Conference lgp30::christian-perspective

    Mike .1,
    
    	I'd be curious to hear more, but I don't want to open up a can
    of worms, which you seem to indicate would most likely happen.  I
    thank you for sharing what you did though.
    
    Peace,
    Richard

    Re: .1
    I too am curious as to what happened.
    
    Marc H.

    Mike
    
    I'd also like to hear your stories. 
    
    Bonnie

   Mike,

   I too would like to understand.  Please share your story.

   Peace,
   Allison

    re: .6
    
    Mike,
    
        It obviously does not demonstrate love in the classic definition.
    It does seem that, perhaps, that those in the seminary were trying to
    shape a self-dicipline that may have been 'required' (in their eyes)
    to be able to be obedient and enduring when on one's 'own' as a Priest
    one day.
    
        What you have described has also been described by people in
    training for many disciplines, particularly in Colleges, Universities,
    and the Military. I have heard of pounding treatment in Law Schools,
    Medical Schools (including grueling internships), and the Military.
    I've heard many people who have gotten professional degrees speak
    of the absence of any support from their professors, public abuse
    in front of their peers, and what seems like an actual program of
    toughness institutionalized to allow only the very determined (and
    perhaps sumbissive) through.
    
        I think the methodology is more culturally or educationally
    dictated rather than as a particular religious hypocracy. If you
    think about it, many business groups have the same extra-tough
    work demands that seem to call for every last ounce of blood to
    survive.
    
        I don't necessarily think this is loving in the sense of giving
    support and dignity to the student. On the other hand, a certain 
    amount of discipline and toughness has to be expected from education
    in order that the student truely masters all of their studies. When
    the pendulum swings in the opposite direction of liberal permissiveness
    the education system starts graduating illiterates in their field.
    The activites of being rigourous enough to impart the right amount
    of discipline to get a student educated IS an act of love because it
    does not accomodate a spotty performance which would then bring
    failure to the person in their field as an under-educated and therefore
    failing graduate.
    
        I have personal experience in the abuse and failures that come with
    this methodology and with the doubts that this brought to my
    self-esteem. As much as I wish there had been support for me during 
    my college days (the worst days of my life), I also wish that parents,
    grade and highschool teachers, and most of all myself, had been more
    disciplined and tougher so that I would have been a more disciplined
    student and therefore better able to endure college.
    
        My parents, who grew up with tough classes all their lives and 
    tough and demanding teachers did not seem to have these problems
    in college although the professors were just as demanding and 'cold',
    if not moreso.
    
        In my perspective in trying to heal from my own bad experiences,
    I consider that it is not so much that higher education became 
    'crueler', but that grade and high school became so soft in our
    generation and parents became so undemanding that our generation was
    uniquely unprepared to meet the demands of higher education that had
    not been 'watered down'.
    
        Thank you for sharing. Please don't take this as an invalidation
    of your perspective, but another viewpoint from someone who has 
    also unsuccessfully faced the hammering of higher education at one
    time.
    
    Peace,
    
    Mary
    

    Re: .6
    
    The experience you talked about seems somewhat the same as "boot camp".
    In that the concept is to strip away the individual "self" and then
    build you in the form the service wants.
    
    Am I close or way off base?
    
    Not trying to fault either the service or RC's here...just understand
    
    Marc H.

    I went to re-read .1 and found it gone.  Although I (obviously) cannot
    speak for Mike, I can shed some light on my own journey.
    
    I have always wanted to do full-time ministry in a traditional role,
    either as pastor or teacher (preferably chaplain and teacher in a
    college).  I used to say this all the time to family and friends when
    finally, one of them turned to me and said "Why don't you?  What are
    you waiting for?"  So I took the plunge.  In 1988, I applied to one
    seminary (where I knew the Lord wanted me).  In May of that year, I
    received my acceptance letter and left Digital to pursue my Master's of
    Divinity (M.Div.).  In June of 1991, I found myself sitting in
    graduation, be awarded my degree, and a changed person from the one who
    had entered three years earlier.  And the change was for the better.
    
    What had happened is a long story, but let me touch on some of the
    highlights.  
    
    * I learned how to read the Bible.  I learned different theories about
      analysis of the writings and I have applied many of them to my
      studies.  I never got to the point that others in my classes had
      reached where they dismissed the scriptures as fiction, mythology, or
      hearsay.  But I did begin to shake off some of the mystical dust that
      had gathered over my eyes and look at the way God had used people
      throughout history to tell this wonderful story of the relationship
      between Creator and Created.  I have come to the conclusion that
      Scripture is like art: the viewer responds as a spiritual, emotional
      and intuitive being on one level, but can also seek to understand the
      technical and historical and social level to better inform the overall
      response.   
                 
    * I learned to dialogue with people who had different beliefs than I
      did.  Not argue, not try to persuade.  I learned to talk.  More
      importantly, I learned to listen.  This did not mean I had to comprise
      or deny my own faith.  Rather, I learned to ask different questions of
      God and seek answers in order to continue the dialogue.  That's not to
      say it was easy.  There were many who were quick to judge just who I am
      and what I believe based on their experiences with others who called
      themselves born again or spirit-filled or Evangelical.  If I expected
      them to listen to me, I needed to listen to them.  Many times, in my
      listening, I became an object lesson - a kind of witness - to them, for
      they had now try to match my tolerance in order to prove their point
      (which was usually that Christians were too judgemental).               
    
    * I experienced a new dimension to Christ's message and our ministry as
      followers of Christ in the world - that of social action and just
      peace.  I read a lot of feminist and liberation theologies.  I read a
      lot that I did not agree with, but I heard voices that had been
      silenced for years and years within the institutional church - voices
      that had a right to cry out and be heard and be counted.  I understood
      who "the least of these" are, and I understood my calling and my role
      in bringing the marginalized into the Kingdom of God.
    
    Was it easy?  No.  I've asked a lot of hard questions and walked
    through a lot of dark places in this journey.  I have wondered about
    God and questioned the very root of my faith.  But I believe these
    questions are a part of our journey and make us stronger and able to
    live out that faith in this broken world.  There were/are times when I
    feel I don't belong in either camp.  My Christian friends wonder about
    the strength of my faith when I dare question or not accept a teaching
    on face value.  My academic friends think I will grow out of this
    spiritual thing and mature into a knowing theologian.
    
    But my God and I know I am in exactly the right spot for where I should
    be now.  Disillusioned?  Nah.  Re-illusioned?  Probably.  
    
    And now, I've overstayed my welcome in this note...  ;-)
    
    
    
    Sue
    
    
     

    Entries that I placed in .1, .6, and .9 are all gone.  After reflecting
    back on what I had written, I felt that I had over-stepped the bounds
    of what this conference is about.  It occurred to me that most of the
    people who note here are not interested in dealing with stories of this
    sort.  After all, they were not stories of hope, redemption, faith, or
    salvation.  And I can understand that.  Really.

    Further, I felt that I had taken a bit of a chance by relating matters
    of such a personal nature, and given the apparent lack of interest, I
    felt uncomfortable with leaving these entries extant.  So they are
    gone.  But I appreciate the opportunity I was given to place them
    before you.

    By the way, I am occasionally accused of using excessive sarcasm,
    especially in other notes conferences; accusations that are sometimes
    justified.  However, I hope that anyone who might read these few words
    of mine do not filter them through my reputation for such.  I am not
    trying to be sarcastic, nor am I accusing anyone of anything.  Mostly,
    I am just relating how I feel and acknowledging the status quo as I
    understand it. 

    Mike                                     

>    Entries that I placed in .1, .6, and .9 are all gone.  After reflecting
>    back on what I had written, I felt that I had over-stepped the bounds
>    of what this conference is about.  It occurred to me that most of the
>    people who note here are not interested in dealing with stories of this
>    sort.  After all, they were not stories of hope, redemption, faith, or
>    salvation.  And I can understand that.  Really.

	I do not recognize this conference in these words. Truly I don't. 
	Though I was quiet, I was most interested in what you had to say.

			Alfred

    >     -< confused - did where things said outside the conference? >-
    
    No.  My thoughts were based on my perceptions.  Of course I am as
    capable of mis-perceiving things as anyone else.  Maybe more so, as
    regards a conference devoted to discussing things religious.
    
    Mike

    RE: .11 And Mike S.
    
    I too don't see this conference in that light, Mike. I hear a lot
    of people, like myself, trying to make sense out of what happens in
    our life. The conference has been helpful to me so far. 
    
    You should continue.
    
    Marc H.

    Mike
    
    I'm also sorry you deleted your notes.
    
    Bonnie

    Mike,
    
    Your notes affect people in ways you will never know just as a
    preacher's sermon does likewise.  Sharing experiences helps others who
    may have thought they were alone - some may now know they were not!
    
    	Shalom,
    
    	Ron
    

    Sue,
    
    Thanks so much for sharing your journey with us.  I really enjoy
    hearing about the seminary from a woman's perspective.  I hope you'll
    continue to share as you progress along your path.
    
    Mike,
    
    I read your notes with interest and they confirmed what some close
    friends who had been seminarians had experienced.  Your notes helped
    present a balance to the views expressed here.  I'm sorry you felt you
    had to delete them, but am glad I got to read them before you did so.
    
    Best to you,
    
    Ro
    

    Sue,
    
    Another thanks for sharing your experiences and learnings here.
    I would very much enjoy hearing more when you have the time.
    
    Mike,
    
    I too was very interested in the experiences you entered about seminary.
    I admire you a great deal for sharing them openly and honestly, in
    spite of the trepidations you felt.  I hope that you will feel comfortable 
    in the future to share whatever you wish about them.  Your experiences 
    are *very* appropriate for this forum.  In the meantime, I wish you the
    *very* best in suffering (bearing) this experience in your heart and
    soul.
    
    Thanks again and peace,
    
    Karen
    Co-mod, Christian-Perspective
         

Mike,

	If you have a copy of your deleted notes, I'd like to see them
reposted.  I understand your intentions were honorable in deleting them.
At the same time, I found your entries to be enlightening.  I didn't
get the impression you were airing dirty laundry.  And I would like to
think that we're all mature enough here that we need not feel compelled
to keep any unpleasant aspects hidden from view.

Peace,
Richard

Sue, Note 470.9

>    My Christian friends wonder about
>    the strength of my faith when I dare question or not accept a teaching
>    on face value.  My academic friends think I will grow out of this
>    spiritual thing and mature into a knowing theologian.

Oh, how I can relate to what you've said here!

>    And now, I've overstayed my welcome in this note...  ;-)

Not!! :-}

Peace,
Richard

   Mike,

   You have to be comfortable.  I am sorry to see those notes gone and
   I glad to have read them before they were deleted.  You were speaking
   about important things.  

   This conference is a hope for me in it's difference from others. I
   am not especially of one belief nor am I embarrassed to talk about
   the sometimes ugly side of religious experience.  I am interested
   is the spirit and sprituality from a perspective of Christianity 
   as a reference. I also feel that often the _I_ could easly be _we_.
   This is one place where a belief can be challenged, I have learned
   much from that challenge.

   Peace,
   Allison

   Co-mod Christian-Perspective

================================================================================
Note 470.1               Disenchanted Seminary Students                   1 of 6
SOLVIT::MSMITH "So, what does it all mean?"          11 lines  15-JUN-1992 15:43
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    As a former minor seminary student, let me say that my experiences were
    such that I turned away from the Church and the Christian faith
    completely.  However, whenever I have tried to tell people about it,
    especially in a conference devoted to Christianity, I am usually met
    with either silence or comments to the effect that I should grow up, or
    something.    

    So, it is my conclusion that Christians, especially Catholics, don't
    really want to know about the down side of the seminary experience. 

    Mike

================================================================================
Note 470.6               Disenchanted Seminary Students                   6 of 6
SOLVIT::MSMITH "So, what does it all mean?"          41 lines  16-JUN-1992 10:36
                       -< Well, you folks asked for it. >-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Thank you for your interest, all of you.  I don't really want to go
    into extensive detail, especially in this public forum, as some of the
    events that have shaped my thoughts are highly personal, and just a bit
    uncomfortable.

    However, let me say that the seminary experience was one of benign
    neglect on the part of the faculty (which consisted mostly of priests),
    at best, and active, hateful, and public emotional and physical abuse,
    at worst.  And not one of the faculty gave a particular damn if a
    priest went overboard in his efforts to instill the love of Christ and
    a sense of duty toward the Church. 

    One sees this attitude of hypocrisy toward incidents of wrongdoing by
    their own throughout the Church hierarchy.  Some recent glaring
    examples have been in the press lately; the case of the ex-bishop of
    Galway, and alleged incidents of the Church covering up incidents of
    sexual abuse are just two.   In fact, such attitudes are endemic to the 
    Church.

    The program seemed to be specifically designed to strip away any sense
    of self, and then when they succeeded too well, when they had someone
    who was quaking in their boots at their very approach and unable to
    function lest a mistake be made and be the object of their wrath, they
    threw you away.  Faced with this scenario, the candidate priest had to
    find some way to save himself, either through rationalization or
    through passive rebellion.  Those who were best able to rationalize
    this program went on to ordination.  Those who were not, were tossed to
    the wayside, accompanied by appropriate gestures of scorn for OUR
    failure.  A sense of failure that pretty much gets internalized by the
    rejected candidate.  After all, these were the representatives of
    Christ who said we failed, and who could doubt them. 

    Anyway, the program is an impossible one to escape unscathed, in my
    opinion.  The alternative to discovering some sort of coping mechanism
    was the death of one's ego.  Which, interestingly enough, is the stated
    purpose of the Church.  But yet, if they really succeeded, the Church
    would no longer be able to exist, because there would be no one fit to
    run it.

    Mike

    I guess a brick wall does have to fall on me after all!  It seems my
    concerns were not well founded, so I have decided to place my entries
    back in the string.
    
    They are back in their original locations (.1 and .6) except for my
    last one, which is entered below.  This last is in reference to replies
    .7 and .8.
    
    Thank you for your encouragement, it was unexpected and therefore
    especially nice.
    
    Mike 

================================================================================
Note 470.9               Disenchanted Seminary Students                   9 of 9
SOLVIT::MSMITH "So, what does it all mean?"          22 lines  16-JUN-1992 14:08
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    re: .7/.8
    
    Perhaps that was the method to their madness.  Trying to provide a
    rigorous enviroment, and all that.  Trying for a rigorous environment
    to toughen students is fine, and worthwhile.  But that doesn't excuse
    public humiliation or public beatings for ridiculously nitpicky
    infractions.  
    
    Don't forget, this stuff was done by priests. We had been taught by our
    parents and the good nuns in parochial school from day one that these
    men are not to be questioned, that they are Christ's direct
    representatives here on earth.  Small wonder that when one of these
    pea-brains lifts his hand to stike you in front of the class, and then
    says aloud "you aren't worth hitting", one takes this to heart a lot
    more than if it were said by some mere adult.  And this was one of the
    more mild occurances.           
    
    Further, I question the advisability of such a program directed at 13
    and 14 year old kids (remember this was a minor seminary), as it seems
    a bit excessive.  It seems the Church finally did too, as it has pretty
    much gotten out of the minor seminary business.
    
    Mike
                         

    Sue -
    
    I'm a wee bit confused!  You went to seminary in 1988 -- what's
    happened since then?  You're still at DEC, obviously, and nothing
    in your note led me to believe that the seminary experience changed
    your interest in full-time ministry.  Sounds to me like you learned
    "all the right things!"  :}
    
    Nancy

    Mike,
    
    I am so sorry you had to go through that humiliation and
    abuse.  I am glad you shared that here.  Thank you for
    reposting your note.
    
    I recall those days when most of the 13-14 yr old boys left
    for the seminary.  My cousin was one of them.  Something like
    20 out of his class of 35 boys.  Don't think any of them stayed
    for very long.  The last one left after 7 yrs.... just before
    graduation.
    
    sigh.... memories are coming back.
    
    Dolores

    Mike,
    
    It's interesting hearing this dialogue. I went into the seminary right
    out of grade school and have mostly fond memories of the times that I
    spent at the school in Illinois. Granted it was tough to be away from
    home and basically on my own at a young age but the friendships that I
    formulated during that time have lasted for almost 25 years (we will be
    having our 25th reunion next year).
    
    The priests were strict and the rules were strongly enforced but the
    education that I got were worth it. We had almost no free time;
    everything was planned around classes and study time. Anyy free time
    was either spent on the atheletic field or doing what was known as 
    "Manual Labor".
    
    Some of the memories of getting in trouble for sneaking out after
    lights out come back. We got in trouble not for playing pranks but for
    studying when we were supposed to be sleeping. The rule was that once
    lights were out, there was no talking. It was almost like boot camp as
    I remember it.
    
    This was all taking place during the time of Vatican II and there were
    a great many changes going on in the Church at that time. Going from
    the Latin Mass to the Mass of the Vernacular were interesting but the
    priests that I remember were for the most part for the changes. 
    
    Now that my life is so complicated, I sometime long for these times
    when prayer and meditation were a normal part of my life.
    
    A small statistic: We started with 88 young men in my freshman year of
    high school and only 2 made it all the way to the priesthood.
    
    Dave

    re: .22
    
    Nancy,
    
    You think you're confused!  :-)
    
    My plans while in seminary were to continue for a Ph.D.  I decided to
    take a year "off" after graduation while I made applications to various
    programs and figure out just how I would like to frame my studies.  I
    had worked summers and part-time in my last year as a temporary
    secretary at Digital, and it seemed the best way to fill out the year. 
    The day of graduation I got a call from the agency that there was an
    assignment beginning on Monday.  I took it.
    
    My applications and all the supporting documentation was in by the end
    of the year and I had to wait until March for replies.  Out of the four
    schools I applied to - all four turned me down.  To say I was
    disappointed would be the understatement of all time.  It's taken a
    couple of months to re-group.  I've had wonderful conversations with
    others about my skills and gifts and feel God teaching me new things
    about myself and my calling as I fumble through this time.  In the
    meantime, I am still temping in the same assignment, applying to CPE
    programs for the fall and getting the process in place for ordination.
    
    Thanks for asking -
    
    Sue
    

    Thanks, Sue -- and best of luck!  
    
    Nancy

    Yes, the seminary experience was a very strict one in terms of filling
    up the hours in the day.  I actually enjoyed the heavily structured
    part of seminary life.  When one wasn't in chapel, one was in class or
    in study hall, or out on the playing fields.  There was little contact
    with the outside world, except once a month on visiting day for those
    whose families lived nearby.  And of course there were the
    Thanksgiving, Christmas, and Easter holidays and summer vacation when
    one was allowed to go home, although the shorter holiday breaks didn't
    do me and some of the other guys any good.  We just lived too far away
    from the school.

    The school was situated on several hundred acres of woodland and tomato
    fields in Central New Jersey, and was formerly a dairy farm until it
    was deeded over to the Salvatorian Fathers some time in the early
    1950's!  Point being, there was plenty of space to roam around in
    during the few off hours we had.  In fact, there was a pond that was
    suitable for fishing and swimming, if one didn't mind the water being
    more suitable for a swamp (local people euphemistically  referred to
    that muddy stuff as "cedar water").

    By the way, I concur that the drop-out rate from that school was quite 
    high.  I don't know how many who entered that class in 1960 went on to
    become ordained, but I'd imagine the number is extremely low, if not
    zero.  For instance, I knew guys who didn't even last the first week!
    Which is one of the reasons why the Church pretty much got out of the
    minor seminary business; it just wasn't very cost effective.

    As far as the scholastic part of the experience goes, I also have no
    complaint.  In fact, the strenuous academic program was probably the
    best thing that could have ever happened to me, although I always did
    lament the dearth of science courses.  In many ways, I wish I could
    have continued to be educated in a similar environment, but without the
    neglect and abuse, as it was a very intellectual atmosphere, and I
    learned a lot.  For instance, I'm one of the few people around that has
    credits toward my high school diploma from a course in Gregorian Chant!

    All in all, it could have been an extraordinary experience but for the 
    way some people were treated.

    Mike 
             

    For another view of the disenchanted seminary student, read "The Seven
    Story Mountain" by Thomas Merton.  Knowing how others have struggled
    through difficult times, impossible times, times filled with all kinds
    of doubt and winder about one's be able to get through things - well,
    a book like this is truly refreshing,
    
    	Shalom,
    
    	Ron