Priestly Chastity
by Card. Mauro Piacenza
Dear brother priests, dear seminarians,
I am especially pleased to be with you
today on the occasion of the regional Day for Piemontese Seminarians, and I
thank you for your kind invitation. The topic you proposed to me [priestly
chastity] is particularly timely and I believe it should occupy an important
place in every formation course for the ministerial priesthood, since affective
education is never separated, and is, in fact, inseparable, from the other areas
of priestly formation: intellectual, spiritual, and pastoral. I will develop my
reflections along two fundamental lines and I will try to draw some conclusions
from this analysis.
The present situation
It would be nothing less than imprudent
to approach the important subject of affective formation without considering
the real revolution that has taken place in western society, and, by a sort of
lethal contagion, throughout the world, from the 1970s until now. The
separation of the unitive aspect of sexuality from the procreative, which
reduced one of the most anthropologically significant acts to its merely
instinctive dimension, has yielded devastating consequences, not only on the
moral plane—which would already be exceptionally serious—but, over the course
of the decades, also on the psycho-anthropological plane.
It is unthinkable to address the topic
of affective formation in the seminary without starting from the lucid
awareness that, without choosing it, all those born after the 1970s and 1980s
have grown up in a pan-sexualized and hyper-eroticized cultural climate. In
this climate the powerful forces of the world have sought to bend the freedom
of persons to various unworthy interests, and have spared no measures,
including subliminal messages instilled from the earliest ages, even in some
children’s cartoons, to achieve the “destructuralization” of the
psycho-affective dimension of the human personality, and by so doing to subject
man to his instincts. To what could be called the post-1970s sexual revolution
we must add the omnipresence of the communications media, especially television
and more recently the internet. These have imported into every household, or
better said, into every room and place, images never seen in earlier times,
which remain impressed in the memory, fantasy, and even the subconscious of
persons from the tenderest ages, and which are found to act in an uncontrolled
and uncontrollable way.
If original sin always rendered the
psycho-sexual dimension of the human person particularly fragile, these recent
significant changes have produced in it a veritable upheaval, acting no longer
only in the private sphere of personal temptation, but becoming generalized
customs and even shared culture, to the point that any other sort of behavior now
appears “weird” to popular opinion. This situation, which could appear at first
“apocalyptic,” describes in reality not so much a moral attitude as the real
cultural situation in which even those who hear the call to celibacy and the
priestly ministry are deeply immersed and from which, in the end, they
originate.
In such a sociocultural context it is,
unfortunately, necessary to recognize what I would describe as the
trivialization of affectivity in general, and of sexuality in particular. Let
me explain. The artificial uncoupling of the unitive and procreative aspects of
sexuality has irremediably reduced the broad sphere of affectivity to the
simple exercise of genitality. This has robbed sexuality of the definitive
context that is proper to it and, in so doing has diminished its importance and
decisively rendered it banal. This becomes evident especially in the
superficiality with which certain acts or gestures are often performed—acts
which by their nature would presuppose a maturity and definitiveness that in
the great majority of cases doesn’t exist. And this happens without the least
remorse of conscience. It is no mystery that in such an environment some young
people live a full exercise of genitality with the same nonchalance entailed in
offering a handshake!
It is obvious that in such a cultural
milieu seminary formators must carry out an attentive discernment. They are
called to distinguish clearly between those who come from a traditionally
Christian formation that has been consciously embraced along with a correct
understanding of affectivity and sexuality, and those who, on the contrary,
come from a worldly situation in which they have been totally immersed, in
which case it is unimaginable even with the help of Grace that they suddenly
adopt radically different attitudes.
This judgment does not necessarily imply
the creation of differentiated formative tracks. Nor does it suppose the
impossibility of reaching the state of equilibrium required by the commitment
to celibacy prior to ordination. It does, however, certainly require a radical,
progressive assumption of awareness on the part of both seminarians and their
formators, together with a good dose of humble realism and a serious, committed
program. Here it isn’t a question only of overcoming vices and acquiring
virtues, but of fighting and overcoming in themselves an anthropological
structure received from and constantly reproposed by the dominant culture. It
is important to be truly free! A situation of osmosis occurs vis-à-vis the
dominant culture and if one isn’t watchful, one ends up being anesthetized
through a sort of worldly IV, drip-by-drip.
Such a disoriented and disorienting
environment has consequences not only in the psycho-sexual sphere, but assails
the entire relational core of the person. Growing up in a hyper-eroticized
environment in which one almost unconsciously breathes a disordered sexuality
has consequences on a person’s daily activity and his ordinary
relationships.
The true drama, then, in this context is
constituted by the fact that even the subjects themselves, who are victims of
this general psycho-affective drift (whether they are aware of it or not), live
a radical dissatisfaction brought about solely by the discord between what the
human person was created for, with the attendant deep significance on his
affectivity, and what they actually live.
The heart of man is made for
definitiveness. Whatever the vocation to which God has called him, virginal or
spousal, it is solely definitiveness that will bring about his real
fulfillment. As the image and likeness of God, who is infinite love, man
realizes that among his elementary needs figure truth, freedom, beauty,
justice, love and, as a synthesis of all of them—though today so poorly
understood, despite people’s tentative searches and even pretenses to
attainment—happiness! Everyone perceives that the satisfaction of these needs
requires, and even assumes, totality. No one would calmly accept being “a
little bit” just, or “a little bit” free. Everyone demands that these universal
anthropological needs be met fully, both experientially and chronologically.
This plenitude is what we mean with the term “definitiveness.” Sacred Scripture
teaches us to resist “steadfast in the faith” the one who “like a roaring lion
prowls about seeking someone to devour” (1 Pet 5:8-9), even when such an
experience was that of our “old man.” The sometimes extreme frailty of marriage
unions and the inability of so many young people to assume definitive
commitments are rooted in the same stuff as difficulties in living an ordered
affectivity and maturing in the peaceful acceptance of the vocation to
virginity. If in every age perfect continence for the Kingdom of Heaven and
celibacy have been difficult due to the frailty of human nature, paradoxically
in our age it seems particularly arduous, since the media communicate an
aggressive pan-sexualism, able to distort one’s very perception of the
affective, sexual and relational spheres.
Affective formation for consecrated
celibacy
How can one imagine an effective
formation program for candidates to the priesthood who come from such a
cultural environment? Where to begin and what course to set in order to
avoid—as far as humanly possible—errors that could turn out to be dramatically
fatal for the future priest? After a methodological premise, I will articulate
this second point of my paper, which is the central matter of the topic
assigned to me, in three sub-points, which are dynamically integrated with each
other, but which, for the sake of pedagogical effectiveness, I prefer to
distinguish and only afterward to show their intimate relationship. We will
consider, then, the following dimensions: 1. purification of the memory, 2.
education of the present affective situation and, finally, 3. the prayerful
awaiting for the gift of the priesthood and for the corresponding grace of
state that comes from it and is so essential for living consecrated chastity.
Everything said up till now reminds us, if it were still necessary, of the
importance of formation of the affections and the radical serenity with which
this formation must be undertaken.
It is intolerable for the matter of the
affections to be dealt with only tangentially and superficially during the
period of formation. In the most rigorous respect for the needed and
canonically recognized distinction between the internal and external forum, it
is necessary that the affective dimension be addressed explicitly with the
seminary superiors and, if this doesn’t happen spontaneously, by the seminary
superiors themselves. Certainly this implies that the superiors themselves be
affectively mature persons, at peace with themselves and with their own
psycho-affective sphere, not frustrated and therefore, at least not tending to
project on others their own unresolved issues. It is necessary that they have
integrated their own possible psycho-affective problems in order to accompany
others along this path toward maturity. Therefore it is necessary that the
choice of formation personnel be carefully pondered and take into account not
only the theological and pastoral competencies of candidates but also, and
perhaps especially, their psycho-affective maturity and the general harmonic
balance of their personality.
While recognizing the indispensable role
of personal responsibility in the formation period it is always essential to
maintain the distinction between educators and students, between those to whom
the formation of future priests has been entrusted by the bishop and the
candidates themselves. Every error in this area could bear serious
consequences, not least of which is the ineffectiveness of the educational
process itself.
Purification of the memory
I mentioned earlier the need to
distinguish between those candidates who come from a motivated Christian
formation and presumably were educated in the real meaning of human
affectivity, and those who were immersed in the world with its affective and
sexual customs, experienced a conversion, heard a calling and came knocking at
the door of the seminary. Both groups, however, need to undertake a true and
comprehensive purification of the memory, both from a spiritual point of view
and from a moral and psychological standpoint.
It is impossible to purify the memory
without “remembering.” While avoiding the risk of getting bogged down in the
morass of memories with their corresponding emotional reactions, an honest
narration of one’s personal affective history is necessary, at least in the
internal forum. This will allow the candidate to present his affective history
to God, with all its beauty and shortcomings, with its fruitfulness and its
falls, with its sporadic and accidental mistakes or reiterated, structural
limitations. To “remember” means to cultivate a healthy realism without which
no genuine path of healing is possible! To “remember” means allowing someone
else to know, at least one’s superior in the internal forum—the spiritual
director—one’s personal history. This will permit him to draw together as many
elements as possible of the candidate’s path in order to help him to adopt a
truly effective spiritual program, that is, to accompany the candidate toward a
sufficient integration of his affective dimension and toward fidelity in his
commitment to celibacy. Dear friends, rather than glossing over critical aspects
of one’s personal affective experiences, it is better to speak about them with
someone, even someone outside the seminary, for example with the so-called
extraordinary confessors or a priest that you trust. If necessary, these
counselors can help address these concerns, whereas sweeping them under the rug
can only call into question one’s purity of intention.
Purification of the memory, which has an
important initial stage during the time of seminary formation, but which lasts
throughout one’s entire earthly existence, requires and in a sense implies a
radical humility. In his Spiritual Exercises, Saint Ignatius of Loyola teaches
us the art of the discernment of spirits, which is intimately connected to the
purification of the memory. Each of us can observe how the frailty of our human
nature and the limits of our memory can allow images and memories to remain,
even in an obstinate way. Even when submitted to the “power of the keys” and
under divine Mercy, and thus destroyed by God, these memories can continue to
insinuate themselves into the spiritual life, sometimes in an aggressive
fashion.
Contemporary culture tends literally to
“stuff” young people with images, and thus with “memories,” which in other
times would have been unthinkable. It’s enough to walk around the streets of
any city, without even mentioning television or internet, to be subjected to a
veritable lynching by images. From the experience of studying the sad causes of
dispensations from priestly duties, it seems evident to me that a person can
see more in a half hour of bad use of internet than he would have run into in
an entire lifetime in the past! If candidates to the priesthood come from this
type of experience, it is indispensable that they choose and are assisted in
carrying out a truly radical break, just to be able to imagine the possibility
of faithfulness to priestly celibacy. All the memories not purified and all the
bad habits not overcome during the formation period will come back to roost,
causing serious problems of psycho-affective balance and sometimes tragic
spiritual, moral and psychological situations.
Purification of the memory could seem to
be an impossible project, but we know, dear friends, that nothing is impossible
for God! In this regard, the essential work of this purification, carried out
and firmly pursued with human intelligence, freedom and willpower, is perfected
by supernatural grace, which comes to us especially through an intense
spiritual and sacramental life. What could seem impossible to our eyes is made possible
by God’s constant and effective intervention. If he is capable of raising up
sons of Abraham from stones, he can forge balanced, integrated, chaste men,
reconciled with the memory of their own past, even in this time which is so
disoriented and disorienting from a psycho-affective standpoint.
Education of present affective
experience
The apostolic exhortation “Pastores Dabo
Vobis” asserts: “Since the charism of celibacy, even when it is genuine and has
proved itself, leaves one’s affections and instinctive impulses intact,
candidates to the priesthood need an affective maturity which is prudent, able
to renounce anything that is a threat to it, vigilant over both body and
spirit, and capable of esteem and respect in interpersonal relationships between
men and women” (no. 44). With an extraordinarily realistic language, in a sense
“new” to pontifical documents, Blessed John Paul II left us an edifice of
affective education for celibacy. The inclinations of affectivity and the
urgings of the passions are not removed or modified by the charism of celibacy,
which—as the text affirms—remain intact! It is therefore necessary to educate
one’s affective state, both as regards one’s inclinations and as regards one’s
urges, to keep from imagining a future priesthood radically different from
one’s present seminary life, from the psycho-affective and sexual standpoint.
We must understand, then, that the important time of seminary is given to us
also to work on our psycho-affective harmony, in order to integrate our
inclinations and urges and to choose and sharpen those “weapons” that are
necessary for battle, which lasts throughout our lifetime. Awareness that the
charism of celibacy is a supernatural gift of the Spirit forces us to recognize
the absolute primacy of grace in this endeavor.
If it is necessary to recognize and
prudently employ the contributions of the human sciences, especially
psychology, with the understanding that we’re talking about a truly Christian
conception of the human person, we must nevertheless acknowledge the many
errors committed in this area in recent decades.
At times tasks have been delegated to
the human sciences that were the competence of formators, who are essential
mediators of God’s mysterious, supernatural action. It seemed that psychology
was a cure-all for everything that ailed candidates to the priesthood, and thus
was applied, sometimes indiscriminately, to all, without the necessary
distinction between so-called physiological neuroses—which we all have—and
those pathological neuroses that require clinical intervention. It was believed
that evangelical values, including celibacy, could be internalized not through
a personal, fascinating, life-giving encounter with Christ—which is obvious—but
through processes of destructuring the personality and a presumed, but never
achieved, restructuring of the same, including the above-mentioned values.
The causes of dispensation of the duties
attending holy orders, including celibacy, testify to the tragic errors of the
abuse or misuse of the human sciences in formation for the ministerial
priesthood. Only when used with the correct criteria and in the correct
situations, do these human sciences prove to be beneficial.
The gift of the charism of celibacy
flourishes, is progressively embraced and matures to the point of defining the
psychological personality of the priest only in an intimate, prolonged, real
and interpersonal relationship with Jesus of Nazareth, Lord and Christ! Only
prayerful intimacy with the Lord and a progressive identification with his
life, his words, his thoughts— “Let the same mind be in you that was in Christ
Jesus” (Phil 2,5) – allow a person to embrace and live celibacy, not as an
element foreign to the person, to be borne as a burden, but as a personal
redefinition, born of an encounter with Christ and of the transformation and
new life that such an encounter generates. Celibacy is, par excellence, that
new horizon that perhaps we never imagined before, and which the encounter with
Christ has radically unveiled. Moreover, as we have all experienced, an
extraordinary flourishing of what is human mysteriously but truly accompanies
the priestly vocation. What would our humanity be without Christ, without the
vocation that He gave us? Along with the call to priestly ministry, the Lord
allows our humanity to flourish, be purified and burgeon in unexpected and
extraordinary ways, progressively enabling it to definitively embrace this
extraordinary charism and live it as a supreme witness to Christ in the
day-to-day reality of priestly ministry.
Even in the dramatic time of shameful
scandals, against which it is necessary to act with all our strength, both in
formation and through reparatory penance and prayer as well as from the serious
disciplinary and penal aspects, the world does not attack our “social” action
or our works of charity. It is our witness of chastity for the Kingdom of
Heaven and its attendant training that the world cannot tolerate.
If monastic life is always rich in
fascination, let us never forget, dear friends, that, paradoxically, the
witness of a diocesan priest who is immersed in his time and in his society can
be even more striking. We are not monks separated from the world, to be
observed with sentimentalism; we are men fully inserted into our time, “in” the
world but not “of” the world. With our choice of celibacy we bear witness that
God exists, that He calls men to Himself, that He can give meaning to an entire
existence, and that it is worth spending our entire lives for Him!
Divine intimacy, a fundamental condition
of celibacy formation, is cultivated above all—as I was saying—in prayer, in
which we must be totally immersed; “Conversatio
nostra in Coelis est”; whereas on earth we fret, but without accomplishing
anything! Forming a radical fidelity to daily Mass, the Divine Office,
Eucharistic adoration, mental prayer (also daily), the holy Rosary, through
which we daily entrust our own priesthood to Mary, is the “bare minimum” if we
are to hope to live celibacy. A priest who doesn’t pray, who doesn’t realize
the urgency of celebrating the Eucharist each day, overcoming the groundless
theories of “fasting from the Eucharist” and the scandalous “days off,” in
which priests seem to be exempted from their relationship with Christ as
well—how sad for a priest to be liberated from Christ!—will find great
difficulty living his celibacy with serenity and effectiveness. During seminary
training it is essential to form oneself in these indispensable dimensions of
priestly life. Seminarians must ask for supernatural grace so that these
practices be not only good and virtuous habits, but a true
psycho-anthropological-spiritual structure defining their personal identity.
The priest not only celebrates holy Mass, he also finds his identity in it,
since Mass becomes progressively and truly his life, and he “is” the Mass he
celebrates! In this clearly supernatural dimension, for which one must be
educated, every thought, every word, and, evidently, every action in disaccord
with the greatness of one’s vocation should be avoided, certainly, for their
sinfulness, but also—and I would say especially—because of the unhappiness they
generate in their total incongruence with the truth, both of the priesthood and
of the ministerial actions that the priest carries out.
The human sciences can provide valid
assistance in understanding, at least in general terms the fundamental dynamics
of the psyche and human affectivity. A good psychologist may be able to
recognize the problems that exist and may offer invaluable help, but he certainly
cannot resolve them. Only Christ saves man in his fullness!
Two more elements seem essential to me
in affective education: one’s relations with the world and the role of
intellectual formation.
As regards relations with the
world—already extensively treated in the first point of this address—one sees
all too clearly that in seminary training there is far too much naïveté in this
area. If in the 1950s and 1960s there was a need, at least for some, to open
themselves more to the world, or at least to reveal to the world the full
beauty of Christianity in a new and comprehensible way, today we find ourselves
immersed in the exact opposite problem: that of being completely immersed in
the world.
I believe that in our present
circumstances it is simply impossible to embark on a serious and committed path
of formation in perfect chastity for the Kingdom of Heaven if one is incapable
of a radical break from the world, which is, above and before all a break with
its mentality. Yet it is only in this way that one can serve society. Can a
seminarian have the same identical attitudes as when he was a member of the
parish youth group or when he was a college student? Can he, during his times
of pastoral work in parishes, frequent the same places with the same attitudes?
I’m not speaking here, dear friends, of
becoming rigid and pietistic, incapable of authentic interpersonal
relationships. It is a question rather of avoiding near occasions of sin and
not repeatedly exposing one’s psyche, emotivity and body to situations that
will inevitably make perfect continence for the Kingdom of Heaven more
difficult.
The last aspect concerns the importance
of theological formation, also as regards education for priestly celibacy. A
healthy Christology, faithful to the revealed Word, Tradition and the
uninterrupted Magisterium, should highlight the extraordinariness of Christ’s
humanity and the beauty of being configured to Him—including his perfectly
chaste humanity—by priestly ordination. An ecclesiology that does not wish to betray
the truth cannot reduce priests to mere religious functionaries, but from a
thoroughly supernatural perspective should recognize in them a mysterious and
necessary mission that is essentially and not only by degree different from
that of baptism, and in fact relates to the promotion of the mission of the
baptized.
I am deeply convinced that a certain
theological weakness, which has found its way into quite a few academic
environments, also bears serious responsibility for priestly vocations which,
lacking adequate reasons—as is to be expected—cannot resist the violent and
persistent impact of the world.
In finishing this reflection on the
education of the present affective life of seminarians I would like to
underscore once more the absolute and incontrovertible primacy of grace in
priestly formation. Let us look to divine mercy, given form and celebrated in
the sacrament of Reconciliation and continually invoked. Mercy is the first
“medicine” to heal the limitations of concupiscence and live, in a progressively
more perfect way, continence for the Kingdom of Heaven. This continence is so
closely tied to the priestly ministry that the Church chooses her priests only
from among those who have received this charism. What seems impossible to human
effort alone becomes experientially possible by grace, in which we must entrust
ourselves continually and without limits.
Prayerful waiting for the gift of
priesthood
The seminary community has its supreme
model in the Upper Room of Jerusalem, in which the apostles, having experienced
the Risen Christ and closely united to Him, live in prayerful expectation for
the gift of the Spirit, together with the Blessed Virgin Mary. If the moment of
priestly ordination is the outpouring of the Spirit, which enables its receivers
to speak new languages, preach the Kingdom effectively, heal with sacramental
power and carry out every other action of authentic ministry, then the seminary
lives, nourishes itself, walks and grows as a true Upper Room. Just as in the
Upper Room all the apostles had the experience of a personal relationship with
Jesus and witnessed him risen, so every seminary should be a community of men
who have experienced Jesus and whose lives were changed by that encounter; men
who have experienced the Risen One and see the Church as God’s chosen people
and his own Body, which now walks through time and history.
In his Rule, Saint Benedict, that giant
of holiness and human wisdom, unhesitatingly invites to remove from the
monastery whomever should enter for any reason other than the search for God. I
think that the same clarity and firmness should be employed in discerning entry
into and continuance in the community of the Upper Room that is the seminary.
Every limitation can be embraced,
supported and borne with by the seminary community, which is, by its nature, a
formative and transitional community, just as the apostles themselves did not
remain forever in the Upper Room. The lack of right intention, however, and
staying in the seminary for reasons other than that of seeking and serving God
and his Church cannot be tolerated, because it blocks every authentic path of
conversion and real formation. The community of the Upper Room, and thus the
seminary, is a community of prayer. The priest is and must be a man of prayer!
It is practically impossible for a seminary community without prayer at its
center to fulfill its proper mission
Prayer is not an interruption of the
things we need to do. We should say, rather, that we sometimes interrupt prayer
in order to do other things, and even in those other works we must keep a
spirit of prayer. The reform of the clergy, looked for by many, must
necessarily spring from a radical rediscovery of the supernatural dimension of
the ordained ministry and the primacy of a prayerful relationship with God.
This primacy should be evident in the official prayer of the seminary: through
fidelity to the liturgy as the Church determines it be celebrated and through
the care behind every gesture and attitude, in which there should be nothing
formalistic. The correct form, besides, assists in keeping and communicating
its substance.
Along with the prayer of the Church,
which comprises not only holy Mass and the Divine Office, but also Eucharistic
adoration, the holy rosary, and every other exercise that upholds and nourishes
the faith, the seminary community is called to educate future priests also in
personal prayer, silence, meditation and spaces for real divine intimacy.
As an “education,” this cannot be left
solely to personal responsibility or creativity. While respecting personal
freedom, moments of silence and Eucharistic adoration should be proposed as
part of the daily or weekly schedule. My personal experience has been that a
daily hour of Eucharistic adoration in the formation program has extraordinary
effects on the lives of seminarians. It creates a familiarity with the Lord
that later on, in priestly ministry, sustains and nourishes a yearning to “be
with Jesus,” encouraging our freedom to constantly seek out these moments.
Prayerful waiting for the gift of
priesthood orients one’s entire prayer life. Prayer doesn’t happen
independently of the vocation one has received, but rather as a part of it, and
a seminarian can place himself in the presence of the Lord and almost have a
foretaste of the sweetness of the priestly ministry. Anticipating the
celebration of holy Mass and the administration of divine mercy, one
experiences that divine intimacy that with priestly ordination becomes
ontological. You are all called to prepare yourselves interiorly for this. From
a human point of view, nothing is improvised and from a divine perspective
nothing happens ahead of time. In this sense we must also overcome those
fears—which also date back to the 1970s—of an excessive “closeness” to the things
of God. We need to wake up—history has moved forward! If today there is a real
problem to be considered it is fragility and priestly identity that, in part
because of theological fluctuations, is not sufficiently well defined and only
rarely coincides with the psychological identity of the candidate.
The model for priests, Saint Jean-Marie
Vianney, whom we have gotten to know better thanks to the Year for Priests, is
exemplary precisely because of his total identification with his ministry. This
is a necessary condition for apostolic fruitfulness, but also for interior
peace, serenity, and above all a sense of personal fulfillment for priests at
the service of God, the Church, and mankind.
Conclusions
At the end of this long reflection, we
can draw out a few conclusions that, while not definitive, can provide some
orientation for affective formation in the seminary. For the sake of simplicity
and clarity, I will address them as bullet points.
1. A thematic memory of one’s
psycho-affective and sexual experience constitutes a fundamental element for a
truly fruitful path of formation. It allows for a vigilant and constructively
critical awareness of the problematic cultural situation of our day, in which
objective knowledge has given way to the most arbitrary subjectivism and its
consequent relativism.
2. It is necessary to recognize the
absolute primacy of grace in affective formation, without which a truly chaste
life is unthinkable. This primacy is acknowledged and lived in the primacy
given to the spiritual dimension of life, made up of prayer and the sacramental
life and of the progressive psychological identification with a priestly
personality.
3. The seminary community should find
its proper balance between missionary aspirations—which shouldn’t transform it
into a centrifugal community—and, as with the Upper Room at Jerusalem, its
centering on the person of Jesus, together with Mary, awaiting the gift of the
Spirit for the mission, and never closed in on itself.
4. From the beginning of seminary, one
should seek to identify with the priestly ministry that in time will be
conferred, since this identification fosters a correct orientation of affective
formation. Unlike earlier times, today a seminarian is the most juridically
fragile person in the entire ecclesial body. He is not a cleric until the
diaconate—to safeguard his freedom—and yet he lives all the duties of
discipline and obedience proper to the clerical state. This juridical weakness
should not give way to a situation of uncertainty, as if the seminarian were
not already living in a prospective way a determined state of life, committed
at least to witnessing to Christ with the life of formation and surrender of
his life in perfect continence for the Kingdom of Heaven.
5. Theological formation also plays a
fundamental role in formation of the affections. It must avoid getting lost
amid theological trends and remain faithful to what is laid out in Sapientia Christiana, namely, the study
of Sacred Scripture, the bi-millennial Tradition of the Church, and the
uninterrupted Magisterium as the indispensable core of the institutional cycle.
Avoiding theological relativism and proposing certain
doctrine contributes in a determinative way to configuring a stable priestly
personality and to a motivated affective formation.
A proper hermeneutic of the texts of the
Second Vatican Council—a reform within continuity, as indicated by Popes John
Paul II and Benedict XVI—is an indispensable factor in a peaceful and authentic
ecclesial growth. It is able to overcome and nip in the bud motives for
antagonism (all of which are worldly and political) between “progressives” and
“conservatives,” which have brought and continue to bring such contagion to the
body of the Church.
6.
The seminarian of today will be the priest of tomorrow! If it is true that from
the day of priestly ordination onward one learns to be and to live as a priest,
it is also true that, especially as regards affective formation, nothing can be
improvised. It is more prudent and morally required to wait a little longer to
request priestly ordination rather than move forward without having resolved
fundamental questions of one’s affectivity. In this area, as in the doctrinal
sphere, proven maturity is required and not merely the absence of impediments.
I entrust these reflections to the Blessed Virgin Mary, most tender Mother of
priests, in the sure hope that looking to her, sublime example of mature
affectivity and capable of authentic, deep and fruitful love in perfect
chastity, we can travel the splendid road of the priesthood that makes us, by a
special title, her sons.