Surely Rome can do better

Didn't your Jesuit superiors also teach you that it's "ALWAYS EASIER TO OBTAIN FORGIVENESS THAN PERMISSION?" Why bother playing the game on THEIR terms? Don't you trust GOD?

The story about the bishop is easily the most disgusting thing I've read in months. And this is a man who believes he is, and is paid to be, following the teachings of Jesus Christ.
No need for Satan when you have bishops like this walking around. Evil incarnate.

Well - the process was even more onerous when I left in 1988 from my religious order. Then provincial felt that he had to write me a letter informing me that I was to proceed to a certain assignment; that I had refused; and thus, had broken my vow and thus removed from the order - my faculties were suspended. At that time, JPII was not approving any requests for laicizations and my canon law friends told me to not even apply. (your process appears to be much more "human" than the one I faced)

I did get married two years later (could not be in the catholic church). Eventually, my canon law friend said that he had successfully completed his first laicization request in years and so I did go through the embarrassing formal process in order to support my wife and children. This required basically admitting that I was not psychologically prepared (developed or whatever) when I made the decision for ordination. Once I signed that document and given that I was past 40, married, with children, it took less than 9 months to be laicized. The final letter from Rome with introduction in Italian and then main body of letter in latin ending with spanish was just ridiculous.
Where the theology is different from marriage annulments is that I am ontologically a priest forever but now in an inactive status with no faculties. The letter outlines what you can and can not do as a "lay" person called rescripts - e.g. restricted from being EM; unable to teach theology at college/secondary school level. And, of course, the local bishop where you reside is copied on this letter.

My classmate was a provincial who spoke at a worldwide meeting two years ago on the topic - the provincial is both a "brother" and a "superior".....he took the opposite approach from your cited Jesuit provincial and stated that in serious or even criminal situations the provincial must act as a "superior" and not a brother - fulfill church, canon law, and civil law requirements...he used sexual abuse as an example.

Your bishop quote is a perfect example of Sipe's Mental Reservations.

It seems to me the official Church should limit their intrusions into personal relationships to the relationships that are damaging to oneself or others (all others).

This is unworthy the NCR.

I don't wish to comment on whether or not celibacy should be mandatory for priests, but it is clear that those Jesuits attending this workshop held in the year 2000, did not understand at all what was at stake by their attitudes towards lay people, particularly vulnerable children. I wonder if they had their own children to hold in their arms, to wake up and care for when they are sick in the middle of the night, to laugh and dance and play and sing with, if they would be so callous and casual in their attitude towards testifying in court in support of abusive priests.

There's a "turnabout is fair play" aspect here given all that has been emerging from the institutional church at a deeper level in regards to sex abuse. I believe many Catholics and the general public would be interested in the sexual histories of priests, nuns and members of the church's hierarchy. That would shed even more light on what drives their decisions and policies.

Mr. Ewens' comment on laicization is most assuring. It assures me again that I was not alone thirty years ago when I submitted my application for a release from celibacy. I was a diocesan priest and so did not have to be released from Jesuit vows as he did. The whole process took about two and one half years, from January 1980 to 1983. When the released from the promise of celibacy finally arrived from the Vatican I married for the third time the same person and was more than happy to do it for the third time. I would jump at the chance to do it again. Where I suspect I differ with Mr. Ewens is on the "onerous questionnaire. " I did not find it onerous. I did not mind in the least listing my repeated violations of my promise to be celibate. In fact I was somewhat relieved and pleased that finally, after thirty years, someone somewhere in the bowels of the clerical mansion wanted to know outside the confessional about my sex life. No one in the priesthood ever asked me what I thought of celibacy and sex and how I lived with it. Now I had a least a cardinal, and archbishop or two, and maybe (maybe!) even a pope who wanted to know. I was glad to tell them. I did not view my sex life as a private as opposed to communal matter. I had, after all, taken a public promise to the church to remain celibate and I thought that at least the leaders of that community to whom I made my promise had a right to know whether and how I lived with it. Though I think that many ex-priests feel as Mr. Ewens does and refuse to seek release from the promise (I sympathize with them), I do not.
I am trying now to write a memoir which will tell, among other things, how I failed the priesthood and the church in my struggle with celibacy. I do wish that more priests and former priests would tell of their own struggles. The church as a community would be far better for that set of truths to be public. Thank you, Mr. Ewens!

James, what is it with the Church desiring to know about anyone's sexual activity, and for the last 45 years no less?!!!!!

I am laughing at the entire idea of someone sitting down to offer to "religious" people details that are none of their damn business. Have these "religious" people nothing better to do with their time and talent?.... and that is assuming they have any talent, other than inquiring about one's sexual activity..... really... In my view, it is a total waste of time and talent to fill out any forms, including annulment forms.

I too am in a situation in which my marriage of 18 years is not "regularized." Perhaps the Church feels we need spiritual Metamucil to regularize the marriage... And really, what might a celibate priesthood really know about marriage or sex? Perhaps their snoopy questions about sex have to do with the fact that the questions are asked by those who are sexually immature, and quite possibly, perverted in their thoughts about sex. It is really sad that the Church is still so backward and having difficulty moving on and maturing with grace.

You might find the following blog very interesting to read, in case you have not yet:

http://enlightenedcatholicism-colkoch.blogspot.com/

Wishing you and your wife all the very Best!

Multiply this (procedure to obtain the anti-biblical 'laicization') by
25,000 plus for the USA alone, & by over 110,000 internationally! We 'inactive priests' have never left the 'lay' state (cf 1 Peter 2:10);
being 'lay' is not a negative thing (i.e. non-clerical), but emphatically positive - "once, before Baptism, you were Not-my-people; now, after Baptism, you are the holy people of God."

James Ewen's commentary is another example of an unhealthy institution trying to lead a people. The human race is trying find God, themselves and some meaning in their lives. They turn to institutions who promise to have the answers. The church, as an institution, tries to control, not instruct. And, then the insecurity of its leaders becomes apparent. No marriage of priests, no women deacons or priests, no lesbians, etc. They have forgotten that Jesus is the founder of the Church and they need to imitate Him. They have forgotten that the Holy Spirit is the Power and the Wisdom and the Creator of harmony over chaos. In the Holy Spirit is the FREEDOM and in Her, we find who we are and who we are to follow. And, we do not follow the secular aspects of the institutional church.
I suffered because of childhood trauma and divorce after 20 years. It has taken many years for me to find the healing I needed so that I can serve Jesus in His Church, the people and not the institution.
Why have the canonized saints almost always been persecuted by the instituional church, whether superiors, bishops or Roman curia? God bless you, James

Not that we didn't know that bishops suffer memory loss of astounding proportion when in deposition or in court, but it is illuminating to hear what some Jesuits consider humorous. I call the bishop's conduct practiced deceit or lying.

This resonates with the humor of Cardinal Francis George at a seminary reunion dinner, recounted in NCR by John Carrigan in 2007:

"In September I returned to St. Mary of the Lake Seminary, Mundelein, Ill. for the 50th anniversary celebration of the ordination of my class. It was an impressive occasion with Cardinal Francis George of Chicago as celebrant assisted by New York Cardinal Edward Egan and Archbishop James Kelleher of Kansas City, Kan. Both Egan and Kelleher were members of that class. Cardinal George, partly reminiscing on his own meteoric rise through the clergy to his present position, commented that the phone calls he’d received telling him of the pope’s wish to appoint him to the sees he had occupied spoke of the simplicity of the process. Then the cardinal made an unexpected comment. He said that should anyone in the congregation receive such a call, he was certain it would be equally uncomplicated “unless they had a couple of kids stashed away in the attic.” I leaned over to a friend next to me and whispered, “Not funny, your excellency.”

... the hierarchy seems incapable of seeing this or any other ecclesial issue as being about anything or anybody but them. It’s all about them, not the flock, not the Spirit, not the children, it’s all about them. Who was it who said, “I came, not to be served but to serve?”

Clerical narcissism in its highest (or lowest) form. I knew a priest who left who was utterly disgusted with the laicization process and its focus on his dishonesty in seeking ordination. It asked him to admit to things he never believed in order to protect the institution from any hint of deficiency.

Thank you, John Ewen, for generously sharing your story. My some deferential lay eyes be opened.

I would think that calling celibacy a "gift" is ... advertising. It's a choice, entered into willingly not just by Catholic priests, but religious leaders and lay people of many faiths and practices. Why the extra steps for release from celibacy after all the other steps to be laicized?

Is this just another sign that the hierarchy is scared of sex?

A 5 page questionnaire looking into his sex life over 45 years? Really? (Say it like Seth and Amy on SNL!) Sounds like someone is looking for private reading material for a quiet evening home alone.

Finally, "The theory is that evidence will be found indicating I was not truly free and mature to choose celibacy in the first place." Doesn't this rather indicate that the process to accept him as a priest is at fault and not thorough enough to catch his lack of freedom and maturity? Again, like Seth and Amy: Really?!?

"...misuse of confidentiality and power in the insular clerical culture"

This truly resonates. At every turning, something is "confidential" or "a
personnel matter" or "cannot be discussed."

This is what happens when one asks for something like an (even dead) abuser's assignment history or where they matriculated, in support of abuse survivors.

The very same information that is touted in jubilee announcements and obituatries suddenly is suddently "confidential" if it is to put to use
in seeking understanding, healing, or restorative justice on other than
the Church's terms.

SNAP has had little to no cooperation in geting assignement records for a Midwest Christian Brothers against whom at least one settlement has been reached and against which going on 20 lawsuits are pending. However, if they err at all in piecing together the information they are denied, they get jumped on.

I recently asked the Diocese of Oakland where an abusive priest who has been dead nearly 25 years went to high school. That was "a confidential personnel matter!" This from a diocese that has titled its survivor outreach program "No More Secrets!"

And these institutions wonder why survivors do not trust them, or are confrontational? Could it be their own passive-aggressive behavior
towards those they have previously wronged?

A bunch of old men playing child games.... reminds me of "mother may I"... Get serious if you want the laity to take you serious...

I have known a number of priests who have "left the priesthood" through various mechanisms. None of them without frustration, bureaucracy and pain.

My cousin, many, many years ago when it was impossible to obtain "official laicization," was one of those who went South and vehemently preached against the Church. He returned home after about 40 years, got things "fixed up" and now is very active, and even parish council chairperson, in his parish.

Another friend, with whom I was with in the seminary, met a nun at my place and then one of her sisters. So he married this nun. Eventually (after years) things got "fixed up" with the Church. He ended up getting a very good diocesan level job in another diocese. He told the bishop there that he was an "ex priest." All the bishop asked him was if he had "all the paper work." When my friend said "Yes," the bishop said. We never need to speak of this again. They became good personal friends.

My best friend from the seminary, was ordained and active for about 15 years and then decided he must leave active ministry. I was one of the people who officially wrote a letter supporting his request. It was and is the hardest letter I have ever written. He is now married and teaching theology at a Catholic college.

Finally, a high school classmate and I entered the same seminary the same year. After one year he was dismissed from the seminary. He was driven to become a priest so paid the full costs of college and philosophy at another seminary, found a bishop and was ordained. For a number of years he moved from diocese to diocese in Canada and the U.S. I thought he might be an alcoholic. Well, he's now in prison for a very long time for child sexual abuse.

Although things turned out well for some of these men, it seems to me that the institutional Church could find a more pastoral and compassionate way to deal with these kinds of situations, other than to "defend celibacy."

BTW, I left the seminary just before ordination to the sub-deaconate.

As this article begins in 2000, it also seems to end there. "Been there, done that." Who doesn't know a priest who simply left and married? Jesus reads the heart. I trust most of us have moved on from such "power trips" by the Vatican.

I really appreciate this article.
Hearing from ex-priests (for me especially ex jesuits) is most important to validating the truth about the systemic insanity of the roman catholic church and the clergy/religious orders that work within that system.

About 20 years ago i read the extreme jesuit oath.
I realized then that on both covert and overt levels i was a target of jesuit retailiation and this came not only from individual priests but the system that rules the jesuits and the system that rules the catholic church.

Some in the church and outside may be trying to move on from the priest abuse crisis to business as usual.. this is not ok.. as the rape of children is only a small part of what is wrong with the roman catholic church.
Thank you
tina

Thank-you, thank-you, thank-you Mr. Ewens, for candidly revealing the truth about more "law"-obsessed, gravely dysfunctional, Vatican/canon law dynamics.

I am so grateful to see one more honest example, elucidating Catholic "laws" that are just plain antiquated.

"Antiquated" doesn't seem to be such a bad word; however, when it comes to people's lives, people's welfare, and people's rights; do we want to be a Church that NEGLECTS PEOPLE, because its "laws" are behind the times--most especially in the sensitive, and in fact HOLY area of healthy human sexuality?

And even more stunning, can we see that the above-mentioned "sexual questionaires" are so invasive, they are, BY TODAY'S STANDARDS, JUST PLAIN WEIRD?

I consider myself permanently dedicated to my Catholic faith. Luckily I intend to be a very curious, probing, and vocal Catholic the rest of my life.

As I told my precious kids: God wants us to be as spiritual and holy as possible, and he doesn't put any cap on our being as intelligent as possible.

This article brings up another point connected to the culture of silence, and
that is, a culture of lying with an apparent clear conscience when it is "for the good of the Church".

I'm 80 yr old now, and it has been awhile since I've been around our grade
schools, but I imagine that we still teach our children not to lie. But Catholic culture is full of lies. Our Catholic Diocesan newspapers do not
directly lie, they just omit some of the pertinant details necessary to tell the whole story. Or they do not print the story at all.

And the Vatican sees no necessity in responding to letters they don't like, or
even acknowledging the reciept of such letters. And these are letters from
Bishops in good standing.

Whatever happened to "the truth will set you free"?

No one forced Mr. Ewen to become a jesuit, priest, or to remain a Catholic. The process of being laicized and being dispensed from his vow of celibacy are not some mysterious processes; the Code of Canon Law (both 1917 AND 1983) clearly defined the procedures; any commentaries on the Code would also provide simple explanations; why is Mr. Ewen not aware of this? What is so shocking about the process? He is not only a Catholic, but was a trained Jesuit and a priest, yet he was that uneducated about the basic law of the Church? Shouldn't he have known about this? And now he wants to complain about it? Of course Rome can always do better; but so can Mr. Ewen--at the very least understand what he is doing before doing it: like signing his life way. I hope he understands his marriage vows and commitment in a more diligent fashion. If being a Catholic is such a cumbersome experience, perhaps he can leave the Church the way he left the Jesuits...and not let the door hit him in the behind on his way out.

The word voyeur comes to mind. They are asking for his personal sexual history??
I'm surprised they're not asking about his personal bathroom habits.

The "additional hurdle" Ewen discusses is not any different from the "additional hurdle" that those going through annulment face; indeed, the time frame of two years sounds about right for annulments, which is why so many couples give up and marry outside the church.

What Rome is fixated on is sex, plain and simple. They don't understand it, fear it, and think it's the root of all evil, most likely because for men wishing to marry women, it involves women. And we all know what Rome thinks of women - they don't understand them, fear them, and think THEY are the root of all evil.

For all the talk about the dignity and importance of the married couple, Ewen runs smack dab into the face of the reality- just so much lip service.

The basic flaw is the hierarchy's concept of human sexuality based on fourth
century anthropology tempered by Manichean and Jansenist ideas. In essence the institution has been in a pubescent sexual panic for a millennium and a half.
Unless we develop a coherent theology of human sexuality based on scripture and the lived experience of married persons, nothing else will make a lasting difference

How will "I'm sorry, my Lord, I did not remember" go over at the Last Judgment? The salt has indeed lost its savor.

Thank you James for sharing this with many world-wide. As a woman working in a educational ministry within the church 'down-under' I felt compassion for you and the many others who would share your story and furious with those who are so blinkered, so lacking in perspective and so out of touch with the loving heart of our God.

Interesting story as well as interesting comments !! Not surprised though, as I have heard worse while working at our parish. When I read Mr. Ewens' comment that he went through a similar process as those couples seeking an annulment from their marriage, I was wondering if Mr. Ewens had to pay the same fee as couples seeking an annulment from their marriage. Just curious????

It is not stated whether the marriage was witnessed and sanctified by a catholic priest. If not is the marriage held invalid as per Church teaching? Always the expert theologians when they leave priesthood find all theology wrong.

One thing is there that inordinate delay should be avoided. Another thing we lay people understand is that the priests who left priesthood and married want that celibacy should not be compulsory Does it not mean that they had been nurturing that desire for long Is this not a double face life ?

YOUR STORY told in anecdotes is a rare insight in the clerical culture that most Catholics have never seen for themselves. Most Catholics are taught from childhood to believe priests are are truly imitators of Jesus. The epiphany moment in my spiritual experience was when I realized that the priest culture in the church (with exceptions) places itself above all others in the church. That was not the epiphany that I had expected to have as a Catholic. I was an insider, too, and saw for myself. Who will believe me or you?

This tight-knit cult of priests who can make jokes like you cite, who can ignore priest abusers, who can ignore violations of the confessional, who can live the good life of personal pleasures and conveniences (never worry about health care, food, lodging, jobs and still pocket thousands of dollars in stole fees).

Today's clericalism makes the church only about priests...not about the Gospel, not about the laity, deacons or nuns.

Catholics need to wake up and demand real reforms.

In his dealings with the Vatican, Father Ewens discovered an essential quality active in many large bureaucracies, secular or religious.

They lie, obfuscate and cover-up.

They care more about surviving, holding on to power and obstructing any attempts at public accountability and transparency.

In my work as a journalist, I have been lied to by folks on the left, the right, priests, nuns, rabbis, ministers and assorted other folks.

I recall former NY Daily News Reporter & Editor Lars Erik-Nelson's admonition when I read about people like Father Ewens: "The enemy is not conservatism or liberalism. The enemy is bulls***t."

Gene Roman
Freelance Reporter
NY, NY

Tonight on the 26th day of May a Friend and myself did have a discussion about both our longing to serve the Lord and the Church . For both the answer was we were to old . My friend was in his late fifties . With a Phd theology in his pocket . I was 53 when I presented myself to the Church(Oblates of Mary Immaculate) . And this has carried on up to the pressent day . Wherever I presented myself . I was given the very same story . Has the Church the luxery in the face of shortage of priests and besides that the sexual scandals which is Haunting the Church today . In Germany many people are leaving the Church and go and find it somewhere else . The samething is happening in The Netherlands . And with all our own problems some ten to fifteen years ago we also have seen here in Canada and in the US an outmarch of people , That is the growth of some of the evangelical churches .In the Catholic Chuch there was no vision in regard to the matter in the face of shortage . It kept on hidding sexual abusers . And as church we kept on refusing potential candidates . Who had done there studies and who were older than the church usually did accept . In this regard policy does need to change otherwise the Church is on its way to bankrubty . Right now we have to close churches by a good number the question is can we keep on going this way . John . Flipsen

Jim Ewens was one year ahead of me during philosophy studies at St. Louis U., way back in the early 1960s. I well remember his warm smile from almost 50 years ago.

When I told my superiors that I wanted to leave the Jesuit order, become laicized, and eventually get married, I remember having to write essay answers to about 25 questions, and the Japan SJ Provincial's office took care of gathering information about me from many other Jesuits who had known me in the past. Fortunately for me, I left in 1974, during the pontificate of Paul VI. I was also working in Japan, so my requests for laicization, dismissal from celibacy obligation, etc., were handled by the Congregation for the Missions, which was able to expedite matters. The approvals for me came within about six months.

I later heard that Pope John Paul II did not grant any permissions for laicization and dispensation from celibacy for the first several years of his long era.

Jack Thro

I ,too, have witnessed the way priests who are leaving the active ministry are treated. At times having a "human" bishop can make all the difference in the world. After making the very difficult decision to leave the ministry as a diocesan priest, I realized what an unusual bishop I had been working with. Although he could not bypass the obnoxious forms needed, he treated me as a friend who was making a hard decision. He insisted that I take a leave of absence so that he could pay me a pastor's salary for six months or until I found a job. It took me five months and for those five months I received my "paycheck". I left the diocese and was gone from it for a year. When I returned he had no problem with my being a Eucharistic Minister, working at the diocesan level with programs for the elderly, and my being the catechist in our parish for R.C.I.A. Would that all bishops loved their priests as much!!

Can't help but say I'm amazed at the number and perceptiveness of the responses to my brief article. I laughed a lot at some,felt the deep pain of many others. Yes, I too was told by my well-meaning provincial that he could order me to go to Omaha, I could refuse, and then I could be released from my vows....No, I was not expected to pay for process of receiving "permission to marry" -- my jesuit province would cover those costs. And word on the street about the 5 page questionnaire is that they only, really, care about answers to two questions: how old are you, how long ago did you leave? If that's true, they could save a lot of time/energy perusing my sexual history and just ask for those two answers. Finally, yes, my marriage was blessed by a classmate, another married priest, on my front lawn (with 7 jesuits in attendance). Rome could, indeed, do much better on behalf of their tens of thousands of former colleagues -- if they so chose.

Dear Jim,
I have thought of you often and want to congratulate you on your marriage. I will never forget the counseling and time you spent with my late husband,Jeff, and me as well. You have done tremendous things for others and I know we were blessed to have had your wisdom and prayers.

I married a priest who left in 1972. The injustice wasn't so much that he had to complete complicated forms and letters letters to Rome asking permission to be laicized, nor that his responses came back in Latin, nor even that the only three reasons the Vatican would allow for laicization were drug addiction, insanity, or a loss of faith (none of which were his reasons), the real injustice was that some priests were laicized for marriage, and others were not. The talk around the club was that the pope was just picking and choosing at random. So, my husband left and we were married in a Catholic Church by a priest who was going to leave six months down the road. Unfortunately, our marriage was never validated by the church. Twenty years later, we were divorced, and my baptismal certificate shows no record of my ever being married. If he had lied and said he had lost his faith (the easiest of the three to prove), he would have been given the ticket. We just need to get rid of the celibacy law. He would have remained a priest. And he was a good one. He was very happy in his ministry but wanted to get married and have a family and not live his life as a very lonely man, as he saw so many older priests becoming.

I left the Jesuits under John Paul II and, like James, considered laicisation. I was told that this would be impossible unless I could argue successfully that I had been incapable of making a proper commitment to celibacy. Part of my discernment process was reaching a point where I discovered that I did indeed have enough freedom to reaffirm celibacy, but that, if I did so, something within me would in effect die. Tha's not a bad thing, as celibacy for the sake of the kingdom is not a good in and of itself, but is 'for' the kingdom. It depends on what it is within you that might die. For me, it was a capacity for tenderness and a gradual realisation that the kind of fiendship that I loved in the Jesuits, that esprit de corps so often spoken of, coudn't draw out of me the kind of love that I thought could make me whole, make me properly human. Some can find in friendship that sort of agapeic love. I couldn't in the end.

I had stuck to the rules pretty darned well, and I took it as quite an affirmation to find out that my Jesuit confreres did not encourage me to go down the laicisation route, that they, like me, would not honestly be able to say that I didn't have a vocation to the priestood. So I didn't apply. Years later I met someone, got married (in the Anglican Church), got automatically excommunicated, and so on.

Being unable to receive the sacrament was more of a blow than I had realised, so I had little choice but to find a church with enough space for me. I became Anglican (and feel quite grateful to them), though with the proviso that I joined a church that defined itself in terms of its longing for reunion with the Church writ large. That was almost 20 years ago now.

It's hard to have regrets once you have kids: it'd be like wishing them out of existence, so no regrets on the large scale. I have some ideas about tmeporary vocations to religious life (I'd do it all over again in a flash, as the Jesuits made me, for better or worse). I'd have preferred to remain a Roman Catholic, but I've discovered that the Anglican Church has space for Catholics, even if they have space for others too (which can lead to all kinds of misunderstadnings and frustrations): there is a form of graciousness in that Church that others don't always see amidst all the other controversies. So, I'm grateful for this second chance.

As people have hinted, proper discernment re celibacy will need a lot of us to tell some honest stories. If what we're after is some sense of how God is moving his Church, then this moving is always concrete, for grace is always concrete, and it will be found active in people's actual lives. Such lives are mixtures of grace and sin, successes and failures, wonderful dreams and horrible nightmares, commitments and loss of nerve. Human stories, but all part of a larger story.

I suspect that some people will say that a commitment is a commitment, and that these stories sound far too self-justifying. That's true enough. If the cost of being a failed celibate priest 'in' the Church is wearing a 'sinner' sign around my neck, I'd have happily done so. I'd prefer to wear 'forgiven sinner' I suppose, but that might be a bit too presumptuous. Maybe it is.

Dear Jim,
Thank you for your article. It was helpful to me in understanding the workings of the church. I still have my copy of Pass It On. Hope you are well.
Mary

Hi there, you actually web site is extremely humorous he / she told me in order to brighten upward

All of you wanted to leave the priesthood and as I understand with a great deal of pain and suffering. And also through the whole process missery far beyond human understanding, Fellows I am feeling sorry for each one of you. With me the story is differend. I have been asking the Church to accept me as a candidate for the priesthood for over thirty years. Everything has been done to discourage me over that period of time. The more they discouraged me stronger did my believe grew that I was called to be a priest. It is of no use to find a bishop in another country who is willing to accept you because it does not work, the negativity follows you wherever a person wants to go to seek ordination, I have struggled with this for over thirty year. And now I have become an old man. And still if one bishop will invite me I will still go for ordination. It is with sadness in my heart that i have red through your personal stories. And it is my hope and prayer that all of you will find your destination, as I continue to search for mine. And were God is leading me.Blessings too you all. John