Program of Priestly Formation (Ascension)

PPF 167

Program of Priestly Formation

separated from one another.” 212 “The concept of integral formation is of the greatest importance, since it is the whole person, with all that he is and all that he possesses, who will be at the Lord’s service in the Christian community.” 213 A seminarian’s self-evaluation can be a valuable instrument. Seminarians should prepare such evaluations with an honest and candid examination of themselves in the areas of human, spiritual, intellectual, and pastoral formation. They should recognize their strengths and weaknesses, their positive qualities as well as their areas of needed growth. It is the responsibility of the seminarian to show positive qualities that recommend his advancement in formation. This self-evaluation is done best in consultation with a priest formator. Peer evaluations are recommended as helpful in the evaluation process. Such evaluations must be conducted in a responsible and confidential manner. Seminarians completing peer evaluations should be exhorted to do so with honesty and in a spirit of charity. Positive or negative opinions concerning the suitability of a peer for advancement should be expressed clearly. The seminary should require an evaluation of a seminarian’s pastoral activities from his appropriate supervisor. This report should give attention to all dimensions of formation. The evaluative process culminates in a yearly written report from the rector to the diocesan bishop or major superior that provides a clear estimation of the seminarian’s progress in the areas of human, spiritual, intellectual, and pastoral formation. 214 The annual report 212 Association of Theological Schools (ATS), The Commission of Accrediting, General Institutional Standards , 3.1.1. 213 Ratio Fundamentalis , no. 92. 214 See Ratio Fundamentalis , no. 204.

167

168

169

170

86