Update

[humbleheart]

[quote name='CruxOfTheMatterAgain' date='09 November 2009 - 04:54 PM' timestamp='1257782046' post='1998774']
Yes, but it doesnt work the other way around. All squares are rectangles, but not all rectangles are squares. A priest needs to be holy, but he also does need to be competent. In religious life, I've seen a sort of idealism replace any sort of pragmatism many places. And contemplatives, especially, can afford that, I guess. They dont really need people to competent on a practical level, as their sole goal is personal holiness.[/quote]

Leaving aside the misconceptions about religious life (pragmatism is an important quality in any monastery), it's important to realise that there is no such thing as 'personal holiness'. Whatever holiness a contemplative has is of benefit and blessing to the whole Church. Their skills may not have any impact beyond the walls of their monasteries, but their holiness will. I have an icon on my shrine that was written by a very gifted Carmelite sister. Comparatively few people will know of her icon-work, but countless people will have benefited from the prayers that go into that work, even if they don't even know of Sister's existence.

The same is true for every last one of us and especially true for priests, who are able to offer the sacrifice of the Mass, the most profound prayer that we have. It isn't your skills or your competencies that count when you stand before that altar. A priest needs to be able to forget himself for the sake of Christ and the good of others. If you can do that, the effects of your ministry will be felt in some surprising places - even if you're in a small country parish where only a handful of people know your name.

[quote]Parish priests, on the otherhand, you can't treat that way. You CANNOT just say, "As long as they're holy, that's all that matters" like you can moreso with a contemplative. If a parish priest is holy, but totally incompetent, or creepy, or dull, or awkward interpersonally, etc...then that definitely [i]does[/i] matter. Yet many current seminaries seem designed on the model of religious life, to ensure holiness (which is a good thing in itself). But if they dont correspondingly weed-out (or funnel into monasteries) those who lack the interpersonal skills and competence needed to live a secular vocation like the diocesan priesthood (or worse, positively scare such people away)...then is a half-baked system. Holiness need not be opposed to those other skills, and seminaries dont have to sacrifice the latter in favor of the former; there are ways to train priests in holiness without turning the seminaries into pseudo-monasteries.[/quote]

Crux, in my eyes your interpersonal skills leave a lot to be desired. Perhaps it's simply that I'm 'institutionalised' and unable to recognise the spirit of an independent American adult when I see one, but a lot of what you write comes across as arrogant, condescending, and - in your last post - slightly paranoid. Fortunately for you, seminaries don't use my standards as criteria when they're admitting their candidates. That's as it should be, because my standards are based on my own finite perceptions and preferences. It could be that you will make a very fine priest, and I just don't see it.

Equally, it could be that the men whom you are so ready to dismiss as 'neurotic' or to class as having 'defective psyches' are very fine priests in their own way. Our parish priest seems dull to me, and I rather dread being cornered by him at a parish function or having to call in at the presbytery for some reason. But it could be that other parishioners find what he likes to talk about extremely interesting. Once again, it's all a question of taste. And even though sparkling conversation and flowing repartee aren't really Father's strong points, he has brought qualities of his own to the parish. Presumably we must need these qualities more than we need a talented conversationalist, otherwise God would have sent us one.

That is the point that people here are trying to drive home: priesthood is a calling, and to be a calling there has to be someone making the call. In this case, it's Our Lord. He is the One who decides where you go and what you do. As the centurion described it: "I also am a man subject to authority, having soldiers under me;and I say to this one, 'Go,' and he goes, and to another, 'Come,' and hecomes, and to my servant, 'Do this,' and he does it." Every Christian life should be lived in perfect obedience to Christ, and a priest has a special responsibility to demonstrate that through his example to his parishioners. What kind of message are the people you encounter going to take away from their 'freelance priest'?

A priest should be rooted in his community, his responsibilities, and above all, his love for Jesus - and the idea that he could just take off for an assignment that looks better to him when he gets bored or feels as though he might like a change is very disturbing. It's even more disturbing to suggest that bishops ought to be grateful to get their hands on such priests during this time of shortage. That implies that you are the one making the contribution, doing everybody a favour - and you aren't. You have absolutely nothing of your own to offer, apart from what Christ gives you.

The main thing that puzzles me about your posts is your mention of how orthodox and traditional you are. But how is it orthodox to see the priesthood as a secular career and to make a catalogue of your own wants before you even set foot in the seminary? How orthodox is it to label people you don't know as defective and neurotic, or to accuse them of conspiring to keep information from you? Orthodoxy is about more than choosing plainchant over guitar at Mass. It is about how you live your life. And I would much rather be a parishioner at a church with modern music at its 'awful' liturgy, to use your adjective, than someone at a church with all the beauties of the Latin Mass - and a priest who openly acknowledged that he was 'freelance' and there only for as long as it suited him.

It is the custom on Holy Thursday for priests to kneel and wash people's feet. With that mentality, would you be able to kneel down in front of one of your parishioners and do that for them? Honestly? I doubt it, because unless you are prepared to put aside your own wants for their sake, you are secretly of the belief that you are more important than they are.

[quote]Once again, my point was practical, not ideological. Specific and concrete, not abstract and theoretical.

Namely, I wanted to know (and still want to know) if anyone knew of any seminaries that allow for greater independence and secular life, instead of being these sorts of pseudo-monastic institution. Does anyone know any places or groups that train men for the priesthood...that are theologically and liturgically conservative, but which live in the more open "modern" way more typically associated with liberal orders after Vatican II?? A seminary where I could live like the grown-up I am, rather than being institutionalized like a child at boarding school.
[/quote]

It [i]is[/i] abstract and theoretical, because no such seminary exists. In the words of Francis Gray, "You can come as you are and leave behind what you can, but you may not stay as you were or do as you will." That holds true for the Christian life in general, but it is especially pertinent to the seminary. Yet you are looking for a place where you will not be asked to do anything that doesn't sit well with you, where you can write off obedience as something that belongs only to the religious life, where you hope to get by on your skills alone - skills that God could take away from you at any moment. Orthodox or liberal, there are no seminaries like that.

[quote]But dont with-hold information about them from ME just because you ideological disagree with how they live or because they dont conform to YOUR ideas of what a seminary "should" be.
[/quote]

I think that sums up why I have difficulty imagining you as a priest. The ME is always in capitals.

As I said at the beginning, it is fortunate that my mind and perception are limited. I will pray for you and I hope that God makes you into an excellent priest if that is what He wants your life for.

[MithLuin]

Let me explain it this way. People who think 'a certain way' about the priesthood and seminaries are likely to know about and recommend seminaries that...fit that mold. There is no 'conspiracy' to it. This is a public forum, open to those discerning or in some other way interested in discernment. It is not a professional database of all things vocation related. It is seriously limited to the experiences of the posters. The idea is that if we all pool our experiences and resources, we'll be enriched.

It seems obvious that many suggestions will be less than helpful. Not what the poster wanted, or oftentimes, not even what the one doing the suggesting thought. In a recent thread, a discerner was looking for a community that would be open to considering an applicant with mild epilepsy. Some of the communities that were recommended promptly replied that they did not think it would be a good match. Is that the fault of the posters here, that they didn't know that? It was hardly meant maliciously, but yes, some of the suggestions were less than helpful.

If you have gotten some helpful suggestions by PM, great! Look into them.

But I will say that the way seminary generally works is that you apply to your diocese, and they decide where to send you for seminary. They are paying for it, after all. If you already have an undergrad degree in philosophy, you would probably go straight to major seminary. Having an idea of which seminary you'd like to attend may enter into the conversation, but most dioceses send *all* their seminarians to a handful of seminaries - maybe 2 or 3. So, if you intend to stay and serve in your area, you might not have many options in the long run. Your diocesan vocations director can clarify how this works if you want to know the details for a particular diocese.