Gerald Archibald, Edmonon

In past columns, I have centred on the faults and serious limitations of the institutional Church. The most egregious of these in my opinion is the systematic, insidious, and embedded belief and practice of Clericalism. I believe this is the most serious of all the Church’s problems, and upon deep analysis, is at the root of everything that is corrupt and sinful in our Catholic Church today. Our dear Pope Francis has been very active in naming Clericalism as the root cause of Church problems.

If we are to move forward, Clericalism must be eradicated. So, to refresh our memories of what Clericalism means, I will list a few of its characteristics:

• The institutional Church (many/most of the priests, bishops, cardinals as well as many of the laity) believe that the ordained men in the Church are ‘ontologically’ changed at the time of ordination. In the seminary, ‘ontological’, was a common word…but it is certainly not in the common language in today’s society. What does ‘ontological’ mean? It is the belief that the Holy Spirit actually changes or marks the very essence and being of the person being ordained. I was taught this in spades while in the seminary. The phrase ‘indelible mark’ was regularly used by theology professors and was present throughout their teaching materials. This was ingrained at all levels of the ordained for centuries and centuries. The result was, and still is, a belief that both the hierarchy and lay community view the ordained as special people different than the rest of us. When this is studied further, it is as if something ‘magic’ happened at ordination resulting in a common belief that the ordained are in reality ‘set apart’.
• Gradually, over the centuries, this characteristic of Clericalism became a given. No one really questioned the ordained. There were no real checks and balances. This led to a belief that the ordained were ‘superior’ in the eyes of the Church (both within the ordained and laity).
• Clericalism led to secrecy and a lack of transparency. The ordained were not accountable to the laity. They believed they could ‘police’ themselves and the laity believed this also.
• A top-down hierarchical Church developed with the laity at the bottom of the ladder.
• Along with other policies of the ordained, such as celibacy for priests, Clericalism insidiously gave all the power in the Church to the ordained. This led to disaster. The phenomenon of child sexual abuse and its subsequent coverups can be directly associated with Clericalism. This is still going on, which is very sad indeed.
• I believe the official ordained Church members and their formulations of canon law are also at the root of not recognizing women as full and equal members of the Church. This has now become a human rights issue – are women full and equal members of the baptized community? If they are, can they not be simply regarded as such and eligible for any of the opportunities that men have? Is Clericalism at the root of this travesty as well? I think so.
• What about decision-making and authority sharing? Clericalism will not allow these to be genuinely and unreservedly shared with the whole church community. A genuine sharing of authority would give witness that the laity are full and equal partners in the Church.
• Since approximately 2013, the higher levels of the Church intervened in a collaborative process to examine and improve the type of music parishes can use. This proved a disaster in many parishes where the hymns do not resonate with the parishioners. Again, Clericalism at work!

There are many other examples of Clericalism that could be listed here, but there is only so much space available.

2.

I do considerable reading and research on Church matters in preparation for writing these columns. The same themes come up over and over. Yet little has changed in most parishes and in the global Institutional church. I must admit, reading and writing about Church corruption and the resulting decline affects me personally.

Believe it or not, I love the Church having dedicated myself to it for most of my life. This being said, I am profoundly disappointed in the lack of progress and reform. As you know, I share my email address along with these columns and I do receive feedback from readers. I am saddened by many of your stories and how many of you feel.

I received a response recently from a former very active member of a parish and diocese (both as a member, but also significant time as a staff member). This person feels beaten down to the point where he/she is now suffering from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. Further, this person now views the institutional church as ‘dead’. And sad to say, this person is not alone. Statistics clearly show the Church is in a precipitous decline in western society. Some non-Catholic churches also subscribe to ICN and often provide feedback.

One active member of another denomination encouraged me to continue writing about issues in the Catholic Church, as he said here are ‘little Romes’ within his congregation, and that this column helps to address them. Nevertheless, I am going to try to write more about what we do to move forward. We have named the main issues…now its time to suggest ways of naming the positives that are happening out there and proposing ways to make our parishes, dioceses, and the Church more Christ centered, and relevant to today’s society. We know we must do something!!!!!

3.

While many of our parishes are non-life giving, some are very active and ‘alive’. One characteristic of these parishes is the presence of a dynamic priest who is both a leader and a person who is cognisant of Vatican II and other progressive literature. He is a leader who, at the parish level, shares his authority with the congregation. He totally believes that through the sacrament of baptism, all of his congregation as well as himself, are Equal.

His concern is more about the People of God than the priest of God. He likely believes his ordination to the priesthood was not a magical act but instead a blessing and occasion of holy graces being bestowed on him. He is not ‘ontologically’ changed. He likely believes in ‘Servant Leadership’ where he deviates from official canon law somewhat when necessary, and instead believes his congregation has the right and obligation to share their ideas and proposals.

He takes them very seriously and discusses openly with them how he feels. They come to conclusions mutually. In turn the congregation responds and gradually becomes more and more involved in the running of the parish. Whereas most parishes are run to maintain the status quo, this parish is run to examine how they can become more Christ centered. They discuss ideas and adopt programs that reach out into the community. Their music is life giving. Perhaps they adopt ways of fine-tuning the liturgy and music of the mass to appeal to all the faithful including the youth.

This parish also believes Catholic schools in their area must be a key part of its ministry and mission. Special and appealing liturgies are a key part of ‘school outreach’. Homilies are never read verbatim from a written text. They must have some spontaneity and be relevant. In fact, this progressive priest will have a committee of lay people, including young people, to read over and discuss proposed key points of the homily for the next Eucharistic celebration. Questions and suggestions are welcomed at this discussion stage.

The welcoming ministry is not a boring ritual…but a genuine reaching out to parishioners in a creative fashion. Similarly, when people leave the Church building, there should also be people who sincerely and warmly thank them for coming. Both welcoming and thanking parishioners after mass should involve volunteers introducing themselves, and if possible, asking for parishioner names. Home visits should be implemented by this parish.

While the shortage of priests often initially suggest home visits are impossible because the pastor is so busy with the running of the parish, this should be openly discussed by the parish council and pastor. Perhaps, this pastor is so open to new ways of doing things, he will actively consider delegating a portion (whether it be a small or large portion) of his duties to various people so he can visit people in their homes.

There are many ways parishes and dioceses can become relevant again. As well, several IVN readers suggest that there be more social and celebratory events sponsored by the parish. This would serve as one more way of people getting to know each other at a much more personal level. These occasions would infuse more ‘joy’ into the parish. The key focus of all these practices and changes would be to create a much more Christ centred loving community.

One more thing: I just read about two parishes in Germany and one in Switzerland that include men and women on the baptismal team, where a lay man or woman ‘perform’ the actual baptism. However, some clericalism even exists here, as only the priest can anoint the person to be baptised with the holy oils (chrism) But positive things are happening here and there!

Please provide feedback. Do you have positive ideas for your parish? If you don’t have a parish, what would entice you to become involved? (email archibaldjerry@gmail.com)

(see Al Lind “A Church That is Alive” – Key Areas to Build a Vibrant Church in the ‘Opinion’ Category)