The picture of the Catholic Church in Thailand, as dealt with in the last chapter, will be rather incomplete, if we do not look further into her men and women of God. Moreover, since we are dealing with their formation, it is reasonable to have a close look at them and their present situation. It will certainly shed light upon further pedagogical reflection on their formation. This chapter therefore deals with the clergy, as well as religious men and women, in the country.
Looking at the Catholic Church in Thailand, from the past up to the present, we can find some interesting data that reflects certain reality.
1. Totals of Local Clergy:
1950: 85 local priests, 28 major seminarians
1970: 125 local priests, 74 major seminarians
1992: 294 local priests, 194 major seminarians
2. The situation in each Dioceses on 31 December 1992
1992 |
Major Seminarians |
Secular Priests |
Religious Priests |
Ratio of clergy to laity |
| Bangkok | 40 |
93 |
81 |
1/404 |
| Chantaburi | 21 |
55 |
12 |
1/426 |
| Ratchaburi | 25 |
36 |
16 |
1/316 |
| Suratthani | 10 |
2 |
39 |
1/151 |
| Chiengmai | 22 |
10 |
24 |
1/635 |
| Nakhonsawan | 11 |
7 |
9 |
1/517 |
| Udon | 10 |
7 |
27 |
1/451 |
| Ubon | 16 |
21 |
15 |
1/588 |
| Thare & Nongseng | 28 |
42 |
- |
1/1124 |
| Nakhonratchasima | 11 |
21 |
- |
1/235 |
Total |
194 |
294 |
223 |
1/464 |
Table 6.1 The situation in each Dioceses1
With regard to the figures above, some observations can be said:
1. During recent years the number of minor seminarians has gone down slightly.
2. The ratio of priests to laity can only be understood in the light of what has been said in Chapter Five about the geographical dispersion of the Catholic communities.
3. In practice the distribution of the clergy takes no account of the needs of the nation as a whole. From the point of view of the pastoral ministry of Catholics this is less important than it seems. There are few parishes with a large population, and few priests who have to look after large numbers of Catholics.2
The major seminarians are almost exclusively recruited
from the minor seminaries. These conform to the official syllabus but add
a more thorough training in religious matters and in Latin.3
For a long time these minor seminaries
were treated as major seminaries in embryo, taking boys from the age of
twelve on, and getting them accustomed to the regular spiritual exercise
of the life of a priest, keeping them within the framework of the minor
seminary throughout the period of their studies and even during their holidays.
Over the last thirty years, however, there has been a certain change in
the process. Today the student goes home for the holidays and the internal
arrangements are becoming more like those in ordinary secondary education.
This has helped a great deal to do away with the isolation of the young
boy who has been sent to the seminary by his parish priest.
One thing though, will continue to hamper a straightforward development. There is too much of a gap between the living standard the minor seminarians are getting accustomed to and that of the social background from which they come. These young people very soon take the modern amenities provided by the seminary for granted and then do not like to go back to their families where the material conditions are much less affluent. Thus the seminary creates a class distinction which can only become more acute.
It is difficult to say what percentage of these juniors continue their studies and enter the major seminary. All we can say is about 7% of those who enter the minor seminary eventually get ordained.4
The age of admission to the major seminary is about 22. The reason is that after their secondary education those that want to go on to the major seminary remain for two or three years in the minor seminary where they are given various functions and can give more time to the study of languages. Most of the major seminarians used to get their training in the "General College" of Penang. A smaller number were sent to the College of the Propagation of the Faith in Rome. Recently, however, some have been sent to foreign diocesan seminaries.
In May 1972 Thailand was given its own national major seminary. It set off with first year philosophy students and so will build up its intake till the complete course of philosophy and theology is established. This is an important step forward. Whatever the competence and dedication of the various colleges or seminaries where the students went before, all those responsible for their training were exclusively foreigners, and this has left its mark deeply on the clergy and the Church of Thailand. The lecturers, those in charge of the general training and the whole study program, were all foreign.
Both in Penang and elsewhere the whole process
turned into a king of Westernization which inevitably depersonalized the
student. Roughly generalizing, one may say that some could not adapt themselves
to this process and were then deemed unfit, while others adapted themselves
so well that, at least in their general behavior, they became practically
Westerners (and in the eyes of their tutors were no doubt singled out as
the post promising, because most like themselves). And then there was a
third group: as Christians they became Westerners more or less at ease in
this new world, but for the rest they remained Orientals, difficult to understand,
at least on the surface, somewhat unpredictable, and therefore rather a
disturbing element for those in
charge.5
For decades this cultural alienation of the clergy,
although not intended, proceeded with a high degree of efficiency. It is
therefore hardly astonishing that the only model the local clergy had before
their eyes was a Latin one. The norms were, and still remain, what was done
elsewhere (or used to be done elsewhere) and had nothing to do with the
needs of their own country.6
Some change at least was initiated
in the General College of Penang thirty five years ago. Since then English
began gradually to replace Latin as the medium of communication. The lecturers
fortunately responded to the directives laid down by Vatican II, and if
the ideal formula was not found at once they must be credited with having
guided the seminarians more and more to an understanding of the real problems.
Inevitably this has led to some difficulties in
the relations between the younger ones, coming fresh from their seminary,
and their seniors already established as priests or bishops. We all know
the central problem: how does a priest, trained in the solidly traditional
and highly clerical view of the clergy which prevails in the Catholic Church
of Thailand, adjust himself to the different concept of the ministry now
prevailing elsewhere? Several major seminarians have asked a few years of
even months before their ordination to have it postponed so that they could
see for themselves what life was about, and then make up their mind whether
or not they wanted to be ordained. This attitude found no understanding.
To yield to such a request would mean to query all that had always been
done, and the Church in Thailand was not ready for it.7
It was this situation which hurried on the plan to set up a national major seminary, "Lux Mundi". This has now been done. At present it is fully active with courses of philosophy and theology. It has been recognized by the government and given a college status. However, in spite of such an honor, "Lux Mundi" still has a long way to go in the formation of major seminarians. Although vernacular is used as the medium of communication in the lesson, Philosophy and Theology still remain imported Western notions. Community life has often been overlooked. Class distinction and individualism often find their place in the daily life of the seminarians, and thus continue to exist in their priestly life.
With its two decades of existence, "Lux Mundi" seems to have gone so well in its material aspect. However, in the aspect of priestly formation, the development is surprisingly slow, especially in the search for new ways in which the Church of Thailand can deal with new and real problems.
For most of the clergy this problem is urgent.
For a long time they were used by the missionaries for secondary functions,
then they were given responsibility in the diocese, but usually with their
mission limited to looking after the Catholics. They fulfill their pastoral
functions honorably and faithfully, but there is no integrated pastoral
plan. One does what has always been done.8
It is remarkable that between 1950 and 1970 the percentage of foreign clergy (religious included) increased in Thailand. There were 101 of them in a total of 186, or 54.3%, in 1950; in 1970 they numbered 175 out of a total of 299, or 58.3%.9
The main reason for this increase was the influx
of missionaries who had fled from mainland China when the Communists took
over. Moreover, while little attention was paid to Thailand for a long time,
the events in Southeast Asia during the last decades and the fact that China
was closed to missionaries have attracted a number of these foreign priests
to Thailand. Here the circumstances are much more favorable to foreign priests
than in other Asian countries because, never having been a colony, Thailand
has no prejudice about foreigners (at least at the time if they are not
Japanese, or, perhaps, French). Foreigners are therefore usually well received.
People do not give them feeling that they are not welcome, and even if this
is only tolerance on the part of the Thais, they are so pleasant in their
tolerance that there is no reason for the foreigner to develop a complex.10
There are three dioceses in Thailand
that are still entrusted to the priests of the Missions Etrangères
de Paris. Three other are in the hands of Congregations that are not specifically
missionary (Salesians, Redemptorists and Priests of Betharam). The first
two have a few local religious. Assimilation is rather handicapped by the
fact that the local clergy, who in the end will have to take over, are not
ready yet.11
A number of foreign priests work among the local clergy of the dioceses left in local hands, but there are no "Fidei Donum" priests.
Lastly, there is a homogeneous group of Jesuits who have student center for the university apostolate in Bangkok and Chiengmai.
It may also be said that the religious foreign clergy (Salesians, Redemptorists and Jesuits) are in general more homogeneous, each being more marked by the spirit of his particular religious family. The priests of the Mission Etrangères and those that work among the local clergy are more inclined to adapt themselves to the pace of the local clergy.12
But there, too, there is the beginning of a change.
In so far as the Church of Thailand has failed to evolve since the Council,
but rather clings to its traditional routines, it has become increasingly
difficult for those who are aware of the new development that must take
place to drag their feet in keeping with official reactions. This is not
merely the case with the foreign clergy, but these do tend to be more aware
of what is going on in the rest of the Church today. For them, as for the
more progressive local clergy, the language still used by the Church of
Thailand tends to become incomprehensible.13
Some Congregations were put in charge of a diocese in Thailand. This was by no means necessarily what they had in view, but it was more or less imposed, sometimes at the expense of their own specific purpose. Other religious can concern themselves more simply with the purpose for which they exist. Apart from the Jesuits, who pursue their own line, the Camillian Fathers and Brothers run three hospitals, while the Brothers of St. Gabriel and, more recently, the Brothers of St. John Baptist de la Salle have come to play an important part in education. Because of their contribution to the growth of modern education, the reputation of their colleges, and the number of ex-students that came to fill important posts in the country, the Brothers of St. Gabriel have become typical of the role of the Church in Thailand in the eyes of the non-Christians.
Quite recently a start was made with the introduction of a contemplative "congregation" in Thailand. The initiative came from a priest of the Foreign Mission of Paris. After a false start, this group made a fresh attempt, but this time aimed at local vocations only. The idea is to create something close to Buddhist monasticism. Here many of the difficulties spring from lack of imagination of the part of those that cannot think of "religious" in any other terms than those of Western traditions and cannon law. When the superiors of monastic establishments in the Far East met in a Congress at Bangkok in 1968, they left the door wide open to new approaches, but one has to fear that nobody took any notice, even in the place where it was held.14
In general the nuns may be divided into those that
belong to local diocesan Congregations without any foreigners, and those
that belong to foreign Congregations which accept local vocations. Their
is no lack of local vocations in either case. Together the nuns, both local
and foreign, numbered 1313 on 31 December 1992, a ratio of one nun per 183
Catholics.15
At the beginning there was a vast difference between
these two categories. Apart from two minor congregations, all the local
ones are offshoots of the "Lovers of the Cross" (Amantes de la
Croix) which was founded more than 300 years ago when missionary work was
launched in Vietnam and Thailand. These nuns were mainly used to help in
the running of the parishes, and, because they had no professional qualifications,
undertook mainly menial tasks (house-keeping, cooking, sacristy work), with
a dash of catechetical work thrown in from time to time. They worked at
this level in the parishes in small groups. Their contribution was obviously
most welcome, but in the final analysis it amounted only to cheap labor
for the parish priest, except in the case of the catechetical work.16
Often, however, they were put in charge of some orphans or other children that lived in the same place as the nuns, and so they played an increasingly important part in parochial education, particularly since education became obligatory and some of these nuns obtained the necessary qualifications. And so they provided these schools with a personnel that had the trust of the people and was cheap into the bargain. So it came about that these groups of nuns working in the parishes were divided into housekeepers and teachers.
The creation of new dioceses since the war led to an increase in these strictly diocesan Congregations of "Lovers of the Cross". They have their own establishments for juniors, postulants and novices, and their own motherhouse. But as they branched out, they also frequently changed their names.
Recruitment is therefore apparently no problem. The same cannot be said about the generation gap between the Sisters within each Congregation. The older Sisters who had practically never studied at all and so became housekeepers for all practical purposes, did not talk the same language and certainly had not the same ambitions as the younger ones, most of whom have a diploma of secondary education, and many of whom today go to university. With this personnel, far better qualified, the local nuns are competing with the foreign ones and today run educational establishments of high repute.
This educational bias has made it possible for these local Congregations to share in one of the channels of development in their country, and this has gone on for some time. In the past this, no doubt, implied an indirect wish to proselytize. But here, too, there is a change. As they are getting increasingly in touch with the rural situation and compare this with their experience in an urban environment, they are becoming aware of new problems, and a fair number of these nuns today ask themselves what their contribution should be to the development of their country as such. An Ursuline nun has conducted an extensive study involving this question, and this shows that these Congregations are caught up in a tension between far-reaching opportunities and still considerable resistance to them.17
It is interesting to see how closely these reactions correspond to the level of education reached in each particular case. The other group of Congregations of nuns consists of those that came originally from abroad (Sisters of St. Paul of Chartres, Ursulines, Sisters of St. Maur, Salesian Sisters, etc.). These, particularly the first two mentioned, opened the door wide to local vocations, with the result that the Thai nuns are today by far in the majority.
Apart from the Carmelites and the poor Clares, who are contemplative, the most important of these Congregations are teaching orders. It would appear that these passed without difficulty from the stage where their members and structures were foreign to their present situation, in which the majority of the nuns are Thai and in practice fill even the most important posts. But here, too, the generation gap makes itself felt. This is the case particularly where the social status of the educational establishments troubles the consciences of those that are more sensitive to the neglect which the poor are still suffering. Some of the young nuns are already working in the slums of Bangkok and getting involved in the social problems of the country.18
The fact that both types of Congregations count
today a large majority of Thai nuns doubtless accounts for their success
in an attempt at research and co-ordination which is not equaled anywhere
else in the country. While the union of male religious superiors exists
only on paper, mainly, no doubt, because these male Congregations have a
majority of foreigners whose training is decided by outside factors, the
nuns have achieved an active union of major superiors and, consequently,
a truly encouraging level of co-operation.19
Female religious, therefore, now
represent by far the richest resources for new creativity in the Church
of Thailand. The diocesan clergy and the male religious are too closed;
with some notable exceptions they are not interested in, if they do not
actively avoid, a common approach to the new problems. It is not so with
the nuns, even if they still have to overcome a certain reluctance here
and there, which results in a certain impatience with the slow rate of progress,
an impatience not hard to understand.
When one realizes that in Thai society the women
are certainly the most valuable part of the population because of their
persistence, their endurance, and their concern for others, one can see
how Sisters in Thailand could become the decisive element in the development
of the Church there in the years
to come.20
2 Cf Thailand in Transition: The Church in a Buddhist Country, in Pro Mundi Vita 48 (1973) 24.
3 Cf Thailand in Transition: The Church in a Buddhist Country, p. 24.
4 Cf Thailand in Transition: The Church in a Buddhist Country, p. 24.
5 Cf Thailand in Transition: The Church in a Buddhist Country, p. 24.
6 Cf Thailand in Transition: The Church in a Buddhist Country, p. 25.
7 Cf Thailand in Transition: The Church in a Buddhist Country, p. 25.
8 Cf Thailand in Transition: The Church in a Buddhist Country, p. 25.
9 Cf Thailand in Transition: The Church in a Buddhist Country, p. 25.
10 Cf Thailand in Transition: The Church in a Buddhist Country, p. 25.
11 Cf Thailand in Transition: The Church in a Buddhist Country, p. 25.
12 Cf Thailand in Transition: The Church in a Buddhist Country, p. 26.
13 Cf Thailand in Transition: The Church in a Buddhist Country, p. 26.
14 Cf Thailand in Transition: The Church in a Buddhist Country, p. 26.
15 Cf Annuario Pontificio 1993.
16 Cf Thailand in Transition: The Church in a Buddhist Country, p. 26.
17 Cf F.X. BELL, Thai Sisters and Community Development. Unpublished M.A. thesis, Ateneo de Manila 1970.
18 Cf Thailand in Transition: The Church in a Buddhist Country, p. 26.
19 Cf Thailand in Transition: The Church in a Buddhist Country, p. 27.
20 Cf Thailand in Transition: The Church in a Buddhist Country, p. 27.