Father
Horan, OFM, is correct that clericalism is a vice, which ought to be repudiated
by every pope, bishop, priest, deacon and consecrated religious. Problem is
that it is unfair, unjust and inaccurate to portray clericalism as merely an
indulgence of conservatives or traditionalists. I have been ordained
twenty-five years and spent twelve years in seminary beforehand. Even went to
high school seminary (hence, I am called a 'lifer'). As a pastor of two
parishes for more than eleven years and a parochial vicar for fourteen years in
several assignments as a diocesan priest (secular clergy) and as president of a
national association of 500+ priests and deacons (Confraternity of Catholic
Clergy), my experience has been that all too often it is the so-called liberal
and progressive priests who behave and act in such a way as to personify clericalism.
Clericalism
is a mindset, an attitude, a perspective. It patronizes and denigrates those
who disagree and uses ad hominem attacks to belittle. When a priest speaks
disrespectfully to an elderly woman and embarrasses her publicly at Mass merely
because she exercises her legitimate option (as defined by Rome) to kneel or
genuflect at Communion time rather than just stand, that is clericalism. When
the faithful are denied their legitimate option to receive Holy Communion on
the tongue or confession behind a screen, that is clericalism. When women are
ridiculed and scoffed at by priests for wearing chapel veils, which is their
option, that is clericalism. When some of the faithful ask the pastor if the
Extraordinary Form could be celebrated in their parish and the priest goes
ballistic and insults them and calls them fanatical, schismatic rad-trads, that
is clericalism. When priests who wear roman vestments and lace albs instead of
burlap potato sacks and moo-moo albs are laughed at and slandered by gossip
among their brother diocesan clergy, that is clericalism.
Clericalism
is also nepotism. Not the kind where relatives are promoted but where
ideologues and those who are philosophically and theologically 'brothers' take
care of one another. When sycophants are rewarded with papal knighthood and are
made monsignors for being blindly loyal to their Ordinary, that is clericalism.
It is a cheap shot to attack a priest for his personal taste in vestments. What
really counts is whether or nor Father preaches and teaches orthodox Catholic
doctrine; does he celebrate a reverent Mass; is he living a chaste, honest, and
virtuous life on the altar and off? Wearing lace is NON-SEQUITUR. BEHAVING
properly is what matters.
During my
seminary career, I saw the effects of BAD THEOLOGY combined with BAD LITURGY.
Both supported one another like two deadly poisons. The two then produced an
even more diabolical by product, BAD MORALITY. Whether a priest likes the Latin
Mass or the Vernacular, Ordinary or Extraordinary, lace or plain albs, roman or
contemporary chasubles, et al., the crucial question is not does he wear a
cassock or does he allow others to call him by his first name (with no title)?
DE GUSTIBUS NON DISPUTANDUM EST, St. Thomas Aquinas said so well long ago. Real
clericalism is not about attire or language, birettas or baseball caps. It is
about sound doctrine, reverent worship and holy, virtuous living. I have seen
priests on both sides of the fence (conservative/liberal or
traditional/progressive) treat laity with disdain and contempt. It is not
an issue rooted in liturgical garb.
I have
seen or heard of priests and deacons ignored, ostracized, marginalized, passed
over for promotion, humiliated and publicly vilified merely because they were
considered 'too conservative' or 'too traditional' Sometimes they call us
"JP2 groupies" or "Benny worshippers" just because we do
not disobey papal authority or because we do not fit the mold of Charlie
Curran, Hans Kung or Richard McBrien. The faithful want clergy to treat them as
adults, not as ignorant children. Yet, often I get emails about pastors who
deny infallible doctrines in their homilies but when asked by a parishioner act
as if the layperson were in kindergarden. It is clericalism to disguise
heterodoxy and irreverence as valid options while simultaneously insulting and
disparaging a layperson's fondness for devotions or forcing parishioners to get
GPS in order to find the Tabernacle since they removed them from sanctuaries
and now hide them out of view lest any spontaneous latria might occur.
What a
priest wears and how he is called is his personal preference, taste and
opinion. Options are just that, not meant to be mandatory nor prohibited. Yet,
wear purple or worse, black, vestments at a funeral, and some of the CLERGY
(not the laity) label you rad-trad, Lefebvre-ite, arch-conservative, et al.
What the people want are holy priests, virtuous and moral priests,
obedient and loyal priests. They also want priests who respect them and who do
not insult their intelligence. If a parishioner is Charismatic, in Cursillo or
a member of Opus Dei, my job as parish priest and pastor is to provide them
with valid sacraments, reverent worship, orthodox teaching with compassion and
mercy. Making fun of someone's Marian devotion is not catechesis, it is modern
clericalism. Chancery workers, ecclesiastical bureaucrats and other middle
management types who happen to also be ordained ministers, just treat your
brother clergy and the lay faithful with RESPECT. Keep an eye and ear on those
clergy who might be breaking their vows and possibly causing further scandal
instead of persecuting and demonizing your colleagues who have a legitimate
difference of opinion and who demonstrate a different style or taste. Remember,
Pope Benedict XVI said it best when he said Catholicism is the religion of
BOTH/AND not EITHER/OR. There is room for both Ordinary Form and
Extraordinary Form, Latin and Vernacular, ad orientem & versus
populum, Roman vestments and modern ones, lace albs and plain albs, etc.
Don't be hung up on externals, the People of God are NOT. No one is
bothered by my biretta but if I am not behaving or acting as a priest should
and ought to do, then the folks have every right to complain and seek a remedy.
Meanwhile, please do not impute motives or agendas onto Pope Francis. His style
and preference may not be identical to his immediate predecessor but both B16
and F1 are true shepherds and brothers in more ways than one. Basta cosi.
N.B. I have been reminded by some of my deacon brothers that another form of clericalism is the insistence by some clergy, namely priests and bishops, that permanent deacons are somehow not clergy. Holy Orders confers one as a cleric (Canon 266). There is no such thing as a 'lay' deacon. That is an oxymoron. All deacons, priests and bishops are clergy. Some deacons are transitional, some permanent. Permanent deacons may be married but only prior to being ordained. That being said, it makes sense to have clergy wear clerical attire of some sort when doing ecclesiastical work or when engaged in the apostolate. Some deacons are accused of being clerical, however, simply because they want to witness to their vocation as ordained ministers. When working in their secular occupations or when off duty with their family and friends, it makes sense that these men dress appropriately but all the more so when they are doing the work of Church. The rare case of some permanent deacon mowing his lawn wearing a Roman Collar has been used ad nauseam to poo-pooh permanent deacons from wearing any sort of clerical attire for any reason. The abuse does not negate the proper use, however. When a prisoner or a hospital patient ask to see the chaplain, if they see a man in shirt and tie, they do not recognize an ordained cleric. Seeing a deacon in some form of collar, be it black or gray, assures them this man is a CATHOLIC CLERIC. And if the person requests confession or anointing, guess what? The deacon then calls for the priest. My priesthood is not threatened nor encroached by the diaconate. I have two wonderful permanent deacons in my parish and our Confraternity has many deacons as members, not to mention two Board Members. Clericalism tries to clericalize the laity and laicize the clergy. It is a caricature and a distortion of what should and ought to be.
N.B. I have been reminded by some of my deacon brothers that another form of clericalism is the insistence by some clergy, namely priests and bishops, that permanent deacons are somehow not clergy. Holy Orders confers one as a cleric (Canon 266). There is no such thing as a 'lay' deacon. That is an oxymoron. All deacons, priests and bishops are clergy. Some deacons are transitional, some permanent. Permanent deacons may be married but only prior to being ordained. That being said, it makes sense to have clergy wear clerical attire of some sort when doing ecclesiastical work or when engaged in the apostolate. Some deacons are accused of being clerical, however, simply because they want to witness to their vocation as ordained ministers. When working in their secular occupations or when off duty with their family and friends, it makes sense that these men dress appropriately but all the more so when they are doing the work of Church. The rare case of some permanent deacon mowing his lawn wearing a Roman Collar has been used ad nauseam to poo-pooh permanent deacons from wearing any sort of clerical attire for any reason. The abuse does not negate the proper use, however. When a prisoner or a hospital patient ask to see the chaplain, if they see a man in shirt and tie, they do not recognize an ordained cleric. Seeing a deacon in some form of collar, be it black or gray, assures them this man is a CATHOLIC CLERIC. And if the person requests confession or anointing, guess what? The deacon then calls for the priest. My priesthood is not threatened nor encroached by the diaconate. I have two wonderful permanent deacons in my parish and our Confraternity has many deacons as members, not to mention two Board Members. Clericalism tries to clericalize the laity and laicize the clergy. It is a caricature and a distortion of what should and ought to be.
Fr. John
Trigilio, Jr.
President
Confraternity
of Catholic Clergy
8 comments:
Bravo! Particularly the remarks concerning deacons.
"...the crucial question is not does he wear a cassock or does he allow others to call him by his first name (with no title)?"
SERIOUSLY?
You seem to vent about something Fr. Horan didn't say directly. The point was the young clergy who come out of seminary appearing and acting remote from the lives of God's people, not about their sartorial proclivities. It just so happens that many reinforce their alienation and separation by means of titles, formalities and cassocks. (I know how that works, too. I was in seminary for six years and wore the cassock whenever I could. I also know the polyvalent reasons why I wore it.)
Yes, one can be tyrannical with a liberal agenda too. No argument there. But the empirical and anecdotal evidence of young priests has to count for something. I fear your full throated defense of traditional practices overlooks the real problem: the alienation of many young men by the prevailing interpretation of the Program of Priestly Formation in US seminaries.
Thank you Father, for speaking truth with the experience and authority given you..You give me hope.
Blessings +
I have long found it amazing that those who speak the loudest about tolerance and collaboration are often the most itolerant and least collaborative of all.
Well said. Growing up post-Vatican II, I found out only too well how flannel shirts and jeans can be the garb of clericalism. I am waiting for the day when clerics 'get it' that the laity need to be treated as fellow adult Christians.
I've found in my life that Clericalism cuts both ways and comes in all forms: from the Clericalist wearing a Maniple and murmering Latin to the Clericalist beginning Mass with a hearty, "Good morning, Everybody!" and having the kids surround the Altar during the Consecration. I've found Clericalists in religious groups that wear habits, speak softly, and walk close to the walls and in those that sit around watching T.V., wearing no habits, and backbiting the Superior.
Maybe, it shouldn't be called Clericalism, rather "Clerical Think." Or, maybe, just Egotism? Or, Narcissism. Or, some combination of the two. What makes Br. Daniel or "Rev. Dr." John feel that EITHER ONE has any handle on what Clericalism is? They are both, after all, Clerics. As a layperson -- or, rather: as one who was anointed as a Participator in Christ's Priesthood, Prophetism, and Kingship at my Baptism -- excuse me for wondering if both of them might be a little too close to the matter to see clearly.
Blogging and writing articles takes effort. I know; I've tried a couple times and failed at it. It's more time-consuming thna people think. And, it's a very opinion-based medium: People go to your blog because they want to see what you're thinking and saying. I myself am wondering: Why are these two Clerics here? I'm sure that our two Clerics involved in this tete-a-tete (namely, Br. Daniel and "Rev. Dr." John) have more appropriate ways of exercising their clerical ministry. For instance, St. John Vianney sat in the Confessional for hours upon end in his small parish church, waiting for whichever penitent might show up. Saint Francis of Assisi could be found amongst the People, walking around townsquares, begging for food, praying in the local church. Both John the Priest and Francis the Deacon were Clerics -- but, hardly Clericalists. Wisdom! Be attentive!
By the way, as an addendum:
A Deacon is a Deacon is a Deacon. A Deacon is not "transitional" ANYTHING . . . anymore than a Priest is in transitum to the Episcopacy. Should we start calling Priests who will never be Bishops: "Permanent Presbyters"? This just shows the silliness of "Clerical Think."
Father,
You probably won't know the help your comments about Deacons has done for my spirit. I have been feeling discouraged when reading comments on more traditional blogs disparaging Deacons. As one who is in formal inquiriy, I had been thinking of abandoning the process.
I will return to pastoral care class in January with a renewed sense of purpose.
God bless!
-Tony
Post a Comment