I hear the word “clericalism” a lot these days. Depending on which Catholic journals or blogs you read, it’s either a rampant scourge upon our church, or it’s hardly a problem at all. The term is pejorative and often directed at younger priests. It implies a pronounced haughtiness, intransigence, and the use of authority for the sake of domination. I must admit that I have met very few Catholic priests who exhibit those traits. Yet clericalism has been named by some as the “central obstacle” to the Church fulfilling her mission, as the reason why Mass attendance and vocations are down, and as the cause of sexual abuse in the Church. That strikes me as a facile explanation for some of the Church’s greatest challenges.
Recently, a Catholic journal published an essay by a priest who is also a seminary professor. In it, he likened serving as a priest today to serving in the military. As someone who is both a priest and a military officer, this analogy grabbed my attention. I have been a priest for thirty-two years, with twenty-four of those years as a military chaplain. I, too, see many overlapping traits in good priests and in good soldiers — qualities such as self-sacrifice, integrity, a desire to continually learn, humility, a strong sense of morality, self-control, and wish to pursue excellence. And all those virtues must be striven for, oftentimes, in the face of indifference or outright hostility from broader society.
As a senior priest in the Air Force, I see many successive classes of new priest-recruits entering active duty. They are younger than I and of a different generational mindset. Most of these men answered the call to priesthood in a world that had been through 9/11, been through the abuse scandal of 2002, and been through the Theodore McCarrick scandal of 2018. Rather than growing up in a culture where the Church and priesthood were held in high regard, as I did — and when priests were afforded more perks and respected more than they are today — they have grown up seeing the Church pilloried from all corners, with priests as the punchline of many debauched jokes. Nonetheless, they have boldly stepped forward to serve. Who are these men and what motivates them?
I will be the first to admit that I don’t always share their tastes in clerical or liturgical attire, many of which I believe they will moderate as they get older. Nor do I possess a sentimental nostalgia about a Church and culture (and liturgy) that existed before I was born. But I also must admit that I often don’t exhibit their sense of Catholic evangelical zeal, either. And it is that zeal that I think many people are observing and mislabeling as “clericalism.”
In my experience, younger priests are not haughty and entitled in any greater measure than their older colleagues. They do not think they are better than other people. Rather, they fully embrace the military-like sacrifice that their calling demands and try to live a counter-cultural lifestyle. They do so proudly and willingly. The thought of working long hours for low pay, of dressing distinctively, and of doing something radically different than their friends, to say nothing of the discipline of celibacy, appeals to them. The harder and more different, the better. They are proud to represent and defend the theology of an oft-beleaguered Church, just as the soldier is proud to wear the flag of his country on his uniform “behind enemy lines….”
From First Things
” And it is that zeal that I think many people are observing and mislabeling as “clericalism.”” I couldn’t agree with you more, Fr. James A. Hamel. Zeal is devotion to the faith to the extent that the desire to make converts is overwhelming. Clericalism is the clutching of the prerogatives of a minister as a means of furthering one’s own sense of self-importance. They are diametrically opposed to be sure, but a priest with zeal believes strongly in discipline and fidelity to the extent that to the lukewarm Catholic this is a threat whose default defense is to claim “clericalism.” A cleric at any level guilty of clericalism will browbeat or otherwise abuse anyone perceived to represent a challenge to his authority. A cleric full of zeal will adopt a sympathetic attitude in the same situation.
Clericalism is the opposite of zeal.
There is also the fading, but still present, phenomenon of lay clericalism of “Susan from the parish council” types.
There is also the clericalism of Fr. “I’m a priest in good standing” James Martin who uses his Roman collar and his Society’s sinful tolerance of him to scandalously promote gay unions and sinful sexual activity among Catholics.
The clericalists are the progressives.
You’re right, there is also a lay clericalism. Some lay liturgists have displayed clericalist attitudes. Also, clericalism is found among some traditional priests as well as progressive ones. Orthodoxy alone does not prevent such destructive attitudes. And, lay faithful, please don’t foster or tolerate clericalism. Respect clergy, but don’t put us on pedestals. That is not good for anyone. Respectfully speak the truth to your pastors, for the salvation of their souls as well as yours.
I don’t understand who gave you a down vote.
I worked in a parish where some of the RE staff were church climbers and the others were afflicted with scrupulosity. The climbers (female) vocally expressed their wishes to become priests, but Benedict, the sexist, was holding them back. Their laments were always about the under-representation of powerful women in the church. They were unapologetically for women’s rights and pro-abortion. The Uriah Heeps (I am your ‘umble servant) were with the Lord at all times and didn’t want to be disturbed in prayer, even if it meant their double-parked cars were about to get towed. Truth. I lived through it and tried to keep my sense of humor and balance. But I saw it all, the wanna-bes, the mostly under-educated but full-of-themselves women and men, the big fish in little ponds, the church-working folks with spurious degrees who found themselves in plum positions with unfettered power over the parish.
A strong priest/pastor could easily weed those people out. Candidates for RE positions, or any positions in a parish or parish school, should be questioned to the hilt about their core beliefs, and then make it clear about what’s expected of them. That would include their fidelity to the Church’s teachings. If the hiring process is lax, then you’ll get people who will undermine you every step of the way. That is what has happened. That is what will continue to happen.
The young seminarians I know, consider it a calling from Christ to love and serve Him. And that trumps every and anything else they were considering. They boldly proclaim the truths of the faith, for as you say, they have grown up seeing a different church and have no illusion. Many know they will be martyrs for Christ. if not red, than daily white, like most Catholics who choose to be faithful despite the culture these days.
Our pastor once said that for the first 25 years of his priesthood he was too self-centered.
Any man that honest with himself must be an outstanding pastor, as I would venture that he is equally honest with God.
Well, at least he woke up after a quarter century. Thankfully, not all are like he was.
Aside from saying Mass and Breviary, absolving sins in Confession, Baptizing, saying funeral Masses, visiting parishioners in the hospital, parish council meetings, meeting with troubled people (hopefully doing a holy hour and Rosary) they still need sleep and food and bathing and rest and relaxation.
Pray for them..
Faithfulness to Christ’s teachings is not “rigidity,” it is faithfulness. Faithful Catholics respect, love and revere their Church’s sacred traditions, which are of Christ. Clericalism is a misuse of power and authority in the clerical profession, by a priest or bishop.
I can’t tell if you are Catholic, Catholic plus, Catholic adjacent or Catholic schismatic.
3 sentences that just aren’t quite right.
You “can’t tell” if someone is Catholic? So what? What are you? Are you Catholic? Are you “woke?” Or gay? Or a transgender– a man trying to be a woman? What are you? Nobody cares. So what?
The word “clericalism” is often misused like the word “Pharisaism”. Yes, there were bad Pharisees and are bad clerics who wrestle with Christ over divorce and other matters seeking to entrap him, but there were those like Joseph of Arimathea, who followed him seeking the truth. The true Pharisees believed in an afterlife while the scribes, an ancient version of Deism or Agnosticism, did not. Look at the good God did with the Pharisees St. Joseph of Arimathea and St. Paul. Reminds me of a present bishop who said of the Traditional Latin Mass, ” Brothers, if it be from God, it cannot be stopped. If not, it will fade away.
On September 22, 1936, the Catholic Church in Canada banned “O Holy Night” from being performed in churches, along with other songs including wedding marches, the Canadian national anthem, and many versions of Ave Maria, including those by composers such as Franz Schubert, Charles Gounod, Pietro Mascagni, and Jules Massenet. Per the secretary of the archbishop, the reason for the ban of these songs was the desire for the promotion and exclusive use of Gregorian chant and Gregorian music.
The bans were not just because the leaders of the Church wanted Gregorian Chant only as there never was to my knowledge a total ban on such Catholic hymns as “Silent Night”. It was composed by a parish priest in German for a guitar when the organ broke down. There seems to be other reasons for the bans, mostly because they were not real Catholic hymns, or the composers were in trouble with the Church at that time, or one country was fighting another and did not want to use their Catholic music. Anthems of countries are usually not sung in churches of any denomination unless one of theirs wrote it.