I don't know for sure.
Priests are given special authority and are ontologically changed during and after ordination. On the diocesan or parish level if proper canonical authority itsn't given or respected there would be chaos because someone will fill the void of authority whether that person has the authority or not.
Clericalism to me is when a bishop does not intervene in the case of the abuse of authority by a priest to either reprimand him, transfer him, suspend him or laicize him. But in all of this there must be due process. And if a bishop isn't faithful to his canonical authority, the Vatican needs to have structures in place to intervene and do the same.
It seems to me that the greatest clericalism of our age is "make it up as you go" Catholicism or the ideology that pastoral theology can be dogmatized. Thus a priest who makes himself the superstar of the parish, manipulates the liturgical rites of the Church to make himself the center, ad libs the words of the liturgical rites to suit his own fancies, this is clericalism and the clericalism of the bishop is that he doesn't intervene to correct or reprimand this sort of clericalism.
All one has to do is experience a Mass in the Ordinary Form and one in the Extraordinary Form to know what liturgical clericalism is and it isn't the fact that in the EF Mass the priest does it all; it is because in the OF Mass that Mass can be as different as different as the many priests who celebrate it are.
WHAT IS YOUR EXPERIENCE OF CLERICALISM?
15 comments:
Clericalism takes many forms.
One form is the belief that some priests, often the recently ordained, have that their ordination makes them experts on most things. "Father knows best" even if Father has no training or experience in public relations, construction, medicine, art, choral singing, child discipline, Eastern religions, etc. Most of us learn fairly early on that our education backgrounds, including major seminary, are rather narrow in scope, and that there are many, many folks in the pews who know far more than we know.
Another form is the expectation that some priests have that they should be deferred to in many things. "Father" gets the seat of honor at the Christmas dinner table, "Father" gets to talk down to the servers in restaurants and make demands of the kitchen staff, "Father" doesn't have to get his hands dirty when the parish campus clean-up day comes, etc.
A really dangerous form is "Father isn't wrong"/"Don't question Father" about some doctrinal matter or some aspect of ecclesial history. There was a time not that long ago when "Father" was, in many places, the best educated person in the parish if not in the town. I am always pleasantly surprised when I encounter someone who has a better grasp of some aspect of church history or a better insight into some doctrinal topic than I. It opens doors.
Among other forms...
What you write is actually bad manners and arrogance which clericalism merely undergirds. I find much of Pope Francis’ attitudes arrogant especially in his refusal to engage in any meaningful way with Cardinals and bishops who voice concern or even opposition to some of his gestures and teachings. That is clericalism too.
Ironic that Fr. Kavanaugh would write all that since the worst clericalism I’ve ever experienced has come from him on this blog wherein he claims that only priests can know what the Church teaches.
"I find much of Pope Francis’ attitudes arrogant especially in his refusal to engage in any meaningful way with Cardinals and bishops who voice concern or even opposition to some of his gestures and teachings. That is clericalism too."
If clericalism undergirds the bad manners and arrogance you note, then the cause if clericalism.
First, we do not know if the Holy Father has engaged privately with the cardinals and bishops who have voiced concerns. You are making an assumption.
Second, the Holy Father is not required to engage with every cardinal and/or bishop and/or blog poster who is critical of him. In the same way, after you have made a decision in your parish you are not required to respond to every person who writes you or emails you or calls you to complain. The Holy Father and you are well within your rights to say "Thank you for voicing your concerns, my decision stands."
For example, were a congregant to come to you and say, "I don't agree with your policy that incense is used on major feasts and I want to discuss it," you are completely justified in saying, "Thank you, but this is the practice I am going to follow" and end the conversation right there. Is that arrogance or bad manners? I don't think so.
Fr. MJK made a good set of points regarding some of the symptoms of “clericalism”, but the actual disease diagnosis should be specific to clerics, no? The same symptoms/behaviors he listed can be found in many different professions including but not limited to medical doctors & surgeons, heads of State, corporate CEOs, etc. I could cite many examples, but won’t here.
It seems to me that “clericalism” has become the newest church buzzword used by many to describe some one or some group with whom they disagree, and is used in all kinds of different situations. Probably best to avoid using it.
For me, the worst form of priestly clericalism is the priest turning his back to the Lord to face the people thereby becoming a liturgical show host. This shows an arrogance against the Lord by putting himself above the Lord to please his own ego.
The second picture of the Mass is just great. The order and decorum speak of a deep and profound faith in Christ.
Fr Kavanaugh writes: 'I am always pleasantly surprised when I encounter someone who has a better grasp of some aspect of church history or a better insight into some doctrinal topic than I.'
This is unexpected, if welcome, news for those of us who have had cause to take him to task on a number of issues. A late conversion? Or are we hearing Jekyll rather than his alter ego Hyde who hides behind Anonymous?
Bee here:
We who lived the before and after of the implementation of Vatican II experienced the worst form of clericalism: dictatorial top down iconoclasm that shut down any feedback about the sacrileges taking place.
From parish priests to the highest Church offices, the attitude was that the changes were being done "because we said so." Oh, there was fancy rhetoric to "explain" them (and there still is), but even though they knew the changes were unpopular, they implemented them anyway, and stonewalled anyone who questioned.
Just like now. (For instance, what is the status of the Dubia sent to the Pope about Amoris Laetitia? Silence. Two years as of tomorrow, and counting...)
That is the worst form of clericalism - arrogant silence in the face of legitimate questions, or doublespeak that avoids the question.
Hardened hearts.
God bless.
Bee
I find clericalism is an attitude that the cleric’s personal needs, ego, and desires trumps everything else and laity are irritating barriers to their comfort . In other words, no sense of service or servant leadership except in name.
You don't want to know.
Actually, you already know! It's still going on!
Anonymous said...
The second picture of the Mass is just great. The order and decorum speak of a deep and profound faith in Christ.
November 13, 2019 at 10:22 AM
Bee here:
I'm proud to be a member of the parish where that photo was taken. That is St. John Cantius in Chicago.
The Canons Regular of St. John Cantius were founded in 1998 by Fr. C. Frank Phillips, CR under the motto "Instaurare Sacra" (to restore the sacred).
I think they do a pretty good job.
John - Some may have different grasp or a different insight, but these are not necessarily better than mine. Remember, you, too, have been taken to task.
Anon 10:11 - "Clericalism" is not specific to clerics as you note. It is a kind of egoism that can, and does, appear in most professions.
Hesiodos - One of the good books I read as a young priest was "Servant Leaders of the People Of God: An Ecclesial Spirituality for American Priests" by Robert Schwartz. It was a good primer for not falling into the "clericalist" mode.
Anonymous is correct is noting that "clericalism" is the new buzzword. Everybody is talking about "Clericalism" without defining what it is. There was an excellent book I remember, by Russell Shaw published by Ignatius Press in 1993 entitled "To Hunt, To Shoot, To Entertain: Clericalism and the Catholic Laity."
Everybody seems to be at cross points, here, to some degree. Without a definition of clericalism, you all run the risk of sounding like Potter Stewart when he spoke defined Pornography as "I know it when I see it," Jacobellis v. Ohio, 378 U.S. 184 (1964).
Fr. MJK on 13 Nov 19 at 1633: I wish you would have heeded the words of Robert Schwarz on servant leadership when you were pastor of Most Holy Trinity from 2010 to 2011.
Post a Comment