a romanticized view, to a degree. I know lots of priests, and trust me, there is plenty of wheeling-and-dealing and "negotiating" about assignments, salaries, etc.

In my dioceses, apparently, a priest who has enough of his own money saved up is pretty much allowed to go on leave or retire whenever he wants as long as he doesnt expect the diocese to pay him during that time.

The romantic view of this all as some sacred thing with pure-motives and sheer selflessness is a great ideal...but in reality, the day to day running of the "business" of the Church is much more petty, trivial, and mundane.[/quote]

Christianity itself is a sacred thing about pure motives and sheer selflessness, and we all fall short of that ideal. This doesn't mean that we should stop striving for it, or that we should be content with anything less. Jesus' message to people who want to follow Him is stark: "Renounce yourself, take up your cross, and follow me." He wasn't being romantic. The renunciation and the cross are prerequisites for discipleship.

[quote]Again, I think this is romanticized. Plenty of men go through this process and DONT come out as good priests. If anything, I would say it has been a spectacular failure in the past 40 years, letting a lot of defective psyches through.[/quote]

It is true that not every sinner who enters a seminary will come out of it a saint. Judas Iscariot was with Christ throughout His three years of ministry, and he was the last of the disciples to touch Him before His death, but in spite of these privileges he turned away from the faith. This doesn't mean that Christ's way of teaching was wrong.

You seem very confident about judging who has a defective psyche and who hasn't. God calls all sorts of people to the priesthood and the religious life, some of whom you will get on well with and some of whom you will dislike. The fact is that God has put them there, and He sees qualities in them that you in your human frailty can't recognise. Being with people whose abilities we don't notice can be a good thing - it will hopefully make us less judgemental and teach us that everybody performs valuable work.

[quote]Compared to all those unhealthy motives, I think my desire to be treated as an independent American adult instead of treated like some adolescent at boot-camp or boarding-school...is just fine.[/quote]

"Compared to all those unhealthy motives..." sounds a little like, "Thank God I'm not like that tax-collector over there." How do you know why those men became priests? You're acting as though you can read their minds, based on your own interpretations of their behaviour. Only God knows their innermost thoughts, and He is capable of bringing good out of them no matter why they made the choices that they've made. There is no need for us to speculate on why they chose to enter the seminary. All we can do is pray for them.

[quote]I was able to find a University that met all my personal needs. If I went into a secular career, I'd be able to find one that met all my needs. Why should that be so unbelievable in a seminary?[/quote]

A career is not the same thing as a vocation. St Matthew is the perfect example of that. Tax-collecting was his career. His vocation came walking by his collection table one day, and in response he got up (leaving all his money and ambition behind) and went off to live an unknown life. The same with the fishermen. How could any of them have known what Jesus was expecting of them when He said, "Follow me"? Christ didn't hand out any job descriptions or discuss a pension plan. His first followers had no idea what they were letting themselves in for.

As for needs, do you even know what your needs are? I don't know mine. I trust that God does, though.

Edited November 7, 2009 by humbleheart

[HisChild]

I want to respond to your comments, some of which were pretty harsh. I could be sweetness and light, responding while mincing words hoping I don't offend. And truly I don't want you to be offended by what I write, but as my former spiritual director said we sometimes need a knock on the head to pull us from a thought process that might be doing some damage. These are only my opinions, but I would chance to say that these thoughts reflect others' on this board, to whom you came for advice.
[quote name='CruxOfTheMatterAgain' date='07 November 2009 - 10:03 AM' timestamp='1257613431' post='1997744']
I think this is a romanticized view, to a degree. I know lots of priests, and trust me, there is plenty of wheeling-and-dealing and "negotiating" about assignments, salaries, etc. [/quote]
Wheeling and dealing? Wow, now THAT really sounds petty and full of self centeredness, doesn't it?
[quote]
In my dioceses, apparently, a priest who has enough of his own money saved up is pretty much allowed to go on leave or retire whenever he wants as long as he doesnt expect the diocese to pay him during that time.
The romantic view of this all as some sacred thing with pure-motives and sheer selflessness is a great ideal...but in reality, the day to day running of the "business" of the Church is much more petty, trivial, and mundane.
[/quote]
I had a pastor like that, jetting off to Ireland several times a year and had nicer things in his home and in his wardrobe than anyone I'd ever met. It got to the point where he lost the pulse point of his parish and was so caught up in himself and doing whatever he wanted that he could no longer connect with them. People don't want a pal as their pastor, they want a shepherd. Incidentally, after 30 years he's no longer a priest.

The day to day of anyone's life might be considered mundane, and when dealing with many different personalities in your parishioners, some things might be considered petty, but you're dealing with people's souls. It's far different than say, working in a secular job, where at the end of the work day, you can go home and leave it all behind. Being a priest is a serious responsibility. Those parishioners will not only look up to you, but people will be coming to you for temporal and spiritual advice. Not to mention the times you will be woken in the middle of the night to administer Last Rites. Take care that in your eschewing the 'romantic' views you think others have, you're not trivializing the spiritual burden you'll be carrying of all the lives you will shepherd, day in and day out. After all, Jesus didn't say, put in a few hours and then go do what you want, He said 'Deny yourself, take up your cross and follow me'.
[quote]
Again, I think this is romanticized. Plenty of men go through this process and DONT come out as good priests. If anything, I would say it has been a spectacular failure in the past 40 years, letting a lot of defective psyches through. [/quote]
And again, I think this is why the selection process and the seminary experience is more stringent, or in some cases, remains stringent and 'controlling' BECAUSE there were so many that 'got through' the process and shouldn't have become priests. You might think the seminaries who were more traditional were at fault for not turning out good priests. In all actuality, it might have been those less organized that turn out priests without a good formation. After Vatican II, misinterpretation of those wonderful documents made some religious communities and yes, even seminaries, irreverently toss the baby out with the bath water. So it might not be the more traditional that are at fault for this 'spectacular 40 year failure'.
[quote]
The number of priests who arent REALLY being celibate is apparently scandalously high, and many priests are in therapy for other things (alcoholism, drug addiction, depression, anxiety, etc).
[/quote]
That's truly neither here nor there. It's incredibly disobedient to your vow of celibacy and to your bishop to whom you make those vows (which I know are different than the vows a religious makes but you do make promises of celibacy and obedience to your Ordinary)... but a topic for another time. Only God can answer that one, and I feel certain that upon that person's death, He will. And as an aside, who's to say those men who are in therapy would have been so as laity? You don't know their histories, so it's rather unfair for you to make such sweeping generalizations. Just because one is a priest or religious doesn't mean that we're not in our own way fractured and need healing. Regardless of vocation.
[quote]
It seems to me that they still care more about whether a man can be an obedient conformist than about any other criteria. There are lots of good normal guys I know who have told me they couldnt stand being institutionalized like that, but who I know are more mature than a lot of the stunted adolescent psyches I've met in numerous seminaries.
[/quote]
I've known many a seminarian who became priests. They're pretty awesome men, and while on fire for our Lord, they're pretty normal. So, I don't know about these stunted psyches you speak of. I think you may be focusing too much on the exception rather than the rule.

Does it truly shock you that they're wanting to make sure a man can obey? Seriously? Look at your previous quote about sexual disobedience and the men who 'do whatever they want' because they don't want to conform, worrying about their own self will rather than serving God and His people? The American Church is more than any other country rampant with religious and ordained doing whatever the fig they'd like because by golly no one will tell them what to do! I've seen disobedient priests, not only to their bishops but to the Church, preaching on topics that we as a faith do not believe... again, does it shock you that they're cautious and want to make sure the priests they educate now are those who DO obey? I'm not saying seminaries should toss out automatons, but this isn't just a job. You'll be a priest 24/7, a representative of an institution that shepherds and guides the souls of more than a billion people.

I'm not saying that the seminary is a perfect institution. I'm sure there ARE serious flaws in the process, just like you'll see me on here talking about the flaws I've seen in religious life formation, but of the many different sins, the ego and the pride are at the base of them all... and one of the best ways to train/teach others that you are not just training for a secular career is to teach obedience, so that you will learn that for the most part, your time is not your own, that this isn't a job, this is who you will be intrinsically, another Christ.
[quote]
Are my motives entirely pure? I doubt anyone's are. But I really want to serve Christ and His Church, help people spiritually, as a priest. Many men are in seminaries running from sexuality. Many men are in seminaries because they crave discipline and obsessive rigidity or authoritarianism. Many are just looking for an easy job or to be taken care of (priests can make their work as hard, or easy, as they choose in most places...the maximum effort can be heroic, but the minimum requirements can be very little, frankly).
[/quote]
You don't need to be a priest to help people within Christ's Church. There are many laity who are of great help in the Church, some even employed within the parishes. Have you thought of perhaps becoming a counselor, since you mention sexuality and spirituality. Or even a trained spiritual director? You say you want to help people spiritually, but you don't mention the more sacred duties of the priest like administering the Sacraments which will be a major part of your life. So perhaps, you could be of service to the Church while not being ordained.
[quote]
Compared to all those unhealthy motives, I think my desire to be treated as an independent American adult instead of treated like some adolescent at boot-camp or boarding-school...is just fine.
[/quote]
Wow, now that's a prideful and arrogant statement if I ever heard one! And yet, it sounds like you want an easy job in which you can help people spiritually and then do whatever you want/be left alone, which is the opposite extreme of those who just want an easy job, to be taken care of. Neither seem like a balance has been achieved.

Forgive me if I sound harsh. Perhaps you have honorable motives for wanting to be a priest. But the perception, and I don't think I'm alone here, is that you're simply looking for a diocese and seminary that will give you what you want vs. what you need in a vocation. One that, while preparing you for priesthood, giving you the nuts and bolts of classroom learning to prepare you theologically for your ordination, will also allow you the greatest autonomy so at the end of the day your time is not your parishioners or even your diocese but completely yours. That saddens me. I hope that if you truly are ordained, your parishioners don't feel that they're only getting a part time priest, one who's more concerned with himself than them. I've suffered through that. It's rough. And in the end I found myself going to a parish where my priest was actually an active presence in the church.
[quote]
I was able to find a University that met all my personal needs. If I went into a secular career, I'd be able to find one that met all my needs. Why should that be so unbelievable in a seminary? Why must they all be so rigid, especially when that hasnt seemed to guarantee anything about the psychological quality of the men emerging (if anything, it is has created a clerical culture severely turned in on itself)?
[/quote]
Not to beat a dead cat, as the saying goes, but this isn't a secular career. I feel that's a little lost on you, that you're trying to secularize a religious vocation.

With your posts many moons ago, you were pretty negative about your experience with religious life. Now you're just as negative as what you see as the diocesan priesthood. A psychiatrist friend of mine once told me that many who violently condemn something or someone often discover that the basis of their condemnations are also qualities within that they abhor about themselves. With your vehement negativity about clerics 'severely turned in on themselves', could it be that you yourself are focusing too much on yourself instead of our Lord for whom you will be of service on Earth? Perhaps you should consider that the reason you cannot find what you're looking for is that you're trying to mould your vocation into your own image, instead of looking to become 'not I, but Christ who lives in me'.

In this thread and the one you started a year or two ago (I can't remember right now when you started that other thread) you focus so much on what's wrong with everyone else. A little self discovery might do a world of good here because the 'fault' may not totally be without, but perhaps also within.

Do you have a spiritual director that you could speak with? Have you spoken to your pastor or maybe to the Vocation Director for your diocese? At the very least (or at most, depending on how you look at it) I really pray that you take yourself to the Blessed Sacrament and spend some time in prayer, discerning if this is really something you're suited for and if it's a life that would suit you.

If I, or others for that matter, have misunderstood your words, please enlighten me, because I can't understand with all your condemnation of all those 'other priests' with all their issues and wrong motivations, etc. why you'd actually WANT to be a priest.

[organwerke]

[quote name='CruxOfTheMatterAgain' date='07 November 2009 - 07:03 PM' timestamp='1257613431' post='1997744']
Why should that be so unbelievable in a seminary?
[/quote]

I didn't say that you shouldn't find "your" seminary: I simply think that you won't find it!
And can I ask you why are you so interested in becoming a priest?
Anyway I can't say that what you say isn't in part true...or that I never heard things like your opinions...
A very friend of mine who studied in seminary often talks like you. And I am really fond of him, so it isn't at all a negative judgement!
But, in fact, he stopped studying and didn't become a priest. The same thing that I really think will happen to you.
Good luck.

[picchick]

Edit

Edited November 7, 2009 by picchick

[littlesister]

Thanks, Picchick, you have said exactly what I was thinking but was saving for when I could read the first post more slowly. No religious calling is about what WE want. It's about what HE wants. Starting out with a list of terms and conditions, once the right spot has supposedly been found, would be a great way to mis-read everything else. The Church is made up of human beings, so human frailty is inevitable, but that isn's where the focus is. Picchick's comments about nursing (I'm one too) and vocation are right on the mark.