Is there a deeper question about the nature of priesthood at the heart of the debate around Maynooth, asks Fr Martin Delaney
In my 30 years as a priest there have been bleak periods when I have been forced to ask myself questions like: “Why do I want to continue in this way of life?” Some of those bleak periods have come about because of a personal crisis and some have been caused by negative portrayals of the Church and/or priesthood in the media following yet another revelation of some kind or another. August 2016 has been another of those bleak periods.
In the midst of the recent media frenzy about Maynooth and ‘the latest scandal to rock the Catholic Church’ a friend sent me the text of a homily preached at a celebration for the silver jubilee of priesthood. Included in the homily was the following quotation: “In the daily exercise of our pastoral office, we sometimes have to listen, much to our regret, to voices of persons who…can see nothing but prevarication and ruin.
“They say that our era, in comparison with past eras, is getting worse, and they behave as though they had learned nothing from history, which is, none the less, the teacher of life. They behave as though at the time of former Councils everything was a full triumph for the Christian idea and life and for proper religious liberty.
“We feel we must disagree with those prophets of gloom, who are always forecasting disaster, as though the end of the world were at hand.
“In the present order of things, Divine Providence is leading us to a new order…directed toward the fulfilment of God’s superior and inscrutable designs.”
The interesting thing about that quote is that it came from Pope John XXIII as he opened the Second Vatican Council nearly 54 years ago.
It could have been said this week or perhaps any week in the Church’s history.
There are many aspects to the present discussion centred around St Patrick’s College, Maynooth. I just wonder if at the heart of this unfortunate story is that very same struggle which the late Pope St John describes in his address.
Is the real issue here a struggle between two basic understandings of Church, of priesthood, of the relationship which the Church should have with the world and which priests should have with their people?
On the one hand, there is a view of Church where the priest is set apart from the people, as in the past. The rules are clearly defined in black and white and those who do not strictly adhere to the rules face exclusion from full participation in the life of the Church. The priest will be the protector and enforcer of the rules.
This understanding of Church and priesthood is often accompanied by a pre-conciliar approach to liturgy and particularly the celebration of the Mass.
On the other hand, there is a view of Church which emphasises the baptismal dignity of each member. The ordained priest has a particular role of pastoral leadership but never in a clerical, elitist manner. He is called to be a minister of compassion and mercy where his role is to comfort the afflicted…and afflict the comfortable. Liturgically the priest is the leader and presider at the Eucharist where there is full, conscious and active participation by the whole congregation.
I readily admit that this contrast may be too simplistic and yet I feel it has some legitimacy. In recent times these two understandings have also come to describe the difference between the approach of Pope Benedict XVI and Pope Francis.
Statement
Undoubtedly, Benedict would be seen as the champion of the more traditional and clericalist approach to Church but in another section of the silver jubilee homily I mentioned above, the preacher refers to a significant statement made by Benedict XVI in 2010 when he called for “a change in mentality, above all with regard to the laity, moving from considering them ‘collaborators’ of the clergy to recognising them as truly ‘co-responsible’ for the being and action of the Church, promoting a mature and dedicated laity in this way”.
I am not privy to the entire approach to formation of priests in Maynooth but from the contributions of college president, Msgr Hugh Connolly and other members of staff I gather that the college sees its primary role as that of preparing future priests to minister in the parishes of Ireland in this 21st Century.
To do that, I presume that the formation team has discerned and reflected on this contemporary Church in Ireland and how best to prepare those who will minister within it. Can we assume that theologically, liturgically and pastorally the formation team in Maynooth favours a less ‘clerical’ and more ‘co-responsible’ understanding of Church and priesthood? Can we also assume that the tension and conflict occurs when some of those in formation view the Church and their future ministry in a very different way?
What role do the allegations about sexual impropriety play in this clash between different understandings of Church and priesthood?
I certainly don’t wish to minimise the seriousness of any allegations and I hope they will be properly investigated. However, in the context of the above discussion, I am conscious that the ‘presenting issue’, that is to say, the allegations of sexual deviance and impropriety, may not be the major source of grievance on behalf of those making the allegations.
Again, I stress I am not seeking to diminish the seriousness of these allegations but I also believe it is possible that such allegations can be unfairly used to further another agenda and in the process damage the reputations of individuals and indeed whole communities. How these allegations are presented and reported on can lead to totally unfair generalisations and characterisations.
Vocation
I think about the effect this whole episode is having on the seminary community in Maynooth, the vast majority of whom are seeking to follow the call of God in their lives whether as students on the path to priesthood or those who have been appointed to lead and guide them.
I think too of those who are preparing to enter seminary for the first time or those who may be contemplating a vocation to priesthood. I hope and pray that this crisis will offer an opportunity for the leaders of the Church in Ireland to reflect on whether the seminary system as we know it is actually the best method of preparation for future priests in Ireland.
I fear that some in leadership may be tempted to take the Donald Trump approach and build bigger walls and lock more doors to keep seminarians ‘protected’ from the influences around them.
If we are to really embrace Pope Benedict’s vision of co-responsibility then the formation of future priests must also model that vision.