Tuesday, September 28, 2010

I'm really having to bite my tongue...

...because I really want to use some very unpriestly language to describe the Association of Catholic Priests. The proposed women's boycott of Mass last Sunday was something of a non-event. My own observation, the anecdotal evidence given by priests and laity and press reporting of the event suggests that Mrs Sleeman's boycott didn't attract any noticable support.

The Catholic Communications Office issued a statment the day before the proposed boycott which rather uncontroversially said the following:
Catholic Communications Office statement on the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass
"Mass is a community sacramental celebration of the life, death and resurrection of Our Lord Jesus. We would encourage people not to absent themselves from the Eucharist where we re-enact the Last Supper and the Paschal mystery, following the command of Jesus ‘Do this is memory of me’.
The celebration of the Mass on Sundays and holy days of obligation is essential to the practice of the Catholic faith as the Sunday Eucharist is a pivotal aspect of the spiritual lives of Catholics."
Separately, in relation to role of women in the Church: "Lay women and men contribute actively to all aspects of Church life and this involvement has increased significantly in recent years. Every day throughout Ireland lay people, priests and religious work together making decisions in parishes for the local community. Examples of this collaboration include Parish Pastoral Councils, liturgy groups, child protection, social justice initiatives, parish finance committees, communications and in administration posts."
This statement, however, upset the ACP. What's more, the fact that a spokesperson pointed out that the boycott didn't seem to have much of an effect was dismissed by the ACP as border[ing] on triumphalism.  Overstate things often?

Really, it would want you to make you sigh (or swear) because people will believe that the whinging statement of the ACP represents the views of a significant number of Irish priests. Indeed, it would be interesting to poll the (alleged) two or three hundred priests who attended the founding meeting would be able to fully subscribe to the statement which begins: We in the Association of Catholic Priests...
One wonders how the statement was drafted, what consultation there was amongst the members and who issued it. My cynical streak suggests that this Association of Catholic Priests will become a sort of soap-box for a small coterie of Irish priests of a certain ideological bent who - whilst claiming to be voiceless - seem never to be out of the newspapers. Now, however, they can put forward their frequently wrong-headed and stale opinions as somehow representative of the thought of Irish Clergy.

What's interesting as well is that this group says:
women are presently excluded from many ministries and from all forms of decision-making.
Now, it's quite true that women are not accepted as candidates for Holy Orders. Ordaining a woman to the priesthood is a power that the Church simply doesn't have. I know that upsets many people and I know that it's hard for many people to accept or understand.  It is imperative that people's concerns are heard in good faith. However, the Church has no power to do otherwise and people need to understand that it's not a question of policy which could change at the stroke of Papal pen. It's something that the Church is irrevocably bound to. It's counter-cultural... it's practically scandalous in some ways, but as Catholics we're called to strive to understand and accept those parts of the faith that challenge us.

However, saying that women are excluded from 'all forms of decision-making' is simply incorrect. You should try explaining that to the Chairwoman of our local branch of the St Vincent de Paul Society. You should try explaing that to the women who play a leading part on our various parish committees, on diocesan finance committees, pastoral councils and a myriad of other similar bodies on the local, national and international level. You should explain that to the superiors of female religious orders and women who occupy leadership positions in lay eccesial movements. You should try to convince female principals in our Catholic schools and chairwomen of Catholic school Boards of Management that they are 'excluded from all forms of decision-making'. Tell the legions of Catholic mothers and grandmothers that they have no decision-making power within the Domestic Church which is the family. I've always understood that my vocation as a diocesan priest working in a parish is in helping all my parishioners in realising their own vocations and assisting them to follow Christ in their lives. That necessarily involves collaboration with those same parishioners and encouraging them to play their part in the work of the parish.  However, this collaboration is not an end in itself and there's a clear danger that the future of the Church is seen as a clericalization of the laity rather than an encouragement of their discipleship of Christ in the world.

To my mind, the statement of the ACP devalues the work of Catholic laity, male and female.

Ironically, the Association of Catholic Priests seems to confuse worthwhile participation in the life of the Church with membership of the clergy. There is no appreciation for the different roles of the laity and clergy as set out in the Second Vatican Council.  There's no appreciation that the Christian vocation involves a sancification of everyday life. I'm not always sure what the word clericalism is, but the ACP statement reeks of it. I suspect that many of the more 'conservative' clergy have a much better appreciation of the need for a renewal of the lay apostolate rather than pushing a model of clericalising the laity and making the Church an inward-looking organisation. (Pope John Paul II's Christifidelis Laici and Vatican II's Apostolicam Actuositatem deserve to be read.)

The Letters Page of today's Irish Times contains a sensible antidote to the ACP statement:
Madam, – The strong turnout of women for Mass last Sunday in Clonakility, despite the widely promoted and widely publicised boycott, confirms something that I have suspected for a long time.

Despite what we are often told to believe, a substantial number of women do not feel discriminated against or “oppressed” by the absence of women’s ordination.

As a young Catholic woman I see plenty of opportunities to be involved in the mission of the church. Such opportunities are complementary to that of ordained ministers, certainly not supplementary.

Perhaps if others were less clerically minded they’d see these opportunities too. – Yours, etc,
ANNE-MAREE QUINN,
Newtown Avenue,
Blackrock, Co Dublin.

2 comments:

Fr. Gaurav Shroff said...

Well put! These coteries of a certain ideological bent garner attention well.more than they deserve. On both sides of the pond.

Mrs McLean said...

They should tell St. Hildegard of Bingen, St. Claire of Assisi, St. Catherine of Siena, St. Teresa of Avila, St. Edith Stein...

I just challenged myself to think of a famous Anglican woman, and I came up with Evelyn Underhill, who was not, of course, a cleric. Oh, and Dorothy L. Sayers, also not a cleric. I have no idea who the first female Anglican minister was although she must (A) have made headlines (B) have thought her personal professional ambitions outweighed the gravity of the inevitable schism among Anglicans and now-impossibility of a reunification of the Anglican Communion with the Catholic Church.

The unthinking lies told over and over again about the position of women in the Church drive me wild. There are people who can say in one breath "WE are Church" and in the next "The Church is a male monolith." The myth of the male monolith is so ahistorical and untrue, it drives me insane.

Yes, it is clericalism. It is a very odd and insidious form of clericalism. And it is linked to a queer strain of feminism that is obsessed with professional status. Priesthood is such a beautiful, sacred, mysterious thing, and these people turn it into Parish CEO.