Hopefully this encourages other conferences and dioceses to review their vocational age limits. Similiar to later in life military applicants, they often bring experience and expertise that isn't regularly cultivated within the organization.
Are limits common? There are seminaries that focus on what they used to call delayed vocations. In England a widowed history professor (already a deacon) was recently ordained at the age of 78.
I believe so, but definitely not universal. I can't find any for my diocese (though there may be an unwritten rule), but a neighboring diocese puts a maximum age of 45. It's always up to the Bishops discretion though, so even those with max age rules I'm sure there are exemptions sometimes.
This is from a prominent delayed vocation seminary. It does acknowledge some dioceses have stricter limits than they themselves have. I know orders do often have limits.
“Am I too old to be accepted into a Seminary program?”
The answer is no! We believe that mature men make some of the best priests as they possess a wealth of life experiences. As a “second career” Seminary, the general range for acceptance is 30 to 60 years of age. Please note that many dioceses and religious communities have age limit requirements.
First, even in such cases, since the Diocesan Bishop is the legislator, and he created the rule, he can dispense from it. Which often takes place.
Second, the issue is money. It costs around $300K (and that is likely far too low) for the formation of a priest from propaedeutic year to priestly ordination. It is reasonable to ask if that is a sound investment for five or ten years of service. In fact, that is the question that is often asked. My opinion on the question is irrelevant. However, if you are an incredibly poor diocese like Brownsville or Fairbanks, it is a very real concern. If money isn't an issue, it should not be an issue.
I'd imagine that a professional man with no kids would often have substantial savings to put toward the costs.
Also I don't know much about what the formation years actually entail, but from what I've heard some of the goals of early formation include things like weaning off the phone and learning basics like how to get up on time and keep a personal discipline of prayer which older candidates would already have. After all, if say a 50 year old man shows up saying he's interested in the priesthood but doesn't already attend Mass frequently, or doesn't already pray, or has substantial immaturity or vice issues, he's presumably not going to be considered as a viable candidate anyway.
Therefore, seems possible the formation could be accelerated and cost less.
There are two distinct concepts: Formation, and education.
Some aspects of human formation could perhaps be accelerated. On the other hand, other aspects require far more work for an older man. For example, someone who has lived by himself for 30 years and done exactly what he liked in his private life (when to eat dinner, not having to share a living space, taking vacation when he wants, organizing his day how he wants) is going to have a far rougher adjustment in many ways than a 20 year old used to the discipline of mom and dad at home and college life. In the same way, there is a tough adjustment for a recently widowed man that is any many ways more difficult than that for a 20 year old.
However, what takes time is that there is an awful lot that has to be learned. You can't send an under-educated priest out into the world ... and if someone hasn't been in a classroom for 30 years ... that is a very rough adjustment. There are a lot of wonderful permanent deacons ... however, I have yet to meet one who did not have significant gaps in his theological or pastoral knowledge. To make a comparison, a PA or a NP can handle a lot, but they are also going to be fooled a lot and need the physician there to provide supervision. This priest (our putative older seminarian) needs the knowledge to be able to do that.
There are some circumstances where formation can and has been shortened with a dispensation from the Holy See. For example, let's say there is a seminary professor with a Pontifical doctorate who wants to be a priest; the academic formation can and has been shortened with the appropriate dispensation.
The idea that formation should be individually tailored to each vocation would be great in our regular seminaries as well. Liability-scared bishops and formators are really wedded to one size fits all programs.
The crisis of that time was widespread ultra conservative heresy and schism (i.e the reformation). That's not remotely what the church faces in the developed world today.
Also seriously uneducated practicing priests who got a small percentage of the parish income while the actual pastor went off and did as he pleased with no concern for the parishioners
I understand the goal of additional priests, but it seems like this demographic is probably better suited to formation as deacons, given their life experience.
This seems good. I think also worthy of consideration is allowing these late vocation priests to keep their existing employment AFTER ordination. I'm thinking of work that relates to the Church such as educations, social service, health care, music and the arts, etc. where they would take on some pastoral duties but not give up their other work.
I don't believe that the whole of priestly formation can or should be conducted in this manner, but it would make sense for at least pre-theology.
In some professions/occupations it is very easy to go back to the job market with a year or two or three away in seminary formation. In others - particularly at the senior levels - it is career suicide. If you are a surgeon who hasn't practiced in two or three years it is going to be very difficult to return to the profession. The state board of medicine will usually have to approve of a "return to practice" plan which may include up to a year of additional residency training.
In Luke 9:62 Jesus speaks of not looking back while plowing. At a certain point, a man has to make the decision to move ahead with priestly formation at the risk of secular career success. However, that does not mean it has to be done on "day one."
Hopefully this encourages other conferences and dioceses to review their vocational age limits. Similiar to later in life military applicants, they often bring experience and expertise that isn't regularly cultivated within the organization.
Are limits common? There are seminaries that focus on what they used to call delayed vocations. In England a widowed history professor (already a deacon) was recently ordained at the age of 78.
I believe so, but definitely not universal. I can't find any for my diocese (though there may be an unwritten rule), but a neighboring diocese puts a maximum age of 45. It's always up to the Bishops discretion though, so even those with max age rules I'm sure there are exemptions sometimes.
This is from a prominent delayed vocation seminary. It does acknowledge some dioceses have stricter limits than they themselves have. I know orders do often have limits.
“Am I too old to be accepted into a Seminary program?”
The answer is no! We believe that mature men make some of the best priests as they possess a wealth of life experiences. As a “second career” Seminary, the general range for acceptance is 30 to 60 years of age. Please note that many dioceses and religious communities have age limit requirements.
First, even in such cases, since the Diocesan Bishop is the legislator, and he created the rule, he can dispense from it. Which often takes place.
Second, the issue is money. It costs around $300K (and that is likely far too low) for the formation of a priest from propaedeutic year to priestly ordination. It is reasonable to ask if that is a sound investment for five or ten years of service. In fact, that is the question that is often asked. My opinion on the question is irrelevant. However, if you are an incredibly poor diocese like Brownsville or Fairbanks, it is a very real concern. If money isn't an issue, it should not be an issue.
I'd imagine that a professional man with no kids would often have substantial savings to put toward the costs.
Also I don't know much about what the formation years actually entail, but from what I've heard some of the goals of early formation include things like weaning off the phone and learning basics like how to get up on time and keep a personal discipline of prayer which older candidates would already have. After all, if say a 50 year old man shows up saying he's interested in the priesthood but doesn't already attend Mass frequently, or doesn't already pray, or has substantial immaturity or vice issues, he's presumably not going to be considered as a viable candidate anyway.
Therefore, seems possible the formation could be accelerated and cost less.
There are two distinct concepts: Formation, and education.
Some aspects of human formation could perhaps be accelerated. On the other hand, other aspects require far more work for an older man. For example, someone who has lived by himself for 30 years and done exactly what he liked in his private life (when to eat dinner, not having to share a living space, taking vacation when he wants, organizing his day how he wants) is going to have a far rougher adjustment in many ways than a 20 year old used to the discipline of mom and dad at home and college life. In the same way, there is a tough adjustment for a recently widowed man that is any many ways more difficult than that for a 20 year old.
However, what takes time is that there is an awful lot that has to be learned. You can't send an under-educated priest out into the world ... and if someone hasn't been in a classroom for 30 years ... that is a very rough adjustment. There are a lot of wonderful permanent deacons ... however, I have yet to meet one who did not have significant gaps in his theological or pastoral knowledge. To make a comparison, a PA or a NP can handle a lot, but they are also going to be fooled a lot and need the physician there to provide supervision. This priest (our putative older seminarian) needs the knowledge to be able to do that.
There are some circumstances where formation can and has been shortened with a dispensation from the Holy See. For example, let's say there is a seminary professor with a Pontifical doctorate who wants to be a priest; the academic formation can and has been shortened with the appropriate dispensation.
That is so Catholic, I love it. Nobody is too old or too weak to be used by the Lord and to participate in his mission. Fantastic.
The idea that formation should be individually tailored to each vocation would be great in our regular seminaries as well. Liability-scared bishops and formators are really wedded to one size fits all programs.
https://www.shsst.edu/priestly-formation/
“Trusted formation tailored for each seminarian.”
That's a great claim, but my seminary experiences make me tremendously skeptical of marketing like that.
There is a reason the Council of Trent required the creation of "one size fits all" programs.
True enough, and that was 450 years ago in a very different culture. For most of the church's history it has not been that way.
The crisis of that time was widespread ultra conservative heresy and schism (i.e the reformation). That's not remotely what the church faces in the developed world today.
Also seriously uneducated practicing priests who got a small percentage of the parish income while the actual pastor went off and did as he pleased with no concern for the parishioners
I understand the goal of additional priests, but it seems like this demographic is probably better suited to formation as deacons, given their life experience.
Why would it not be good for priests to have life experience?
Great to see some creativity being applied to priest formation.
This seems good. I think also worthy of consideration is allowing these late vocation priests to keep their existing employment AFTER ordination. I'm thinking of work that relates to the Church such as educations, social service, health care, music and the arts, etc. where they would take on some pastoral duties but not give up their other work.
I think the idea has some merit.
I don't believe that the whole of priestly formation can or should be conducted in this manner, but it would make sense for at least pre-theology.
In some professions/occupations it is very easy to go back to the job market with a year or two or three away in seminary formation. In others - particularly at the senior levels - it is career suicide. If you are a surgeon who hasn't practiced in two or three years it is going to be very difficult to return to the profession. The state board of medicine will usually have to approve of a "return to practice" plan which may include up to a year of additional residency training.
In Luke 9:62 Jesus speaks of not looking back while plowing. At a certain point, a man has to make the decision to move ahead with priestly formation at the risk of secular career success. However, that does not mean it has to be done on "day one."