On the Renewal of Seminary Formation to Meet Evangelization Needs in Africa: The Nigerian Experience

The Nigerian Seminary Education in Context

Historically, the Catholic Church in Nigeria, from its very humble beginnings as a mission church, today has 54 ecclesiastical jurisdictions, all headed by indigenous bishops. ⁹ These are divided into nine provinces, parallel to the nine archdioceses in the country, with proximate dioceses serving as suffragans to each archdiocese. There are 16 seminary training colleges located in different parts of the country, which are owned jointly by dioceses within different provinces, and missionary congregations, besides the Veritas University, owned by the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of Nigeria (CBCN) in Abuja. These seminaries, the oldest of which was established in 1924, have continued to produce priests to serve the teeming Catholics in Nigeria. We shall limit this review to the curricula of a selection of some seminaries across the country to draw our conclusions.

A cursory look at the curricula for several seminaries in Nigeria ¹⁰ reveals a bewildering array of courses and subjects which a candidate for the priesthood is expected to master. The Curriculum Studiorum in use for St Augustine Major Seminary Jos till long after I graduated in 2003, for example, had several courses on Western Philosophy and Theology, with no courses offered on African Theology, nor practical courses relating to leadership and service as well as poverty reduction in answer to the troubling issue of leadership, both in Church and in government. Neither did one find a course relating in some way to the theology of accountability to respond to economic distress in Nigeria. As at my graduation in 2003, there was no course on the First African Synod which had taken place close to ten years prior, nor any indication of a focus in the courses listed for a concerted training in critical analysis of contemporary issues affecting society as advised in the new Ratio Fundamentalis #10.

A curious detail in the curricula of the seminaries I sampled generally is the fact that some seminaries do not include a course on the vast corpus of Catholic social teachings, nor do they teach a comprehensive socio-political history of Nigeria. Except for the seminaries at Bigard, Bodija, and Gwagwalada, some of the seminaries do not list a single course on Catholic social teachings, nor any on African Theology or contemporary Nigerian or African history.

Seminary formation follows a somewhat similar pattern of education to what the colonialists were willing to offer to Nigerians in colonial times; people were trained basically to serve colonial needs, to serve as clerks, interpreters, and attendants. It would appear that the training of pastoral agents is done in such a way that calculatedly keeps them uninformed about the public character and demands of faith. This accounts in large measure for the poverty of leadership that has hindered a praxis-oriented witness of the faith in the Nigerian Church. This fact makes the claim of Edward P. DeBerri et al., in Catholic Social Teaching: Our Best Kept Secret, ever more plausible when they underscore: ‘The Church has a developed body of teaching on social, economic, political, and cultural matters and what that body says seem to have been forgotten—or have never been known—by a majority of the Roman Catholic community.’ ¹¹

In a major study reviewing seminary formation program in Nigeria, George Ehusani establishes ‘the history of the Catholic Church of Nigeria in the first one hundred years of its existence (1865–1965) is in large measure a chronicle of the heroism of the many Irish men and women who traversed this vast country, implanting the Catholic faith, opening schools and vocational centers and founding hospitals and orphanages.’ ¹² Thus, Ehusani contends, ‘since we operate along the same models of Church,’ the Nigerian Church needs to learn from the experience of Ireland at the dawn of the 21st century. He notes specifically regarding seminary formation:

The present method of formation at all levels appears to place too much emphasis on the cognitive and too little accent on the affective and intuitive dimensions of human development in general and the Christian enterprise in particular. Training in love, mercy and compassion, which are a function of the affective faculty of the human personality, have often been neglected in favor of an all too intellectual approach to catechesis and theology. The result is that we often have more professionals, scholars, and scrupulous functionaries among the clergy and religious than transformed men and women whose hearts have been won over by the love of God in Christ. ¹³

In an earlier study, Ehusani notes emphatically:

The form, organization and structure of our seminaries . . . [is] essentially European and often superfluous. These structures not only make an elite group out of the clergy and religious, often alienating them from the concrete socio-economic conditions of their people, but they also need continued financial input from foreign agencies. ¹⁴

Therefore, he calls for a paradigm shift in the formation of priests and agents of evangelization, recognizing fully ‘our traditional religious genius, our unique historical experience, our peculiar cultural patterns, and our contemporary socio-economic and political exigencies, for as they say “God meets people where they are at.”’ ¹⁵ Several respondents to the memorandum share Ehusani’s views concerning the outdated Western European methodology of formation. Nigerian Professor Chris Ejizu recounts:

One of the greatest challenges which the prevailing situation poses to the Nigerian Church is the need to constantly review the curriculum of training priests, religious and the laity. More often than not, candidates who pass out of our seminaries and religious institutes graduate without having been seriously exposed to the realities that are of immediate concern to people in the world they are going to minister. The curriculum of training the candidates does not sufficiently embody the realities of their society. The candidates graduate and get into the ministry only to begin to tinker with so many novel ideas and methods. I recommend that our seminaries and houses of formation borrow a leaf from what happens in secular institutions, in terms of curriculum development. ¹⁶

In the same study, Nigerian political economist and social analyst, Pat Utomi, asserts: ‘The reality is that orthodoxy, which the Church represents, tends to dispose institutions towards tradition. Tradition generally tends to be closely aligned to inertia. There is value here in that it helps unchanging truth to be preserved with the desired fidelity. The flip side is that inertia in a changing world means dis-equilibrium which brings about a crisis of relevance.’ ¹⁷

Overall therefore, it is possible to identify from these reactions the claim that the kind of formation obtained in Nigerian seminaries is largely responsible for the creation of a vast dichotomy between the vertical and the horizontal dimensions of faith, elevating the former over the latter. The human person as the subject of the social teachings of the Church integrates the body and the soul, so, any authentic witness of the gospel needs to address issues which impact both the body and the soul. It is instructive that the latest Catholic Bishops’ Conference of Nigeria’s version of Ratio Fundamentalis Institutionis Sacerdotalis ¹⁸ was produced in 2005 as a guide for seminary formation in the country. The document notwithstanding, it is difficult to discuss any one specific model of seminary formation in Nigeria since there appears to be more than one in use.

James Downey, writing over 30 years ago about seminary training in Nigeria where he served as seminary rector, decries the situation where ‘future ministry is mapped out for the candidate and reduced to a series of convergent problems which admit of mathematical and logical conclusions.’ ¹⁹ Rote memorization of Western theological concepts and Western Philosophical theories that are often removed from lived challenges of daily life, typically, is the characteristic form of the training seminarians currently receive.

Apart from the so many courses offered in a wide array of subjects, the length of training and the seclusion of the seminarians during the period of formation only widens the gap between the training they receive and the unfolding experiences of the communities to which they minister. This obtains even as ‘common sense suggests that life, and especially the life of a priest, is a matter of divergent problems which have to be lived through and to which there is no mathematical answer.’ ²⁰ Undoubtedly, this affects the pastoral efficiency of the priest as a leader of the Christian community, as it ultimately affects his leadership and the community too.

I argue therefore, that the task of seminary training in Africa and the training of all agents of evangelization is not one of learning and reproducing ‘universal’ philosophical and theological principles and applying them to the African reality. Conversely, as the new Ratio Fundamentalis #10 notes, philosophical and theological education should be geared to exploring in depth the African situation and applying to the said situation in various African nations, a creative and integrated response in the light of faith. Such faith, informed by a context driven philosophical and theological training will better respond to the problems that Africans face. ²¹ The listing in Appendix I reveals an emphasis on spiritual life, morality, and theoretical Western Philosophical thought to the neglect of active commitments of faith of the local community, lending weight to Downey’s assertion that ‘the most important questions and problems of our time are not in the curriculum.’ ²²

To avoid the illusion of institutionalization where the solutions to the many challenges that priests and pastoral agents face in their day to day ministry are presumed to be provided by the seminary, the curriculum as Downey suggests should be pruned and rationalized to cope with diversified needs. Indeed, as he says, ‘in any field there is a limit to the areas in which one is proficient.’ ²³

Proposing a Contemporary Approach to Seminary Formation in Africa

This essay has indicated that the overly theoretical style of seminary formation offered in Nigerian seminaries, which applies to most of Africa, is correlative to poverty of leadership which has hindered a praxis-oriented evangelization in the African Church. Since leaders of the Catholic Church are products of the seminaries, our call to update practices of seminary formation is done in hope of addressing leadership practices which are often neo-patrimonial in approach, to embrace a leadership of service based in transparency.

Such leadership of service will enable the Church in Africa to first of all, embrace best practices in its internal structures, and then to step into the organizational vacuum of a failing state and weak forms of government and provide space for a virile civil society, by actively joining in the social struggles of the people towards realizing the coming of the kingdom here ‘on earth as it is in heaven.’ This call is not in opposition to the mission of the Church, but it is in fact, inspired by the call of the African Synods, I and II. This modest attempt re-echoes simply this call of the Synods that seem to have been glossed over in Nigeria and elsewhere in Africa. Despite the seeming spread of western education in Africa today, in most rural communities where priests minister, the priest is often the smartest, most educated person in the community. With this comes some form of moral authority. His role in forming public opinion becomes crucial in animating the community towards credible engagement in social life.

Elochukwu E. Uzukwu, like Downey, supports our view, noting that the effects of transplanted West European Church structures conditioned Church leaders in Africa to operate in medieval feudalistic manners with their actions originating from an interest very much concerned with power. ²⁴ To perpetuate this hierarchical pyramid pattern of ecclesiastical administration, the Church in most of Africa employs a style of training that keeps seminarians almost out of touch with realities of life and challenges that people face.

In Nigeria, for example, people struggle to beat a neo-colonialist politico-economic arrangement in order to survive. But the issue in the church is power. Among the qualities required to function as a good priest or religious, obedience comes out on top. In a continent where 50% live in absolute poverty, and an estimated 400 million (according to United Nation Development Programme) will be living in extreme poverty . . . candidates for the priesthood and religious life are assured of food and other material necessities of life by foreign agencies and the local contribution of the laity. They are thus rendered incapable of appreciating in a practical way the lot of majority of Africans; also the root cause of our poverty escapes them at a practical level. ²⁵

Indeed, as it happens with any group of people, physical exclusiveness and esoteric preoccupations breed their own sub-culture. Thus, the seminary, feeding upon long years of institutionalization, indoctrinates future priests with a theoretical view of ministry and Christian life which is overly academic. ²⁶ Seminaries in Africa, operating in the manner of total institutions, control practically every aspect of the lives of those being trained, thereby discouraging initiative and critical thinking, and suppressing creativity in order to preserve and defend ‘orthodoxy.’ Part of the effect is that ‘the seminarian, whose contemporaries devote themselves, sometimes with considerable sacrifice and initiative, to their families or their businesses, is preoccupied with matters of personal comfort, trifling luxuries, minor acquisitions, and so on,’ to the neglect of serious pastoral issues affecting the lives of the people to whom they will be ministering. ²⁷

Premised on the foregoing, Downey calls for a reassessment of values in seminary training, where theological and pastoral training are taken in perspective:

To begin with, one could visualize a more rigid distinction between the more strictly theological ministry and the pastoral ministry in the conventional sense of the word. But within each area, there would be more specific fields of specialization and therefore of ministry. We would therefore witness a departure from the system whereby all ministers follow the same rigid pattern of training, lifestyle, and so on. ²⁸

The implication of Downey’s call which is at the heart of this essay is that the contemporary African reality and unfolding worldview and how these affect the day to day lives of Africans should form a basic component of priestly training. ‘The strictly defined course, specified for all seminarians, would be seen for the anomaly that it is,’ bearing in mind the basic question in each case, ‘for what type of ministry is the candidate being trained?’ ²⁹

Relatedly, the very structure of training will need to be reconsidered so that other options like in-service training, the university system, and the apprenticeship system options can be adopted in training for the priesthood. This is where the call of the African Synods I and II become very pertinent for seminary formation in Africa today, especially the First Synod which specifically reiterated the need to concretely apply the Gospel to life situations. This concern and commitment should be reflected in the curriculum of study in African seminaries.

As a leader of the Christian community, the teaching role of the priest is vital to help form the consciousness of the community to whom he ministers in the important impulse of witnessing the Gospel message to the community to ignite action. This cannot be achieved with a training that stifles creativity and critical thinking in defense of orthodoxy. Paul Gifford has indicated that regarding attaining the desired levels of change in the style of leadership, ‘the lesson both of Asia and Latin America is that the path to change begins in the minds of its indigenous thinkers.’ ³⁰ In Latin America for example, Ignacio Ellacuria took up the challenge of articulating the Christian claim of salvation through an explicit attention to the context of the poverty in El Salvador, whose majority population experienced extraordinary violence and repression in any attempt to improve its lot.

Frances Fox Piven and Richard A. Cloward have identified three necessary aspects for change in consciousness:

First, ‘the system’—or those aspects of the system that people experience and perceive—loses legitimacy. Large numbers of men and women who ordinarily accept the authority of their rulers and the legitimacy of institutional arrangements come to believe in some measure that these rulers and these arrangements are unjust and wrong. Second, people who are ordinarily fatalistic, who believe that existing arrangements are inevitable, begin to assert ‘rights’ that imply demands for change. Third, there is a new sense of efficacy; people who ordinarily consider themselves helpless come to believe that they have some capacity to alter their lot. ³¹

The change in consciousness which is stimulated by human agency can be found in all societies and among all groups and classes, including the Church. It enables human actors to act to make a difference in their world, shaping extant structures and forging new and adaptable systems in coping and improving the parameters of their societies uniquely. This is the unique role that theology needs to play in the current context on the African continent to achieve the desired ecclesial leadership.

Effective change begins from below, from among the people. To get to the consciousness that they can work for change, the people need to be informed and formed. The Catholic Church in the United States of America today, for example, has stringent checks and balances to issues around sexual abuse because a small group of informed Catholics at a parish in Wellesley, Massachusetts organized and started the advocacy for change. The Church in Africa will get to the point of overcoming the current poverty of leadership if Catholics are well formed and informed to ask questions and demand accountability from the hierarchy. And this can best begin with the formation of priests in the seminaries.

Formation programs in seminaries will specifically need to prioritize teaching that focuses on helping priests understand the complex nature of the systems of injustice, which are inherent even in Church and the society, so that they can become more aware and more capable to deal with these issues as they assume their ministry with the people. Such analysis is sometimes beyond the scope of the philosophical and the theological background the seminaries propose to offer to young priests; hence, in some cases, Church leaders have rushed in to condemn or otherwise to comment on issues without understanding the complexity of the issues at hand.

African seminaries and houses of formation will as a matter of priority reconsider the current situation where too many general courses are offered without emphasis and concentration to ensure depth and proficiency. This accords little mastery of specific fields of study. Rather than offer so many courses, fewer courses with more depth and concentration should be the target. ³²

Importantly too, seminary faculty should design specific courses to facilitate integration of social studies and theological studies, prayer life, and active life of service considering faith. These tools will enable priests to develop a more fitting schedule of pastoral activities partnered with suitable techniques of social action and community organizing in consonant with Catholic social teachings. Every part of the curriculum—bible, sacraments, liturgy, ethics, homiletics, church history, etc.—should integrate this aspect of seminary education, and this topic should not be confined to a single course on social justice. All these need to be pursued over a sustainable period by successive leadership committed to the same objectives; a sustainable culture of honest, clean, and transparent Church leaders as bishops, priests, religious, and lay leaders.