Through Archbishop Jorge Carlos Patrón Wong, Rome has revealed a minimal number of seminarians that a seminary needs to be “a veritable training community”, La Croix reports. The most recent Ratio Fundamentalis Institutionis Sacerdotalis, the document outlining the guidelines for the formation of future priests, did urge that seminaries need to be of sufficient size to function as a community in which priestly formations could flourish and develop, it refrained from mentioning an actual number. Last Monday, in a meeting with the bishops of France, Archbishop Patrón Wong, the secretary for seminaries of the of the Congregation for Clergy, reiterated this guideline, but left it to Bishop Jérôme Beau, auxiliary bishop of Paris, to state a minimum number of 17 to 20.
While Bishop Beau conceivably arrived at this number from a French perspective (in that country, only fifteen of the thirty-two seminaries reach the minimum of seventeen seminarians), it could have repercussions for other countries as well.
The Vatican guidelines make no demands about numbers, merely inviting bishops’ conferences to “consider” a minumum number for seminaries to remain open, and Archbishop Patrón Wong seemingly expressed his personal opinion that seminaries who do not manage to reach that number should be closed or merged.
Should the Congregation for Clergy move from an urging to a demand, what would the consequences for the Dutch dioceses and seminaries be? A question that is especially interesting considering the question that flares up every now and then of whether the Dutch seminaries shouldn’t merge anyway.
There are currently seven seminaries and other places for the training of future deacons and priests in the Netherlands: The Ariënsinstituut in Utrecht, St. Willibrord seminary in Heiloo (Diocese of Haarlem-Amsterdam), Vronesteyn in Voorburg, (Diocese of Rotterdam), Bovendonk in Hoeven (Diocese of Breda), St. John’s Centre (Diocese of ‘s-Hertogenbosch) and Rolduc (Diocese of Roermond), as well as two seminaries of the Neocatechumenal Way, in Cadier en Keer (Roermond) and Nieuwe Niedorp (Haarlem-Amsterdam). Most of these already cooperate closely, with teaching staff working at several seminaries and seminarians from various dioceses living and working in one place. Bovendonk caters especially to late vocations, offering a curriculum for students that is compatible with their day jobs.
Of these seminaries there is only one which would be able to continue independently, and that is Rolduc, and then only if we combine the numbers of the diocesan seminary with that of the Neocatechumenal Way seminary, which makes sense since they already share facilities. Together, they have some 40 seminarians from 17 different countries. Only four of these hail from the Diocese of Roermond itself, while others were invited from India and Sri Lanka by Bishop Frans Wiertz. The Neocatechumenal Way seminary in Nieuwe Niedorp has 16 seminarians, just below the minimum suggested. Rotterdam’s Vronesteyn seminary has 13 students, 8 of whom study at Bovendonk and three in Utrecht. Only five seminarians live at Vronesteyn. Utrecht’s Ariënstituut has 10 students, and Haarlem-Amsterdam’s St. Willibrord seminary has 8, with one young man in a year of orientation for a future entrance. The St. John’s Centre does not offer current numbers on their website.
Merging the existing seminaries into one or two larger ones is an idea that has been floated in the past, with some staff in favour and others opposed. Merging all seminaries into one would result in a community of at least 87 seminarians. More realistically, the Neocatechumenal Way would not be involved in a merger, thus creating a seminary of between 40 and 50 seminarians. Perhaps more likely, if a merger would ever happen in the foreseeable future, there will be two seminaries with student numbers somewhere in the 20s for both.
But this is theory. For it to become reality, something more than a directive from Rome is needed. A merger would present its share of logistical and ideological problems as well, the resolution of which could initially be more divisive than unifying.
Photo credit: [1] Eglise.catholique.fr