72 / 84
Reception and Orientation | G-9
Case Study 3
Deacon M. was a South American seminarian who
delayed ordination to priesthood to be in the United
States with his father, who was experiencing difficul-
ties with his health. A vocation director identified him
as a possible candidate for a US diocese desperately in
need of Spanish-speaking priests. His two years of sem-
inary and diaconate internship in the United States
were “rocky,” as seminary formators indicated in their
reports. The rector, however, saw the difficulties as
a matter of cultural adjustment, which would come
in time.
As a deacon, a critical incident occurred when
he was called on to lead a wake service for an Irish-
American family. The talking and especially the laugh-
ter of those gathered at the wake upset him, and he
corrected the family by suggesting that they had lost
a sense of respect for the deceased. This unleashed a
flurry of letters and complaints to the diocesan bishop,
who marked up his “indiscretion” to an immaturity
that would resolve itself after ordination to the priest-
hood. As a priest, he manifested more harsh, author-
itarian, and insensitive behavior. For example, he
once had a heated discussion with a female lector, and
placed his hand on her shoulder as he spoke with her in
the sacristy. She reported that she had felt intimidated
and even threatened.
Two “formational fallacies” seem to be operative
in this case. The first is this: given time, adjustment
and cultural adaptation will happen automatically.
The second fallacy is that cultural differences account
for all difficulties; rather, sometimes basic deficits in
human formation are more decisively in play than a
lack of cultural adaptation.
Frequently Asked Questions
Q1. Who should be involved in establishing a
local process of reception and orientation?
A1. The situation will differ based on local resources
and settings. It is certainly advisable that the fol-
lowing be considered for roles in the planning and
implementation process: personnel directors; vic-
ars for clergy or religious; legal, immigration, and
canonical experts; experts in culturally sensitive
psychological assessment; seminary administration;
international ministers who already serve in the
locality; and local pastors or other leaders.
Q2. Do the recommendations in this chapter
constitute a “plan” for reception and orienta-
tion of international ministers?
A2. Given the diversity of circumstances and
resources among US dioceses, eparchies, institutes,
and societies, this chapter does not provide a plan
or template for universal application. Rather, it
outlines general principles and a variety of possible
approaches. In fact, it presumes local autonomy and
a high degree of local creativity and adaptation on
the part of receiving communities.
Q3. Why have so many international ministers
come to work in the United States?
A3. In the course of US Catholic Church history,
large numbers of international clergy and religious
have come to serve in the United States, excepting a
brief period following WWII during which time the
United States produced a large enough population of
US-born priests to serve the needs of the Church in
the United States. International priests are a normal
part of the US Catholic experience. What is new for
this generation of international priests is the large
number whose home countries of origin are found on
the continents of South America, Africa, and Asia.
Q4. Must all arriving international ministers be
offered a program?
A4. At present, about one third of arriving ministers
have the opportunity to attend a formal orientation.
Many do experience local ad hoc orientation. While
there is no formal requirement that such programs be
offered, this document strongly advises that a com-
prehensive and mutual approach to providing a wel-
come and orientation will improve the experience of
the arriving minister and the receiving community.
The improved quality of the encounter will certainly
enhance the effectiveness of the Church’s mission in
the United States.
Q5.Should an international minister be respon-
sible for adapting to life in the United States?
A5. Yes, but not in a one-sided way. The nature of
the Church demands that all relationships be rec-
ognized as mutual. Of course, the arriving minister
(like any good pastoral minister) should have an
understanding of the people he or she serves. But,