Friday, September 6, 2019

Women on clericalism

... as reported by Cardinal Cupich in the archdiocesan newspaper.  Offered here without comment on my part, as no further mansplaining seems to be called for:

https://www.chicagocatholic.com/cardinal-blase-j.-cupich/-/article/2019/09/04/archdiocesan-women-s-committee-responds-to-the-issue-of-clericalism

42 comments:

  1. >>Want to have the last word on even the smallest details of parish life,

    Pretend to be the smartest person in the room or dismiss women’s knowledge on church matters,

    Opine authoritatively on subjects they know nothing about,

    Use their authority to deny sacraments, or

    Favor those parishioners who treat clergy as if they are always correct.<<

    In my parish, this describes the Church Ladies, except for denying sacraments, though they certainly offer many guidelines on that front.

    The role that a small clique might play in encouraging clericalism (or even stepping up where they think that the priest might not be clerical enough) is probably worth exploring. To what extent is clericalism encouraged by the parishioners?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Jean, You are right. Most parishes have a cadre of enablers who make it to easy. We used to have a housekeeper who did the opposite. She told one priest, on hearing his father had disinherited him, "You used to be a stuck up, rich brat. Now you are just a stuck up brat." But she moved to another state to be closer to her family,

      Delete
    2. It occurs to me that not all clericalism is confined to clerics. In fact the worst clericalism I have encountered was a parish wedding planner (not our parish). She was Jean's church ladies on steroids. My husband was officiating at the wedding of a friend's daughter. She asked for a copy of the homily that he planned to give. I thought she was going to have an anxiety attack when he replied he just had it in his head what he was going to say. I thought it was funny, because she had been going around like a border collie all day fussing about stuff and being a pain.

      Delete
    3. Actually what I'm talking about probably isn't really clericalism. Just control freak, busybody, mean girl stuff.
      Sometime I may write a post about how that kind of thing accomplishes reverse evangelism, if that is the face of the parish that a newcomer encounters.

      Delete
    4. I imagine Hell being run by wedding planners.

      Delete
  2. I would say that Jean's Church Ladies comprise a clerisy of their own, apart from the clerisy of the ordained clergy, although no doubt there probably is some sort of feedback loop by which they reinforce one another's clericalism :-).

    Lay staff at parishes and Catholic schools (who in many cases are doing work that, in the days of an abundance of clerical vocations, would have been done by priests or religious sisters) certainly can exhibit clericalism in their own right.

    I know of an instance in which a church secretary was fired because she clashed with a person on the parish staff who had the job title of Director of some ministry or other. The pastor explained that the secretary had to go because "I have to support my Directors". That probably is as overt an exercise of clericalism as I can think of, even though the primary beneficiary was a layperson.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "... no doubt there probably is some sort of feedback loop by which they reinforce one another's clericalism."

      It has been interesting but distressing to watch the dynamic between the Church Ladies and the new young head priest of our two combined parishes.

      Our priest-in-residence was moved here from his long-time suburban parish in his late 60s, and has never shown much interest in doing more than putting in his time. He has been on hospice for two years, and this has strengthened the influence of of the Church Ladies.

      However, when the parishes were merged, RCIA and other religious enrichment programs were consolidated in the other, larger parish. This left the Church Ladies with titles, but no customers. They had high hopes that when the new head priest came in, they would be able to mold him to their will.

      The new priest is under 40, seems harried, ill-at-ease, and is kind of an odd duck. Because of Father's ill health, he is called in more frequently to say Mass in our parish, often without more than 30 minutes' notice.

      At a recent function, it was pretty clear that the officiousness of one of the Church Ladies really ticked him off.

      Whatever kind of cleric he is, my guess is that he will either end up short-sheeting our parish because he doesn't want to deal with these women. Or he will exercise his clerical authority to bust up their junta and make a lot of hard-nosed changes.

      I wonder what exposure to these types of women does to a celibate man who lives alone, and how it colors his views of women. I can't imagine this is a good situation.

      Delete
    2. Just guessing he'll pretty much say Mass, and that's it. He can do that without engaging with the church ladies much.
      Our parish is in the process of pairing with another, smaller parish about 10 miles down the road. They're going to be considered a mission parish. Word is they'll keep their readers and music people, ushers etc., as well as grade school catechists. It's going to be up to the laity to keep the place going, the archdiocese isn't likely to put any energy into it.
      Your church ladies could pick a different job. Of course they would need to avoid stepping on someone else's toes, and maybe they're not good at that.

      Delete
    3. The local parish is being called a "chapel," and and it seems clear to me that the diocese is going to let it quietly die off as the original members pass away. The Church Ladies direct the decorations and altar servers/lectors/EMs, and that's it. They're being allowed to keep CCD for this year, but I think the younger families have already switched to the bigger parish.

      What is sad for many people (maybe even the Church Ladies) is that there is a lot of unexpressed grief over the slow demise of what is familiar and clearly wrapped up with a lot of memories of First Communions, weddings, and funerals in their families. I say unexpressed because the m.o. is to pretend that any year now, there will be a big new influx of people to save the place.

      It would be nice to see an effort made in the larger parish to welcome these folks, maybe even make a plan now to incorporate the crucifix, icons, etc., into a place in the larger parish church. I suggested that the Men's Club talk to the new priest about helping with this effort--they have quite a lot of money in their coffers for that type of thing--but the feelings about this are too raw.

      Meantime, resentments build as any functions the larger parish puts on are seen as directly competing with and working against the local parish.

      Neither priest seems able to address this ill-will, which, in my view, speaks poorly of their pastoral abilities.

      Delete
  3. When my children were much younger, we sent those of school age to a neighboring Catholic school (our parish doesn't have a school). When our first child started school there, before I had started the journey to the diaconate, the school's policy was, "No family ever will be turned away because of an inability to pay the tuition."

    Years later, when our fourth child was ready to start kindergarten, and my wife was a stay-at-home mom and not earning anything, we realized that we really couldn't afford to send four children to Catholic school. I was a deacon by that time. I called the school and left the principal a voicemail explaining that we were experiencing a financial hardship. In the voicemail message, I alluded to the "no-family-that-can't-afford-the-tuition" policy. If we were any other family, I am sure that the principal would have called us back and we could have had a conversation about it.

    But somehow she knew I am a deacon at a neighboring parish (she was new to the principal's position, and I had never met her, so she didn't learn that fact from me), so instead of calling me back, she called her own pastor, and her pastor called my pastor, who then approached me about it. That whole chain of communication reeks of clericalism - that because this was a deacon's family's issue, it gets handled differently (and in my view, much worse) than any other family's issue.

    I was pretty much mortified that my family's financial status was being spread around to all the pastors in the neighborhood. When my pastor initiated the tuition conversation with me, I explained our financial situation to him (not that it's any of his !@#$ing business). He offered to subsidize our kids' Catholic education (from our parish's funds, of course). I am certain he wouldn't have offered that to any other parish family. That's another extremely overt instance of clericalism. To my credit, I think, I turned down the offer. The following fall, all of our kids were in public schools.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Jim, yeah, I would have felt the same way. Here the parishes have reciprocal agreements, you get the member tuition rate if your parish doesn't have a school. Our kids went to public schools, except the younger one did go to a parochial school in grades 6-10. It didn't hurt them.

      Delete
    2. My guess is that there is a sense that it "looks bad" for the deacon (or other parish leading lights) not to show support for the school by sending his kids there. Hence, the parish will bend over backwards to try to retain them.

      Delete
    3. Jean, you're probably right about "looks bad", and I admit that thought didn't cross my mind when we were going through it all. (As I say, I was practically incognito about being a deacon - it wasn't my parish, most of the other parents and teachers didn't know me from Adam except as one of the dads.)

      I guess I'd add that the fear of "looking bad" because the deacon left the school - that anxiety is itself a vestige of clericalism. It's hard to get away from.

      Delete
    4. It helped that our kids had graduated by the time my husband started formation.

      Delete
  4. Tom Blackburn: Please update us on your safety (or unsafe) situation. Thanks.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Gene, I did. The Bahamas fell on the grenade that was headed this way. What was left of it dribbled up the coast and is now making a mess of the Carolinas. We didn't even have the lights go out. We are collecting all the batteries people bought that didn't fit their flashlights anyway, and all the canned goods they bought so their neighbors wouldn't get to them first, and sending them to the Bahamas, where they are needed. Meanwhile, two more storms are forming out in the Atlantic.

      In good news, Florida state employees are now permitted to say "climate change" "ocean rise" and "global warming,"all phrases that were banned under then-Gov. now-Sen. Drydock Rick Scott, Navy hero and architect of the biggest Medicare scam in history.

      Delete
    2. I work with a guy who is in Florida, somewhere along the Atlantic coast. We were under orders last week (before it became evident that Dorian would make a right turn) to check on our Florida employees. So I checked on him. He described Dorian as a "nothingburger".

      Delete
  5. The clericalism problem is not, as noted,confined to priests. The church ladies, yes, they are clericalists too. But, the laity in general support clericalism, whether or not they realize it. The "Yes, Father", "Of course, Father", or "your Eminence" as the case may be, is an attitude bred into Catholics from baptism on. Or at least it was. I don't know if it still is.

    But, church teachings are the root of the problem. The church teaches that the priesthood is a superior state, that priests (and deacons too? They are clerics and ordained) are ontologically changed into superior beings through ordination.

    JPII and Benedict reinforced this view with priests, which may explain why the generations of priests who were "formed" during their papacies exhibit little interest in the Vatican II model of priests as equal to all other baptized Catholics with a vocation of being "servant leaders". Those young men who were very attracted by the idea of being "superior" to the laity (rather than equal and "servants", even if "leader" is appended) very often dominated, and continue to dominate, the new classes of seminarians. Too many begin exercising their superiority at the parish level, operating as dictators in their own small fiefdom, and it just gets worse it seems as they climb the clerical ladder.

    Seminarians are also still kept away from "temptation", (aka - women), and deliberately removed from the "real world", yet are not warned about the predators among their male, celibate superiors.

    All of the ill effects of excluding married men, and excluding single and married women from the priesthood are reinforced and exacerbated by the teachings and church laws that demand this exclusivity, and by the "ontological superiority" teaching that reinforces clericalism. Until those are changed, clericalism will persist. Abuse will continue to pop up also, because the clerical class of the RCC is still too much of a Boys' Club whose members too often protect their own.

    In the meantime, women are still seen by what seems to be a majority of Catholic priests as little more than cheap help (it's official Catholic teaching that women are to be helpers and supporters subject to male authority in the church and in the home. They call this "complementarianism" and claim it is God's will) - underpaid staff and an additional army of women (primarily) who volunteer to run all the programs at the parish level, from religious education, to ironing altar cloths. The men will accept jobs on the parish council and/or finance council, man the BBQ at the parish picnic, and, occasionally teach thekids - the older kids, if there are any left after Confirmation. But no "womens' work" for them. No flowers or ironing altar cloths).

    Frankly, since so few women demand any respect (including a decent paycheck if on the staff), they really share the blame for this lack of respect for women by clerics.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anne, You and I have clashed before over what I think of your propensity to attribute mole hills to the eternal teaching of the Church and you must think of as my propensity to ignore mountains. So I will pussyfoot a bit.

      If there were an exclusive call to priestly power instead of a universal call to holiness, Cardinal Cupich's column above should land him in deep a divinis doo-doo. But it won't. I remember, before Vat II ended, clerical Catholics diving for Bishop Charles Helmsing's ring before he could pull it away from their slobbering lips. He usually won the competition because he had more practice.

      In fact, the Council was still in its preparatory stages when I was sitting around with a bunch of guys who worked, marginally, for the Church. And we heard this story:
      A monsignor we knew had purchased a Mercedes in Germany, when there was a price advantage in doing it there, and had it shipped back to the Unites States with his maroon self. The Customs Inspector, of the Irish persuasion, admired the vehicle and said, "Ah, you know you will have to pay duty on that, Monsignor." The monsignor agreed. The Inspector thereupon smudged some dirt from his shoe on the tire and said, "Oh, but I see it's used. That won't cost as much."

      When we heard this story, the group immediately split into two groups. One thought it was a lovely story of the devotion of the Irish to Holymerchurch. The others wanted to tear the hide off the monsignor's back.

      This was, mind you, before the Vatican Council, which began by splitting up pretty much as our group had, with the majority leaning more toward flaying while the conservatives were edified by the story. The majority, for the most part, wrote the Council documents, which were and still are (even with their age showing a bit) official teaching.

      You are correct in saying that JPII and B16 felt VatII had gone too far in humanizing the priesthood and wanted to pull it back. You would be correct, too, if you said seminaries to this day struggle -- some more enthusiastically than others -- who want to bring back the chalice veil, the turtleback chasuble and all the buttons on what a Hong Kong lawyer used to call (when he was a child) "monsignors pajamas." But, my goodness, Anne, I bumped into a Catholic Mass in the Anglican Dispensation from England on the Web and saw things that the celebrants would never have gotten away with in my grandmother's day, much less in this era of Brexit. And those smells and bells are permitted but not encuraged, by Rome, as an exception, these days.

      Delete
    2. Anne - whether ordination makes one "superior" in some sort of ontological way is a disputed question which I leave to the theologians to sort out. I accept that ordination brings about an ontological *change*, and that the grace of ordination strengthens the recipient for ministry (which, to my mind, means service - which may not exclude servant leadership in some cases).

      I'd add that what is critical is not the *difference* between those who are ordained and those who aren't, but rather the *unity* of all of us who are baptized. In that sense, we all are, in a real sense, one - one in Christ.

      This point about unity is important because clericalism runs contrary to unity. It attempts to break our essential unity into, not only different categories, but different castes.

      Delete
  6. Very interesting post. Much more attention needs to be paid to this issue. Francis has certainly made it central.

    However Francis has not given a systematic analysis of what it means for him. But there are plenty of hints here and there.

    First he has made it clear that laity are a part of clericalism. Not only do some or most of us permit it, some desire it. Jean's church ladies are a good example.

    Some people such as Anne claim that church beliefs are part of the problem. For example the exclusion of women from the priesthood. However its seems clear to me that Protestant Churches who have women priests and Orthodox churches who have married priests still have much clericalism.

    It is also tempting to see clericalism as problem of males, or of certain personality types of males. Both may be implicated but they do not account for the whole problem.

    As someone trained in sociology I have interpreted some of Francis observations and actions as directed toward some of the underlying social structural problems. I am sure he is NOT aware of this.

    I recently outlined some of my thoughts in this area. Your comments so far have encourage me to put my thoughts into several future posts spread out over time so we do not get sick of the topic. It will also take me some time to organize and research my thoughts.

    ReplyDelete
  7. http://www.firstthings.com/article/2008/02/clerical-scandal-and-the-scandal-of-clericalism-14
    March 2008

    Clerical Scandal and the Scandal of Clericalism

    Richard John Neuhaus

    Russell Shaw admits that some people think he has become a nag on the subject. He has written several books and many more articles on the evils of clericalism. Charmingly titled is his 1993 book, which plays off the answer of an English bishop who was asked about the role of the laity— To Hunt, to Shoot, to Entertain: Clericalism and the Catholic Laity. Now Shaw has a new book coming out from Ignatius Press— Nothing to Hide: Secrecy, Communication, and Communion in the Catholic Church.

    Shaw knows whereof he speaks. He was for several years an official spokesman of the United States bishops' conference and has ample experience with the secretive ways of church leaders who, as the old saw has it, think that the chief and maybe only role of the laity is to pray, pay, and obey. A strength of the new book is that Shaw knows that, both canonically and in pastoral common sense, there is a legitimate and necessary place for confidentiality and secrecy. Shaw is also well aware that the Church is not constituted as a democracy, as he also knows how frequently the observation that the Church is not a democracy is ¬misused to avoid addressing the problem of clericalism.

    (see below)

    ReplyDelete
  8. Part 2:

    He is notably faithful to the teaching authority of the Church, and, in fact, it is the authority of the -Second Vatican Council and subsequent popes, especially John Paul the Great and Benedict XVI, that he repeatedly invokes in support of his indictment of ¬clericalism. Although his book is not chiefly about the sex-abuse scandal that broke in January 2002, he leaves no doubt that the scandal and the bishops' response to the scandal are part and parcel of the evils of clericalism.

    “By clericalism,” Shaw writes, “I mean an elitist mindset, together with structures and patterns of behavior corresponding to it, which takes it for ¬granted that clerics—in the Catholic context, mainly -bishops and priests—are intrinsically superior to the other members of the Church and deserve automatic ¬deference. Passivity and dependence are the laity's lot. By no means is clericalism confined to clerics themselves. The clericalist mindset is widely shared by Catholic lay people.”

    The National Review Board, composed of laity, reported in March 2004: “Some witnesses likened the clerical culture to a feudal or a military culture and said that priests and bishops who ‘rocked the boat' were less likely to advance. Likewise, we were told, some bishops did not want to be associated with any problem for fear of criticism because problems arose on their watch. As a result, problems were left to fester.” The board also said: “In many instances, church leaders valued confidentiality and a priest's right to privacy above the prevention of further harm to victims and the vindication of their rights.” “Indeed, church officials seemed to want to keep information from themselves.” Contributing to the problem, said the board, was the “haughty attitude” of some bishops and the practice of placing priests on “a pedestal far above the laity.”

    Hard words, no doubt, but hard words that nobody should want to deny. Clericalism is the shadow side of Catholicism's high doctrine of ministry. In celebrating the sacraments, the priest acts in persona Christi. It is a breathtaking dignity and responsibility. In reflections on the priesthood, the words of the ¬nineteenth-century writer Father Jean Baptise Lacordaire are frequently invoked: “To live in the midst of the world without wishing its pleasures; to be a member of each family, yet belonging to none; to share all sufferings; to penetrate all secrets; to heal all wounds; to go from men to God and offer Him their prayers; to return from God to men to bring pardon and hope; to have a heart of fire for charity and a heart of bronze for chastity; to teach and to pardon, console and bless always—what a ¬glorious life!”

    The glory is not diminished but in an odd way intensified by the unworthiness of the priest. “We have this treasure in earthen vessels,” said St. Paul, and there is a tendency in some veins of Catholic thought to exult in the earthenness of the vessel. Recall the whisky priest of Graham Green's The Power and the Glory. Hounded and hunted by the anti-Catholic Mexican regime, he is in every way a broken man, until he remembers that, despite all, he still possesses the priestly power to put God on the tongues of men. Is it clericalism to exult in the indelible mark of holy orders heroically manifested under conditions of moral disorder and duress?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Jim - very interesting passage from Neuhaus. He could be an original and penetrating (albeit in some ways flawed) thinker.

      Delete
  9. I can't bring myself to address a priest as anything other than "Father". I think it sort of puts up a barrier to more intimate friendship. In some cases, I think priests find that comforting - not having to get too close to people. I haven't walked in their shoes; I'm sure it's hard to have to leave people behind every six years or so. when the priest is reassigned.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Most of the time it's hard to say goodbye when a priest gets transferred, and I think it's hard for them as well. There was just one instance when I wondered, is this six years *ever* going to be over!
      I'm like you, I can't address them as other than "Father".

      Delete
    2. Jim, One of the responses to Vat II was to change the address to the pastor from "Monsignor Smith" to "Father Jim." Some priests, hoping for maroon buttons, may not feel comfortable with that, but they aren't worth talking to. Interestingly, the deacons I know I usually call "Deacon Marty," "Deacon Pete" and "Deacon Jack" respectively, but I knew the first two when they were still in the reduced lay state. While they were at the seminary, I was hanging out with black churches where "deacon" is a more common honorific than "reverend." It comes easily. In fact, when I quote you to them, I call you "Deacon Jim." They know who you are. :-) And they are watching.

      Delete
  10. Jack, the Protestant world is very big, and the different branches of it are very different from one another. There is NO similarity between our friends' evangelical church and our Episcopal church. I feel more at home at Jewish services than I do at evangelical Protestant services.

    Our parish is Episcopal - not Anglican, and different from the Anglican parishes that became RC. It is an historic building, with stations of the cross on the walls, and a beautiful portrait of the Madonna. Stained glass but no statues. A crucifix over the door to the sanctuary but not on the altar. Amazingly good music. We go to the Rite I mass (more formal than Rite II - because of the time it is offered) so much of the music is classical - Mozart and the like. I sing in my head some of the Latin hymns of my RC past.
    Vestments like the RC, and incense on "big" occasions. Ashes on Ash Wednesday, foot washing on Holy Thursday, etc. The language of the liturgy is more beautiful (in my mind) than the RC - not as awkward (not translated literally from Latin), more poetic.

    I can't judge how widespread clericalism is in the not-Catholic churches. I only have real personal experience with the RC church and the EC. Two of our sons went to an RC high school; one went to an Episcopal high. The chaplain of the school was not remotely clericalist. The parents called him Will. I don't know what the students called him. I'll have to ask my son at some point. In the EC parish we attend there has been no clericalism at all that I have observed over a decade or so. Even the church ladies pretty much behave themselves. The elected Vestry has genuine authority and power, unlike RC parish councils. In the RC church the Parish Council has as much or as little say over parish matters as the pastor chooses to give them. The members of the congregation have a voice in who their priests are, as well as in choosing a bishop. Representatives of every parish are part of the search committee for Bishop, and they have a vote. Lay people have a say in who leads their church at both the local and diocesan level. They also have a voice in church governance and policy at the General Convention of the EC in America.

    But my parish experience is one parish only. We call both priests by their first names - John and Cindy. John recently retired and Cindy is moving to a new parish to become the rector. Our new rector, Lisa, was one of seven children in a very Catholic family. She graduated from Notre Dame. Her first monthly "letter" to the parish was based on her mother's rosary. She goes by her first name. She is friendly and down to earth and not a bit clericalist

    We do address the bishop by preceding her first name with "Bishop" as in "Bishop Mariann". She is s non-clericalist as they come also. She is someone that we ordinary pew sitters can have a genuine and normal conversation with - she and I share an admiration for Joan Chittister, and she and I have had a couple of nice discussions about Sr. Joan. We have conversed on more than one occasion, and many parishoners (the more active ones)have talked with her on multiple occasions. She has two adult sons and her husband is RC. She has invited Sr Joan to the Washington National Cathedral several times - to give talks, and once to give the homily during the Sunday liturgy. Bishop Mariann is humble and kind. She is a "servant leader". She is everything a good bishop or priest should be in my opinion.

    Certainly I can't say that there is no clericalism in the EC, or in the Anglican communion. But, my personal experience with this parish, and with the two Episcopal schools we sent our sons to (also a k-3 day school), as well as visiting a number of Episcopal parishes in my area, I would say that if there is clericalism, there is far less of it than in the RC.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There are spikey Eiscopalians with "smells and bells," but most are broad church. Raber went to a low EC in West Virginia. It seemed pretty much like an evangelical church.

      I have never called an Episcopal priest other than Father or, for women, Reverend or Pastor.

      The vestry can fire a priest without permission from the bishop, though the diocese usually sends in a mediator to reconcile the parties if it gets wind of strife.

      Bishops are elected by the laity and priests and deacons.

      What happens sometimes, though, is that you'll find the same people dominating the vestry, and they become a clerisy (I think that's the word Jim used above) in themselves. These people can exert considerable restrictions on what and how a priest might preach on some issues. Some Episcopal Church Ladies once insisted that the priest use champagne in the cup for Christmas services. The priest explained politely why he could not, but they never really forgave him for it.

      Even my childhood Unitarian Church, which had no regular clergy (leader congregants or visiting clergy from many denominations would work through the order of service and give sermons or talks), had Church Ladies who tried to exert excessive influence.

      My point is not to knock ECUSA or Catholics or Unitarians, but to point out that balancing the influence of laity and clergy is difficult in every denomination.

      Delete
    2. Jean, You just reminded me of the late former principal of our late school, Sister Ruth. She used to say she was all for ordaining women priests, but not for the women she knew who wanted to be priests because they were even more clerical than the male priests.

      If you want to meet a bunch of male lay clericalists, go to a meeting of the (mostly wealthy) guys who think Pope Francis is a disaster. If being a priest looks like a nice gig to a person, that person is going to tend toward clericalism.

      Delete
    3. About the wealthy guys, and others, who think Pope Francis is a disaster, I am starting to think that schisms don't happen because of disagreement on actual articles of faith. It's tribalism, pure and simple. I used to discount the danger of schism as hyperventilation, because we all basically still believe the same thing. But the fault lines are all about who your "crowd" is.

      Delete
    4. Katerine, there may be something in what you say. The near-schism in the Anglican communion over homosexual clergy and marriage broke along cultural and political lines as much as teaching.

      Delete
  11. Is clericalism really about using first names, and informality?

    In Catholic parishes the homily usually last about ten minutes, often to observe the unwritten sixty minute Mass rule. The homily is supposed to be about the readings. I am not sure that a priest being folksy during Mass means he is not being clerical. Folksy can be just showing off and bringing a lot of attention on himself rather than on the readings or the music.

    In most mainline congregations the homily usually lasts about twenty minutes, and again there are usually readings and standardized music as alternatives to the pastor’s homily. Again I question whether down to earth talk that focuses upon the pastor’s experience, no matter how similar to that of the laity, is not in many cases clericalism. We end up knowing a lot about the pastor not much about our lives.

    Finally in Evangelical congregations the sermon is often an hour long; there are no standardized readings and seasonal hymns to provide an alternative framework to the pastor’s message. No matter how down to earth the preacher in the way he dresses and talks, it is really all about him and his message. I think such congregations are extremely clerical, no matter how much involvement members may have on the periphery of the worship service, not matter how relevant people might think the words of the pastor are.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Jack, The "unwritten" 60-minute Mass rule is due to the necessity of clearing the parking lot in time to refill it for the next Mass. We had an assistant (excuse me, parochial vicar) who believed in every jot and tittle of the Ordo. If there was a chance to omit part of the Gospel, he didn't. Additionally, he did not intend to leave any stones unturned with his homilies. The result was that people for the next Mass crashed into his people as they prepared to depart, and the next Mass started late as its later comers lined up in the street to wait for space in the parking lot. A lay -- and therefore ignorable -- member of the staff began campaigning then to cut one or even two Masses out of the Sunday schedule (there are five starting between 7:30 and 1:30) and spreading them out more. No dice. He noted that there would be time for longer homilies. Even less dice.

      But you are never going to get good preaching in 10 minute segments with one eye (unless the priest is anally retentive of the GIRM, as that one was) on the clock.

      Delete
    2. I think Francis does an excellent job of homilies that are about ten minutes long. I think his model comes from the spiritual exercises where Ignatian says the retreat director's points should be brief. Francis typically has three points which take several minutes each.

      Delete
  12. "...in Evangelical congregations the sermon is often an hour long..."
    While visiting Evangelical relatives I spent a week listening to one of those sermons one Sunday morning. When asked what I thought of the sermon I replied "It was nice", figuring that was polite. The relatives replied enthusiastically that I could have a copy on CD if I wanted. I declined with thanks.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Re: homilies. In my RC parishes over a 30+ year period, the homilies averaged 20 minutes. The only short homilies I heard were at weekday masses at Holy Trinity church in Georgetown (they use the original church for weekday masses, and I love it). Jesuit, so the homilies were short, intelligent, and to the point unlike most of the rambling homilies (with jokes from some book), at my parish church. We did have a couple of good homilists - weekend helpers, pulled from Catholic University and Georgetown. Masses were spaced far enough apart to be able to clear the parking lot before the next group arrived. Seven masses - one on Saturday evening, five from 7 am to 1 pm (the Spanish mass), and one at 6 pm on Sunday. Shorter hymns than at the EC, which also has a longer service (75 minutes except for the earliest of the three - no music at that one)

    Our EC priests gave excellent homilies - usually 15-20 minutes. Nothing folksy about them, Tom and Jack. What I liked about them was that they were far more interesting and intellectually challenging, more insightful, often more "spiritual", than most RC homilies. Both priests are widely read - "intellectual" types – but not snobs. They based their homilies on the readings, but drew widely from religious writers of multiple christian backgrounds, poetry and literature, and occasionally from spiritual wisdom drawn from non-christian religions. We have been away a lot recently, and so I haven't yet had enough experience with the new rector to know if she is as good a homilist as were the former rector and the now departing asst rector. Her most recent letter quotes Henri Nouwen - a good sign. The EC also has some stupid rules - one of which is that the assistant rector can not be promoted to serve as rector. So, to be rector of a church, Cindy is leaving, to everyone’s dismay.

    But the EC priests never conducted themselves as being "ontologically" or any other type of superior to the laity, though better educated in scripture, church history, liturgy than most of we folk in the pews. However, the pew sitters do include at least two retired priests, and one professor of the OT. Their homilies were not limited to what most of the RC priests seemed to rely on - what they were taught at seminary and what they pulled out of some canned homily book. The EC priests respected the intelligence of their flock, and also the fact that in this particular parish (the same demographic as my RC parish), many of the parishoners hold advanced degrees in their own fields and are not to be talked down to, as I (and others) often were by freshly ordained RC priests, as well as by a couple of pastors. The most clericalist of the pastors we had in the RC parish was an adult convert from the Baptist church. A whole story about him, but not enough characters to tell it!

    But, at coffee hour, at monthly dinners, at community events of all kinds, the EC priests were just like the rest of us, part of the church community, not above, and like the rest of us, are addressed by their first names.

    The overall gist of the comments seems to imply that to a degree, clericalism is pervasive, often, local - especially in churches without a hierarchy. It also seems to be a serious problem with many "church ladies" and those I call "the priests' groupies". Not all women by any means.

    But the extent of the clericalist mindset in the RCC, especially in the hierarchy, has caused far more harm than the clericalism in a Unitarian congregation, or most protestant churches - who can get rid of the pastor if they so wish. The clericalism in the hierarchy of the RCC led to protecting those who sexually abused others - especially the young, but, also, adults, including young priests and seminarians. There seems to be a lot of that also in the evangelical protestant world these days, including in the Southern Baptist churches. And much of that abuse does seem to be tied to clericalism also.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Katherine, you can also see videos of homilies on the websites of many evangelical churches, not just the megachurch pastors. I have done that because of some close friends who are evangelicals and also my husband's brother and his wife (who was raised RC and was actively RC in the early years of the marriage). Fascinating. I wanted to try to understand how they see christianity, how they are taught the gospel - mostly they aren't. Evangelicals rely heavily on the OT, and on Paul and Revelation in the NT. Perhaps the gospels might make some of them squirm a bit, except for the passage about "nobody can come to Father except through me" - and the one about being "born again".

    I stumbled across an article by Rachel Held Evans a few years ago. Sadly, she died at 37 this spring, leaving two very young children and a husband. She was considered a rising star of young evangelical womanhood - until she rejected the type of religion she was raised in. Her small town was where the Scopes trial was held, and she attended the small Bible college where her father taught. She was all-in until a few doubts started to arise while she was in college. It was the teaching that only born-again christians could go to "heaven". She had watched the execution in the soccer stadium in Afghanistan of a woman, a mother, which I also remember, feeling sick to the stomach while viewing.

    http://www.rawa.org/murder-w.htm

    RHE could not get rid of the idea that God loved that woman as much any born-again christian. Her friends, family, church told her that the woman could not go to heaven. She had not been saved, because she had not accepted Jesus Christ into her heart as her Lord and Savior. She had not been born again.

    That was the beginning of her slow walk away from evangelical religion. Her name still arises ire among commenters on articles about her, which were prominent in the mainstream media after her death.

    Until I read some of her books, I thought that the RC church did a pretty good job of indoctrinating its young into RC belief. But the indoctrination (some might call it brainwashing) in her life went well beyond what most Catholics get, especially since she lived in a town where pretty much everyone believed the same things. Fully immersive.

    I learned more about why evangelicals think the way they do from reading one of her books than I have from reading scores of articles in the mainstream press - both secular and religious.

    She and her husband were sometimes shunned (when they did not submit to "fraternal correction" from church members); some lifelong friendships shattered.

    Rachel Held Evans was not a theologian - no advanced training in theology or religion, although she did go to a bible college and knew a whole lot of scripture.

    Her writing is down to earth, addressed largely to others like her - raised evangelical, accepting it mostly, but fighting doubts. Young evangelical women flocked to her blog, because one of the things she rejected was the "Biblical Manhood and Womanhood" teaching - Complementarity of Men and Women (men superior, women inferior) teachings.

    For those who are interested (easy reads), her book on her path out of the evangelical world is called Faith Unraveled. Her last book, on "loving the bible again", is called Inspired

    She and her husband eventually found a church home again - in the EC. They were attracted to liturgy and the sacraments, to traditional worship, and they liked the EC's short-list of must-believe dogma and doctrine, as well as its openness to including all - even gays and women - as members and in ordained leadership. I thought her book on sacraments, Searching for Sunday does a better job of explaining them to ordinary people than do the more theology heavy books on the subject. Her book, seeing the sacraments through the eyes of someone who had never known them, gave me a new appreciation for sacraments.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If that small town was Dayton, Tenn., it's where we stumbled in a week before the 75th anniversary of the Scopes trial and found out they re-enact it every year in the Rhea County Courthouse. (Much of the actual trial was held outside because of the heat, but forget that.) We got tickets and brought a bunch from our family reunion the next week near Knoxville. In the re-enactment, what is said behind the railing is from the trial record. In front of the railing "townspeople" talk about the trial to indicate the passage of time. William Jennings Bryan was played by a lawyer in town. Clarence Darrow was played by, no fooling, a minister. Both were pretty good. Everybody was lovely, and we had some out-of-this-world tea. Unlaced.

      Delete
    2. I hadn't heard of Rachel Held Evans until she died. Very sad, especially for her children and husband. I think I would have enjoyed reading her writings, maybe I will have to look some of them up.
      I have been around Evangelicals quite a bit, my mother's side of the family were, and so were my in-laws. Seems like a lot of them take some things with a grain of salt. My grandma was a devout Baptist, but never bought into the male headship thing. It was said that she took the "obey" part of the traditional wedding vows out when she and Granddad got married.

      Delete
    3. A p.s. to our adventure in Dayton, Tenn., that just occurred to me: One member of the prosecution team (someone played him in the re-enactment) was a lawyer named Sue K. Hicks. Sue was a male, named for his mother, who was later a state court judge, and was the inspiration for Shel Silverstein's song which became a Johnny Cash classic, "A Boy Named Sue."

      Delete