Changes to College Priestly Formation: A Defense

Belonging to a few online priest support groups, I have noticed a question gaining popularity: the value of the changes in priestly formation. The concern is focused on the perception that this change creates an additional year of formation: what took eight years now takes nine. There is the consideration of added expense as well. Likewise, there is worry that the extra time may turn men away from pursuing the priesthood.

These concerns make sense. So many dioceses are in desperate need of men in priestly ministry, and the prospect of waiting even longer for new men is frustrating. Their concern proposes a critical question: will adding time in the seminary help? No. However, change is necessary, not because it automatically adds a year (true in some cases, but not all), but because the formation focus is shifting to address the new needs of men entering the seminary.

I want to offer an apology, of sorts, for these changes to priestly formation. Since these changes are a response to the new needs of men, my primary focus is to convince you of the seriousness of the issues now being presented. Likewise, I hope to convince you that not addressing these issues appropriately, even if addressing them takes more time in formation, only compounds the lack of quality, available priests for ministry. The goal is not to provide a step-by-step guide on how the changes address the need — that can come later — but to show they are necessary.

Two important notes need to be made. First, seminaries are not therapeutic environments. If a man has significant therapeutic needs, he is called to step out of formation and enter a space with more intense psychological and spiritual help. The issues that seminary personnel address must be below a certain level of pathological crisis. This is determined through psychological testing at the beginning of the application process and through professional help during priestly formation. Any seminary program is to help men who can make meaningful changes with the help of seminary formators and, when necessary, through the ordinary course of psychological counseling.

Second, I work to point out various crises besetting men in priestly formation, and while the seriousness of these issues seems bleak, please know, however, that not all men entering the seminary struggle in the same way or to the same degree. I point out several common deficiencies. Still, many great things are also happening: men are more open to formation and each other, men are desirous of service and prayer, and men love the Church, her traditions, and her people. Do not think of my exposing of critical issues as a hopeless situation, but rather an honest and hopeful look at the work necessary for good, holy men.

Priestly formation and ministry are in crisis. The culture young men are being formed in is no longer Christian. American society now promotes extremes in self-absorption, pleasure-seeking, and grave distortions surrounding gender, marriage, and sexuality. These experiences are combined with social media technologies’ isolating effects and influence (e.g., TikTok, Instagram, Facebook, etc.). The effect is that society and media have contributed to negatively forming men, where their sense of reality and mental habits of choice and belief have often been corrupted.¹ The Program for Priestly Formation 6th edition (PPF) understands that these factors create an environment where new seminarians lack the “requisite qualities for formation.”²

There are three critical areas of concern: psychological, spiritual, and intellectual health and ability. Psychologically, men present with higher rates of anxiety and depression, personal and family trauma, isolation, and lower rates of interpersonal skills. Spiritually, men entering the seminary have less familiarity with Catholic tradition, piety, prayer, and general practices. Additionally, men often have a lower sense of worth and being a beloved son of the Father, possessing an obscured sense of masculine virtue and value. Intellectually, men tend to have a diminished ability and desire for critical thinking and expression, especially in writing and the basics of intellectual work. This issue has only been compounded since the COVID-19 pandemic. Additionally, there is a lower ability for hard, focused, and sustained work.

While not all men entering the seminary struggle in these ways, these are the most common issues seminary personnel face and why the changes to priestly formation are greatly needed. Before discussing the crisis in detail, let me briefly share how the crisis is being addressed and offer some insight into what is generally expected.

Addressing the Crisis

In the most recent edition of the Ratio Fundamentalis Institutionis Sacerdotalis (RF), a change in how priestly formation is imagined was called for.³ These changes have been translated into the sixth edition of the PPF. Historically, college priestly formation is organized into academic stages: freshman, sophomore, junior, and senior. The other dimensions⁴ of formation, human, spiritual, and pastoral, followed the academic calendar and scope. In the first editions of the RF, Pope Saint John Paul II emphasized developing a mindset that placed human and spiritual formation as most necessary.⁵ Despite this added emphasis, academic instruction seemed to remain in pride of place. For those who did try to shape priestly formation primarily around human and spiritual formation, it was still organized through an academic model. The Church is now reemphasizing the new focus, making concrete steps to move from a dominant academic structure to one more clearly centered on human and spiritual formation, especially in the early stages. Let me be clear: The focus is not to deemphasize intellectual formation but to emphasize a structure where stages of formation that emphasize all dimensions are the basis of organizing priestly formation.

What is this new structure to college-level formation? Instead of classifying men as freshmen, sophomores, juniors, or seniors, they are now organized into two formation stages: the propaedeutic stage and the discipleship stage. Academic accrediting bodies will still require classic academic standings concerning study. However, the seminary’s internal language, mindset, and practice are to make this shift. Of course, simply renaming the years men spend in the seminary will not affect real change. This shift includes much more. The timing, length, scope, and content of each “stage” has also developed.

The goal of the changes is to systematically and concretely address the crisis so that a foundation is built where the men have the “requisite qualities for formation:”⁶ capacity for self-knowledge and self-awareness, demonstration of interpersonal skill and development for friendship, growth in self-discipline, trust and openness to formation, healthy habits of self-care, and healing from spiritual and psychological trauma.

The Psychological Crisis

In the interest of space, I will highlight rates of anxiety and depression as significant factors in necessitating a change in priestly formation and briefly highlight social media’s effects on this generation. Anxiety and depression affect, on average, nineteen percent of Americans yearly, making it the most common mental illness among men and women over eighteen.⁷ This crisis of anxiety disorders is compounded because, on average, only about forty percent seek help for an illness that is treatable.⁸

The emergence of anxiety disorders is generally higher during young adulthood — the age of men entering the seminary.⁹ Anxiety has been linked to decreased school participation and success, especially in college, as rates of anxiety are highest during this period.¹⁰ The transition into collegiate life, academic challenges, time management, and social expectations add to the severity of anxiety.¹¹ Anxiety is also highly connected with depression, resulting in more significant mental health issues and lower treatment success.¹²

The combination of anxiety and depression increases have been found to correspond positively to higher rates of negative psychological functioning within “intrapersonal (i.e., hope, self-compassion, shame) and interpersonal (i.e., social connectedness, quality of social relationships) functioning.”¹³ While other factors contribute to poor inter and intrapersonal functioning, the fact that it is an issue is critical. In a recent long-term study, priests who admitted to being “unhappy” spoke of loneliness, with five to twenty-one percent admitting significant loneliness.¹⁴ Fr. Rossetti, the author of the study, recognized that men entering the seminary often do not have the experience or skill to develop nurturing and lasting friendships, contributing to significant loneliness and depression.¹⁵

The rates of anxiety and depression among young adults nationwide correspond to the same increases among new Catholic seminarians. Rates of anxiety and depression were generally over three percent higher among Catholic clergy than the national average.¹⁶ Both clergy and seminarians have identical responses to anxiety and depression, as does the general population, a worrisome prospect. These effects diminish a man’s ability to function appropriately in formation and future ministry. When left untreated, there is the possibility that burnout can occur in ministry,¹⁷ resulting in higher rates of men leaving the priesthood, exacerbating the current crisis of vocations. For Catholic seminaries to respond effectively to the growing rates of anxiety and depression is necessary.

Statistically, 84% of men between the ages of 18–29 (the general age for men entering the seminary) are active on social media, and many report adverse effects, including lack of sleep, isolation,¹⁸ and depression.¹⁹ On average, this age group spends three to five hours per day on social media.²⁰  The increased use of online technologies also presents higher rates of pornographic use and addiction.²¹ These realities are even more significant because men entering the seminary often come from broken families or families with increased trauma.²² These experiences alone require more careful consideration and healing in priestly formation.

The Spiritual Crisis

While not as quantifiable as various psychological concerns, there is anecdotal evidence for concerns regarding Catholic culture and spiritual development in the seminarian.

Included in the harmful effects of society is a lack of Catholic culture. Although men entering the seminary tend toward traditional and conservative observance of Catholic belief and practice, they still often lack a basic understanding and practice of prayer, e.g., lectio divina, mental prayer, discernment of spirits, or familiarity with the Divine Office. Men also tend to lack a rudimentary understanding of traditional Catholic beliefs,²³ e.g., explaining the doctrine of the Real Presence (happily, the percentage of Catholics who believe in the real presence is rising),²⁴ the relationship between Scripture and Tradition, or general familiarity with Sacred Scripture.

The reasons for such a situation rests on various factors. Many men have had a profound conversion experience later in life, missing that critical time that matched religious education and a desire to learn. It is also not unusual for men to have had less than adequate religious education from the parish or their parents, even if they stayed dedicated to the faith. Of course, other factors could be at play. Still, the effect is that many men coming into the seminary do not possess even an introductory level of knowledge of prayer, scripture, or the tenets of our faith. Combined with the non-Christian social experience, the seminarian may be at a significant deficit in progressing quickly through formation, requiring a refocusing of efforts to prepare men for further progress and study.

The interior lives of men are also in crisis. The typical American culture is such that two additional areas of concern are present. First is a crisis of masculine identity, and second, a crisis of not possessing spiritual dignity.

The PPF recognizes the need for young men entering priestly formation to possess traditional virtues of Christian masculinity.²⁵ Father Donald Cozzens, a former seminary rector, speaks similarly when he says, “Real men make the best priests . . . their moral courage and spiritual strength are well known to their brother priests and close friends.”²⁶ The PPF also recognizes various problems that beset incoming seminarians and sees society possessing weaker ethical standards, redefinitions of marriage and gender, alienation from authority, and distortions of reality.²⁷ This has begun obscuring traditional expressions of masculine virtues like strength, leadership, and assertiveness. Men in the seminary frequently desire to understand what it means to be a Christian man and how that can be lived out. Too often, they have been told their masculinity is “toxic” or can be defined by extremes of either violence and possessiveness or by adopting overtly feminine mannerisms and qualities. What is at stake is the seminarian learning to understand and accept a proper masculine identity that creates a proper personal wholeness and meaningful purpose.

These crises affect formation because seminarians must first develop an openness to formation that previous generations naturally possessed. Likewise, both psychological and spiritual development have little to build on for the man to grow in a priestly identity that can flourish in both the joys and challenges of ministry. Deep and lasting growth requires a man to recognize his identity being placed on a firm foundation built on rock and not sand (Mt 7:24–27).

Complicating the matter of identity is that spiritual directors of men generally report that men struggle with a lack of spiritual dignity. Instead of humble trust in God’s providence and care, men tend toward scrupulosity and feelings of undue unworthiness. Men tend toward envisioning God as vindictive and angry, demanding perfect obedience rather than a God who, while demanding moral integrity, also desires a loving and personal relationship with the seminarian.

Care is needed to open the seminarian to genuine spiritual growth and discernment. Tremendous effort is required to convince the man he is a beloved son of the Father who desires a personal relationship with him. Likewise, helping men see themselves as being configured to Christ takes more time; virtues like joyful obedience, self-sacrifice, discipline, silence, and personal prayer need extra attention. Extra work is now needed for a man to be free enough to recognize and receive such an identity, requiring, once again, a refocusing of efforts to prepare men for further formation.

The Intellectual Crisis

A third major crisis that needs attention is that seminarians generally lack critical thinking, writing skills, and sustained focus on academic studies. The intellectual demands of a pastor are not the same as those of a college professor, and many influential and beloved priests (and saints) did not possess stellar intellects. Yet the landscape of social dialogue and thought is such that the demands of a priest’s ability to think critically on complex topics are necessary. Not only that, the priest must also be able to articulate the truth with firmness, confidence, and persuasiveness while remaining affable. The ability to produce loving, nuanced, but clear teaching is becoming more complex.

Consider the 2011 National Assessment of Educational Progress at Grades 8 and 12 report on writing proficiency. Only about twenty-four percent of twelfth graders were proficient at writing, meaning that approximately fifty-two percent had only a basic level, and twenty-one percent had a below-basic capacity for writing.²⁸ This means that most seminarians possess a low capacity for even basic writing skills, a critical skill for philosophical and theological studies. This also indicates a low average ability to reflect on challenging issues, formulate a coherent thought, and organize that thought logically and understandably — all necessary skills for good writing. Significant time and effort are now required for men to master proficiency in these areas, let alone what is required for success in graduate theological studies.

A unique secondary issue is the diminished capacity for nuanced, abstract thought.²⁹ The rise of an almost exclusive STEM³⁰ study approach to academics has disadvantaged men entering the seminary. While valuable in many instances, STEM does not naturally promote the traditional liberal arts nor the outlooks of an appreciation of beauty, knowledge for its own sake, or philosophical reasoning. The American education system promotes a perspective of pure utilitarian need for further education. The seminarian now needs first to be convinced that the liberal arts are a necessary and reasonable plan of education. The seminarian also requires more time to train his mind to think abstractly and make real connections between ideals and practice. Intellectual formation now needs the same refocusing of efforts to prepare men for further formation.

Conclusion

Both scientific and anecdotal evidence clearly show that it is common for men entering the seminary to be less capable than in the past to have the requisite foundation for priestly formation. The days of the natural Catholic culture and a basic Christian society that could provide that foundation are gone. Men have higher rates of anxiety, depression, and serious trauma. They have a lower capacity for necessary academic pursuits and struggle to cultivate lasting, valuable friendships.

If left unaddressed, serious consequences are inevitable. When men have less capacity for developing lasting, valuable friendships, higher rates of loneliness and isolation occur. When men have not been well prepared for the challenges of priestly ministry, they feel burned out or incapable of doing the work. Similarly, higher rates of acting out immorally or imprudently occur when real trauma is not addressed. This leads to an unfortunate circumstance: men leaving the priesthood or causing grave scandal.

In the past year, I have personally known five priests who have left because of burnout, feelings of inadequacy or isolation, or some moral failing. Each time this happens, it harms the diocesan communities and stirs doubt in men considering the priesthood — compounding the need for priests. A recent CARA report reported that the common reason for leaving the priesthood, even after ten years, was being ill-prepared in the seminary for the realities of parish life and ministry.³¹ As stated earlier, significant loneliness also threatens men to leave the priesthood.³² This alone should convince us that refocusing efforts to prepare men for further formation is valuable.

My hope has not been to discourage vocations to the priesthood by painting a picture that is too dire or impossible. This is untrue; many quality candidates still come to the seminary. Yet the issues facing young men cannot be understated or ignored; that only leads to more significant issues in the future. Believing that changes to priestly formation are unnecessary threatens the good men who have a vocation and come to the seminary and the excellent work done by priests today. For these reasons, significant steps need to be taken to integrate men into a Catholic moral and spiritual culture, heal the harms caused by society, and provide the spiritual, human, intellectual, and pastoral skills necessary to deal with the challenges of parish life and ministry. If this can be accomplished well, the needs of the Church, with God’s grace, will indeed be met.