Heart doctor and seminarian – well not really

The question is, why are seminarians, who aren’t deacons, preaching and reading the gospel?

I am aware that this is a general and unnuanced statement, but the clerical cultures of many African cultures see concubinage and other sexual misconduct much like we see (for example) drunkenness or even rudeness. It’s something that is frowned upon and has the potential to become a serious issue, but doesn’t provoke scandal in the way it does for us. In some places, it’s almost expected that clerics have “something on the side” as a norm. Regarding this issue, the picture is not unlike the Church of Christendom through much of the middle ages.

The clerics (and laity) know that celibacy means the unmarried state and seem to tolerate a lot more “working on the chastity part” than we have become accustomed to (by the grace of God).

It’s unfortunate, but in our global Church where technology has made communication and travel easy, we need to understand and attend to cultural differences. Our Western culture of scrutiny and scandal is an environment where many of the profane (secular) incentives to clerical life have been purged. We can be thankful for this, but we must remember that it is not the case in the rest of the world, especially in areas where “vocations are booming.” In many cases, a religious order or seminary is the difference between going hungry or three square meals, a cot, and medical care. In the case of seminaries, it can also mean a life of relative wealth and prestige over a life of insecure menial labor.

I don’t mean to disparage or cast doubt on the many holy individuals and authentic vocations from around the world, but simply to shed light on an important social factor in all of this.

I would like to respond to Jay Adrian�s opinion about �African clerical cultures� of 7th February 2007.
First, while I would agree that the �socio-economic� factor plays a role in the rising number of vocations in Africa, I would say that it is not the principal factor. Speaking from personal experience as an African priest and former Director of Vocations, I can say that while for many candidates to the priesthood and religious life, the initial motivating factor might be socio-economic, or the charm of a charismatic priest or even just the desire to be a respected leader in the community, these motives are generally purged during the discernment process during the long seminary process which normally runs eight to fourteen years. If a candidate�s discernment process does not mature as it should, either the candidate realises that the original motivation is no longer true or is no longer motivating enough and will leave on his own, or the watchful care of the bishop, vocations director and seminary formator will ask such a candidate to leave. This fact is born out by the relatively small percentage of those who make it through the formation years. It is not unusual to start with a class of 40 students in the high school seminary, of whom only 10 make it to college seminary and eight years later, less than half 5 are ordained priests.
Second, it is simply not true that �in many cases, a religious order or seminary is the difference between going hungry or three square meals, a cot, and medical care . . . relative wealth and prestige over a life of insecure menial labour.� Mr. Adrian might do well to get a first hand experience of African life to realise that contemporary African society consists of a wide economic spectrum, with peasants, middle class and even the filthily rich upper class. Particularly through education and other services offered by the Church to the people, the clerical life is not the only way to secure a higher standard of living. Sheer hard work, a good education are key ingredients. In fact, the average lifestyle of clergy is generally lower and considered less economically rewarding than that of their lay counterparts of the same level of education.
Third, I would like to take issue with the implied superiority of the scrutiny and scandal-driven western culture over the African ways of dealing with the same problems. A useful hermeneutical (interpretative) principle holds that realities (texts, events, actions etc.) are best interpreted within their contexts and not by the use of interpretative categories of a different time and different society. The lack of wide press coverage and other means of scrutiny does not mean that Africans ipso facto tolerate clerical wrong-doing. For people for whom community life is still an important value, damage to one�s reputation by gossip (founded or unfounded) might even be a much more effective dis-incentive to avoid wrong doing. But even this argument sidesteps the issue. Clerical wrong-doing should be avoided for its own sake, not because of fear of scandal or scrutiny in the western world or gossip (and other control measures) in African societies. As much as Africans are more forgiving of their leaders who do wrong, it is frankly insulting to suggest that for them �it’s almost expected that clerics have �something on the side� as a norm.� Despite their poverty and low formal education, they can tell a holy priest from one who is not. They expect that their priest who preaches upright living to them must live uprightly himself, despite his human weakness. And while they will not feed on media-driven scandal, they will at the same time not tolerate a priest with �something on the side.�
Finally, I would just like to point out that while general statements can be useful tools for identifying trends, they fail in that task when they don�t take all factors into account or when they use an inadequate and unrepresentative sample. The incident of Seminarian Jude Nanyumba which ignited this discussion in the first place, as deplorable and reprehensible as it is, should not be used to disparage the many other good African seminarians and clerics. His love-affair and financial scam is neither representative or nor is it unique to African seminarians and clergy. Moreover, it would be as ridiculous and inaccurate to conclude from the relatively small percentage of American priests involved in paedophilia and homosexual activity, that this is the general defining of American clerical culture. I know that this is not true.