Is it time for the Holy See to consider/reconsider forming some priests largly via praxis?

[Duesenberg]

Given the critical needs for priests – particularly to celebrate the Mass, is it time for the Holy See to consider/reconsider forming some priests largly via praxis gained locally rather than through the seminary system?

Much like some of the Orthodox, it would seem that men could be chosen to undergo formation right in their parishes with direction from their pastors. Educated men with long, verifiable service to their parishes. Men who might be unable to attend seminary, but would be more than willing to learn via praxis and directed study from their pastors. Considerable praxis of perhaps 8-10 years or more.

Obviously not all pastors would be able to provide such formation, nor would all parishes have potential candidates for such a program. Yet I think almost all of us know of very good men (married or not) with very strong and long-held ties to their parish and their communities at large that might well make great priests yet cannot attend a seminary for whatever reason(s.)

It seems to me the resistance to such thinking would be very practical. First, how would such a program impact would-be celibate priests in the Latin Rite and the existing seminary system. A very legitimate concern. That could be partially answered by making the minimum age for priests formed in this manner to be 50-55 or so.

The next issue would be the existing population of permanent deacons. While they responded to a call and were formed for a very different vocation, I’m sure that many would still feel slighted that they didn’t have the opportunity to be formed in their home parishes as priests.

Third, as mentioned above, not all pastors/parishes would have the resources to provide such formation – even though tiny Orthodox parishes often do.

Finally the process of determining those who would be allowed to enter what amounts to a long apprenticeship would really require some thought and prayer. The selection process would be so critical – as it already is with those men who become priests and deacons. At least some part of the formation itself should be part of the selection process.

I think if some of these questions could be suitably answered, that forming priest via praxis could be a true Godsend to the Church – in more than one way, as it really already is in some cases, depending on the country.

 

[superblue]

well as much as a nice and well thought out plan that is Duesen, the problem is the Church does not like change, you have to look at how long it took the Church to come up with the seminary system, and then the criteria that followed, some other factors like does the Church want men who are strong in the faith or can just obtain a college/ universty degree in something and just hope their faith follows ( because you cant have your cake and eat it too, it is either one or the other ) … Or you can look at how long it took the church to allow girls to be altar servers.

The system is set in place and it isn’t going anywhere nor is it going to change. If you have great grades, and know how to play the game to get through seminary college, congrats you are on your way to becoming a priest, if you are broke, and have poor grades then forget it; it is way easier for a Bishop and Diocese to invest in boys an men who have great grades in college or highschool and place a bet on those men or boys graduating from seminary college than it is to do anything you suggested or actually start looking for solid men in the faith to become priests. Politics, money, and grades play a bigger part than anything.

But that is the cold hard truth

the fluffy , everything is great truth, is that God picks great boys and men to become priests, and the process is fine.

 

[Duesenberg]

well as much as a nice and well thought out plan that is Duesen, the problem is the Church does not like change, you have to look at how long it took the Church to come up with the seminary system, and then the criteria that followed, some other factors like does the Church want men who are strong in the faith or can just obtain a college/ universty degree in something and just hope their faith follows ( because you cant have your cake and eat it too, it is either one or the other )

There were/are very important reasons for the seminary system. I would never argue otherwise. But I don’t believe that means it should totally preclude other, more ancient means of formation. Also, a man can obviously be both formally educated and have strong faith.

The system is set in place and it isn’t going anywhere nor is it going to change. If you have great grades, and know how to play the game to get through seminary college, congrats you are on your way to becoming a priest, if you are broke, and have poor grades then forget it; it is way easier for a Bishop and Diocese to invest in boys an men who have great grades in college or highschool and place a bet on those men or boys graduating from seminary college than it is to do anything you suggested or actually start looking for solid men in the faith to become priests. Politics, money, and grades play a bigger part than anything.

I don’t think that’s really true. First, I’m not suggesting the seminary system go anywhere. It’s vital. However I can think of a half-dozen men that would thrive on such a process of praxis-formation and would become great priests – if they would heed the call. One of them asked me if I had ever considered the permanent diaconate? During the discussion I turned the question around on him. He said no, that his discernment made him feel that he should have entered the priesthood, but he really wasn’t aware until he had been married and had started a family. Interestingly enough, all six are quite different than my parish’s 3 permanent deacons.

I empathize with your frustration, but I do think positive change will come in this area.