Frustrated Over Two Year Waiting Period

[JReducation]

It is simply improper to have blanket waiting periods.

As has been said above, the waiting period is a recommendation. Even if the bishops wanted to make it blanket statement, they don’t have that kind of jurisdictiion. Each bishop is the Ordinary of his diocese and each Provincial Superior is the Ordinary of his religious. The decision lies with the Ordinary and his formation team.

Each person is different. I know many converts who know significantly more and are far more spiritual than many life long catholics who do not have to wait and are mature enough not to be “too exicted” about conversion. Which to imply that everyone that converts has this “excited” level and therefore is incapable of proper thought is also extremely Cathlocentric.

It is not a matter of what a person knows or whether the person is a saint. It is a matter of whether the person has a vocation. Dioceses and religious communities decide how long a person should belong to the Church before they will consider whether a person has a vocation. The final voice on whether you have a vocation is either the bishop’s or the major superior of a religious community. Saints have been denied ordination, because the bishop or the religious superior have discerned that the person does not have a vocation to the priesthood or to the religious life. That’s not being Catholicentric. That’s being obedient to the Holy Spirit. Br. David has eloquently stated that one who aspires to be a priest must first be obedient.

This also makes the outside world look at this as Cathlocentric; only if you were born into the church or been a member long enough are you worthy, regardless of the level of spirituality or understanding.

I hate to sound blunt, but when it comes to deciding if a person has a calling to the priesthood or to the religious life, what the outside world thinks or believes plays no role in the process. This was an issue in the history of the Church where the opinion of the laity and political powers were considered in this process. The result was disastrous. That’s the reason that the Church decided that this is an internal matter of the diocese or the religious community and neither shall be influenced by any opinion from outside. Even the pope has no voice in who gets ordained for a diocese or in a religious community. The Church applies the principal of subsidiarity here. Basically, everyone else has to stay out of the process.

Thank goodness Jesus, Peter, Paul, and thousands after, for example, did not do this, as the first, immediate converts were so successful as leaders in the church.

This is not a question of leadership. Priests are not ordained to be “leaders”. They are ordained to be priests. The only leader in the local Church is the bishop. The only leader in a religious community is the canonically installed superior. Case in point, communities such as the Cistercians have ordained monks, but they are not leaders. They have no pastoral practice at all. The priesthood is a participation in the priesthood of Jesus Christ, not a ministry of leadership. Sometimes their superior is not even a priest, but he is the canonical leader, because he’s the superior.

And I am glad God does not judge us this way, by time frame, instead of who and where we are in our spiritual lives. We need the enthusiastic converts that have that significant background and we need to stop being Cathlocentric about so many things.

The diocese or the religious community also judges people according to their gifts and their calling. We need men who have a vocation. As I said many times, that’s not decided by the individual alone. But it must be confirmed by the Church or the religious community in the name of the Church. Obedience is the first sign of a vocation.

This is why so many people I know do not convert and why so many have left the church.

Anyone who can’t obey does not belong in the Catholic Church to begin with.

I hear it all the time even with the use of our words, a lifelong Catholic who could only dream of knowing as much as a new convert, and not even close to the same spiritual level, calls the new convert a “newbie”, or “neophyte” or just by general attitude treats the convert as not as good as me the “life-long” Catholic. After, all as long as you “meet this requirement” you are OK, regardless of your level of development. Again how arrogant, whether you have been a member all your life or not is not the gage of spirituality or knowledge.

No one said that it is. But there is a requirement that must be met. The person seeking to enter a diocesan seminary or a religious community must prove that he or she is a faithful Catholic.

This is simply ridiculous and leads to those high levels of dissatisfaction with the church and as recent studies have shown high levels of conversation to other churches where this type of centrism does not occur.

The Catholic Church will always have centrism. It is a kingly system, not a democratic one.

Waiting is not such a bad thing for the individual either. It allows the person to live his Catholic faith among the faithful and explore other options open to all Catholics.

In my own community, which is rather small because we’re only 15years old, we do not admit anyone to postulancy who has not been an active member of the Church for at least five years, lived a celibate life, been engaged in the apostolate of the laity, and have a reference from their pastor and the formation director who meets with the aspirant for at least six months prior to postulancy.

Every community and diocese has its requirements. Part of the proof of a vocation is the ability to live with those requirements. It’s a sign of obedience, patience and fidelity to the Church.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[stuartsfeather]

A great attribute a priest can have is patience. And there is obviously a reason there is a two year waiting period. If you can’t learn patience, and obedience to rules now, what sort of priest to you hope to finally become? When and if you do eventually become a priest, are you going to follow suit and go over the Bishops head and run to the Vatican when things aren’t the way you like them?

If you truly have a calling to the priesthood, and love and zeal for the Faith, then a two year waiting period shouldn’t sour that.

And just because someone has a zeal for the priesthood doesn’t necessarily mean they’d make a good priest or even someone that should become a priest. Shortages in some areas doesn’t mean rules should be bent just because someone doesn’t find it suits them. Once upon a time the Church let in people to the seminaries who really shouldn’t have been allowed in. I’d rather a discernment period be given to potential applicants, then waiver regulations due to shortages and risk applicants getting in that really wouldn’t make good priests.

I am sure you can find something to do in this period, hopefully that will aid you when you and if you do go into the seminary.

I’d love to be able to chuck my job in and do something that I feel worthy of my readiness to do something for the Church, but God has other ideas and for now, as frustrating as this is, I have to wait, and as I am waiting, I am learning things and changing in myself, so waiting does have a positive side. Find yours and God Bless your journey.

Beautiful and right on the nailhead Kyria. This sounds like the modern day sickness of I want it and I want it now and I don’t care what the sound and just minds of the Church and Magisterium have established. I would advise to relax do your best at the studies to prepare and let the Lord our God direct the outcome. No matter what geat shortages people say we have in the Priesthood I am confident that the Lord God will provide sufficient for our needs.

Stuartsfeather, (Sebastian)

 

[JReducation]

Beautiful and right on the nailhead Kyria. This sounds like the modern day sickness of I want it and I want it now and I don’t care what the sound and just minds of the Church and Magisterium have established. I would advise to relax do your best at the studies to prepare and let the Lord our God direct the outcome. No matter what geat shortages people say we have in the Priesthood I am confident that the Lord God will provide sufficient for our needs.

Stuartsfeather, (Sebastian)

The Church began with 11 bishops and it took three years to prepare them. I can’t think of a greater shortage and here we are 2,000 years later and over one billion Christians, Catholic and Orthodox, all founded on the faith of these 11 bishops.

As Pope John Paul II said, “Do not be afraid.”

Fraternally,

JR

 

[Spirithound]

The Church began with 11 bishops and it took three years to prepare them. I can’t think of a greater shortage and here we are 2,000 years later and over one billion Christians, Catholic and Orthodox, all founded on the faith of these 11 bishops.

Actually, 12 bishops…one dropped out of the seminary…

 

[stuartsfeather]

Actually, 12 bishops…one dropped out of the seminary…

That one was replaced with a more worthy candidate quite rapidly by the other 11. Come back and tell us the name of that worthy one if you will

Sebastian

 

[Daniel_Boucher]

I think the Church should lower the minimum age for beginning formation for either Holy Orders or the Consecrated Life. When Jesus calls, there is no waiting. Children should be allowed to join a brotherhood or sisterhood as soon as they would like. It is better to form yourself closer to the life of Jesus earlier on; take the Mystery of the Finding in the Temple for example. The sooner the better. Christ recieved His education throughout the 30 years of His life before His preaching. All priests, deacons, and religious should be raised the same way.

Formation should begin sooner, I agree with you. I would rather you have two extra years in the Seminary than two years waiting to enter into the Seminary!

 

[Daniel_Boucher]

Another passage from Scripture that is relevant to your situation is how Jesus tells us to do everything the teachers of the Law tell us, but to have more faith than them. Do what they are telling you to do, but believe that God can do anything, such as convert someone to Catholicism and make him a priest soon after entering into the Faith.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

I think the Church should lower the minimum age for beginning formation for either Holy Orders or the Consecrated Life. When Jesus calls, there is no waiting. Children should be allowed to join a brotherhood or sisterhood as soon as they would like. It is better to form yourself closer to the life of Jesus earlier on; take the Mystery of the Finding in the Temple for example. The sooner the better. Christ recieved His education throughout the 30 years of His life before His preaching. All priests, deacons, and religious should be raised the same way.

Formation should begin sooner, I agree with you. I would rather you have two extra years in the Seminary than two years waiting to enter into the Seminary!

The seminary is not a place to form people in the basics of the Faith.

Children can not make any legal decisions so no religious order/community will accept them. It is ridiculous to think that children should be allowed into such a life.

Christ received his “education”, as you put it, in the context of a family.

We have given the original poster some ideas. There are prerequisites for entering a major seminary. He could easily work on those while he is waiting. Many religious orders/communities require a bachelors degree (another thing he could work on). But the original poster has not replied to anything in this thread though he has been active in other places on the forum and from reading those posts I think the two year waiting period is very good in his case.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Another passage from Scripture that is relevant to your situation is how Jesus tells us to do everything the teachers of the Law tell us, but to have more faith than them. Do what they are telling you to do, but believe that God can do anything, such as convert someone to Catholicism and make him a priest soon after entering into the Faith.

While we do have scripture we are not to interpret it for our selves. The Church has the final say and we are called to be obedience.

Also, how do you define soon? Even if he was accepted to start the Major Seminary next fall he would not finish for four years. That is provided that he has a bachelors degree and the required 30 credits of undergraduate philosophy and 12 credits of undergraduate theology.

 

[JReducation]

Several points:

1. Religious houses and seminaries are not places to raise children, much less to form them in the faith. That place is the family, not the secular seminary where there is no family spirit or the religious house where the family spirit is already defined by the founder and assumes that one have the basics of the Catholic faith and life from the home.
2. In the case of religious, there are vows involved. Children cannot legally make vows. Vows are both a consecration and a legal contract. Civil law would not allow such a contract, nor would canon law.
3. Religious communities and secular seminaries all require an undergraduate degree with a specific number of theology and philosophy courses as a prerequisite for admission. Those who do not have those prerequisites still have to acquire them before they proceed to graduate studies in theology.
4. It seems pretty obvious that the OP either found his answers or is not interested in what we have to say, because he has not acknowledged what we suggested. There were some good suggestions made by both lay posters and religious on this thread. I’m hoping that he found his answers.
5. Obedience is the first positive sign of a good priest or a good religious.

Fraternally,

JR

 

[Daniel_Boucher]

Once you find Jesus in the Temple, you will understand the truth. Age does not matter to God. We are to recieve the Kingdom of Heaven like children.

 

[JReducation]

Once you find Jesus in the Temple, you will understand the truth. Age does not matter to God. We are to recieve the Kingdom of Heaven like children.

Jesus also went home with his mom and dat and was obedient to them.

Fraternally,

JR

 

[Spirithound]

That one was replaced with a more worthy candidate quite rapidly by the other 11. Come back and tell us the name of that worthy one if you will

Sebastian

'Twas Matthias, my good man!

 

[JReducation]

'Twas Matthias, my good man!

It was Matthias. But what we must remember is that Matthias was chosen by the eleven, not personally by Christ. It does not change the fact that the Church begins with 11 if we believe that the Church is born out of the side of Christ when blood and water come forth. At that point, Judas is out of the picture.

If we believe that the Church begins at the Last Supper, then we can say it began with 12, one of them being a heretic.

Or we can take the view that the Church begins at Pentecost. Then we go back to 11. Matthias came after that.

Regardless, the Church began with a shortage of priests and religious. The only persons present who would qualify as religious were the Virgin Mary and John the the apostle. They lived the consecrated life. Later more came.

Fraternally,

JR

 

[Corki]

I think the Church should lower the minimum age for beginning formation for either Holy Orders or the Consecrated Life. When Jesus calls, there is no waiting. Children should be allowed to join a brotherhood or sisterhood as soon as they would like. It is better to form yourself closer to the life of Jesus earlier on; take the Mystery of the Finding in the Temple for example. The sooner the better. Christ recieved His education throughout the 30 years of His life before His preaching. All priests, deacons, and religious should be raised the same way.

Formation should begin sooner, I agree with you. I would rather you have two extra years in the Seminary than two years waiting to enter into the Seminary!

The Church tried that. When I was younger, there was a much different system in place. Boys who felt called to the priesthood went to seminary high schools (some of my friends went), followed by Junior Seminaries for thier undergraduate studies and then the Senior Seminary for final formation. Not all priests followed this path but it was in place.

In Her wisdom, the Church decided that such a system was not a good idea for this time. The priesthood in these times requires a certain amount of “street smarts” that is hard to come by if you are sheltered from age 13. Perhaps such a system will return in the future to meet future needs.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

The Church tried that. When I was younger, there was a much different system in place. Boys who felt called to the priesthood went to seminary high schools (some of my friends went), followed by Junior Seminaries for thier undergraduate studies and then the Senior Seminary for final formation. Not all priests followed this path but it was in place.

In Her wisdom, the Church decided that such a system was not a good idea for this time. The priesthood in these times requires a certain amount of “street smarts” that is hard to come by if you are sheltered from age 13. Perhaps such a system will return in the future to meet future needs.

It was just a couple of years ago that the last High School seminary closed, at least I do not think there are any today.

There are still College Seminaries (this is what you call a Junior Seminary).

What is different with these is that those who attend a High School do so with parental consent and are not under any sort of vows nor are they a part of any religious order/community (if it is/was run by one).

 

[JReducation]

It was just a couple of years ago that the last High School seminary closed, at least I do not think there are any today.

There are still College Seminaries (this is what you call a Junior Seminary).

What is different with these is that those who attend a High School do so with parental consent and are not under any sort of vows nor are they a part of any religious order/community (if it is/was run by one).

Our first order, the Friars Minor (Observants, Capuchins, and Conventuals) in the past admitted men into the novitiate right after high school. With the changes in society and laws, this proved to be impractical.

Adolescence has extended to the early and maybe the mid 20s. Young men of the past were adults by the time they were 18. They usually had jobs, were drafted or were preparing for marriage. This is rarely the case. Most 18-year olds are still students, dependent on their parents and on their peers. Their rate of emotional maturity is slower than that of their peers 50-years ago. You would be admitting teens to the novitiate. The spiritual work of a novice and the common life is not for teens. Their presence would be disruptive to the community and they are not independent enough. They have no idea what they are giving up.

Other issues include legal ones. If you admit an 18-year old into a religious community, you are responsible for their education. The law of the Church is very clear. If they leave the religious life, they owe you nothing and you owe them nothing. But who is stuck with the bill for their education? The laity. Most religious communities depend on the donations of the laity to pay for the education of their men and women. The same would apply to a secular seminary run by a diocese. If the seminarian’s family does not have the financial resources, the money has to come from somewhere. There are federal grants and loans, but not all seminaries qualify to receive them. Even if they do, who pays these loans after the man is ordained and makes only $18K a year, if he’s fortunate to be in a parish that can pay that salary? Religious don’t even get salaries. So who pays that? Someone has to be legally responsible for these debts. According to Church law, the diocese or the religious community is responsible.

There are other financial issues that enter the legal sphere such as auto insurance. When you have a novitiate with 10 to 20 men under the age of 25 driving, that’s a lot of insurance money that most religious communities cannot afford. This would not apply in a secular seminary, because secular seminarians own their vehicles. But novices are religious men. They do not own vehicles, nor do they have medical insurance. Secular seminarians can probably remain on their parents’ medical insurance policy because they are considered college students. Religious are not college students, even if they are in college. They are members of a religious institute. Legally, they have severed their legal ties to their families.

In a country such as the USA where everyone must have all kinds of insurance and lots of money to get an undergraduate degree, it is cost prohibitive to admit men to religious life before they complete college. Diocesan seminarians must take care of these expenses as any other college student. But the question is still there. If they reach ordination, who pays back the loans? A diocesan priest barely makes enough money to support himself.

We have to be holy, be we must also be practical and acknowledge the country and society in which we live.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[Daniel_Boucher]

Jesus also went home with his mom and dat and was obedient to them.

Fraternally,

JR

I think it would be wonderful for a child to live with their parents and go to school at a school of formation for them to become priests, deacons, religious, or even lay ministry (Church music, teachers, principles, etc.). The earlier people are formed to live according to the Church, the less likely are they to fall into the ways of the world.

In the circumstance of this thread, it is better to train someone sooner rather than later. It would be better to let them enter into training sooner and have them stay longer if they are not ready to serve as priests. But it is foolish to postpone educating someone on the Faith or in training them to serve. The service must wait until each candidate is of age and ready, but the education and training must not wait. That is what the Finding in the Temple/The Christ Child Among the Doctors shows us by His example. That example even tells us that service must not even wait. Jesus waits until his public ministry to begin performing miracles, but to teach about Scripture is what even a Child can do.

 

[Daniel_Boucher]

While we do have scripture we are not to interpret it for our selves. The Church has the final say and we are called to be obedience.

Also, how do you define soon? Even if he was accepted to start the Major Seminary next fall he would not finish for four years. That is provided that he has a bachelors degree and the required 30 credits of undergraduate philosophy and 12 credits of undergraduate theology.

When we (Catholics) are Confirmed, we are given the authority/sovergeinty of the Church. That is, we are fully united with the Church. Therefore we may preach about Scripture and apply it in our lives, as I have done. We are, however, not to vary its interpretation from what the Fathers have determined as being the proper and true interpretations of Scripture. I do find no fault in what I have stated. God has the final say, not the Church, after all, He is the Author of Scripture. We, the Church, are subject to God.