Saturday, August 18, 2012

Clericalism, American Style

Like everything else, Clericalism began working on me before I knew it was there.   By the time I was ordained, I was already enjoying the clerical state and therefore blind to an objective perception of it.   Since Clericalism feeds the ego, a taste for it was easy for me to acquire and keep on nourishing. Today I see Clericalism as an unfortunate, inevitable evil; unfortunate because of the suffering it spawns, and   inevitable because it is hardwired into human nature.  Clericalism is an evil parasite. It eats up and lives off of the souls it inhabits. Ultimately, it makes priests and people dead branches instead part of the living vine.
Most people today, if they think of Clericalism at all, would say it means a priest or minister abusing his position of trust in society for personal pleasure of a sexual nature, or for gain by taking advantage the perks which are part and parcel of his profession. That impression, while accurate in many regards is inadequate because it is incomplete. Clericalism isn’t reducible to sexual abuse, or enjoying perks. It is a relationship, a social reality, a way people regard men of the cloth, and a way men of the cloth regard people. Clericalism is a systemic codependent relationship in which both priests and people deal with one another not on the basis of their humanity, their real selves, but their imaginary selves, idealized and/or demonized to various degrees. This reflection attempts to relate the unfortunate yet inevitable reality of Clericalism to its broader dimensions, the most important of which is Christ Himself and the priest’s sacramental configuration to Him.
To set the groundwork, let me offer some seminal experiences from my past which help awaken me to the problem:
1.) I remember walking into a department store when I was newly ordained back in 1968, and getting a discount of 20 % on something I purchased.  It came as a surprise to me.  I thought the clerk had made a mistake.  So in my in my “Boy Scout” honesty I spoke up.  The clerk told me that it was store policy to give a discount to “men of the cloth”. I certainly didn’t mind. That night I shared my experience at the supper table with my first pastor, and he told me that the same discount applied pretty much across the board, with Airlines, trains, and busses as well as stores.  He gave me some information on how I could get a Clergy Pass, so the discount would be applied automatically whenever I travelled.  That certainly was fine with me.  Priest salaries were not high at that time, and I didn’t mind getting a break because I wore the Collar. It was a nice perk. Within a few years, however, the discounts had disappeared, and our salaries had risen considerably.  I loved the increased in salary, but I was not very happy that clergy discounts had disappeared. The times had changed, just after I had developed a sense of entitlement.
 2.) In those early days of my priesthood, it did not take me long to discover that clergy also got a pass on misbehavior.  In 1968, it was overlooked if Father drank too much, or did poor job preaching, or had a nasty temper.  Back then, Father even had the right to get angry and go on a rant! The Collar put him above reproach.  In legal matters where a complaint had been lodged, the Collar also got him a warning to get out of town before the posse arrived. I saw this happen at my first assignment, although it took a few weeks to put the pieces of the puzzle together and figure out what was going on. The details are blurred today, but I still remember the specifics that matter.
 I was in the backyard of the rectory. I had parked my new Plymouth Valiant in the garage, and was on my way to the backdoor porch, when a State Police car pulled in to yard and parked by the garage. The Hartford police parked in the church yard and school yard all the time, so I no longer noticed their cars. But a state police cruiser was an unusual sight. I stopped and stood there to see what was going on.  A trooper got out of the car, tipped his hat to me, (again, remember this was in 1968) and asked if the Pastor was in. I was about to say “I’m not sure because I’m just arriving myself”, when out of the door back door walked the Pastor. So, instead of saying “I’m not sure….,”my words to the trooper became “There he is now.”  With that, I headed into the rectory. Although I wanted to hang around, I somehow knew I should not.
At supper that night the three of us, (the Pastor, myself and the other assistant) sat at the table, but a fourth chair was empty. For the past couple of weeks, it had been filled by a visiting priest who was staying in the guest room upstairs. I remember asking if I should go call him, or if he was going to be in for supper, or some such thing. And the reply came that he had left. The tone of the pastor’s voice did not invite question or comment. I have no memory as to what we spoke of next, but I do know we did not talk about his leaving. The pastor’s tone of voice made me sense that I was not supposed to raise the subject.  I wasn’t aware of it at the time, but I was part of a conspiracy of silence around his departure. In truth, the silence was not consciously a conspiracy, but a general unawareness and unfamiliarity with the complexities of sexuality. Since I did not even know the meaning of the term pedophilia in those days, no pings or dots appeared on my mental radar screen for me to ignore.
What do I recall about our visitor? I remember him as a pleasant dinner companion, affable, easy to be with, who came from a diocese down South, and spoke with a slight drawl. He was on vacation, had people he wanted to see in the area, and was staying with us for a while.  Slowly but surely my mind began to doubt this information was accurate and complete. Little by little I began to put the arrival of the state trooper in the back yard with the priest’s unexpected departure.  Did the trooper arrive with some kind of complaint about the priest? Was he asking the Pastor if the priest was staying with us? Or did he come to warn the Pastor so that the Pastor could warn the priest?  It could have been any of the above.  Did the Pastor lie to the trooper about the priest’s presence and then tell the priest about the trooper’s visit?  Who knows? Maybe there was no connection between the trooper’s appearance and the priest’s disappearance, but the time-line led me to associate the two and look for a link even though I had no proof of one. I may be doing the priest, the trooper, and my Pastor an injustice, but I had the suspicion the Pastor warned our visitor, (with or without the trooper’s okay), to get out of Dodge before the posse grabbed him.
 3.)  Some months later, the Pastor asked me if I would like to be Principal of the school. I agreed, without giving the matter any thought at all. I was in the habit of visiting the classrooms, giving short talks to the kids, and interested in education. Why not be principal? The reason was very simple: because I was in no way qualified for the position.  They fact that I was a priest gave me no automatic right to be a principal. Any of the nuns who taught in the grammar school would have been better qualified than I was.  It amazed me how much more educated most nuns were than most priests.  The reason why was simple: we stopped our formal education once we got out of the seminary, whereas they continued theirs. Every summer while parish life went into low gear, the sisters, dressed in black, in the steaming summer heat, went and took courses at St. Joseph College, continuing their education.  It was laughable that I was their principal; even more laughable was that they all accepted my appointment as a matter of course.  The school secretary had more knowledge about running a school than I did. I feel sure that much of the drive for women’s ordination to the priesthood today has its historical roots in the unjust discrimination nuns and women in general endured in the not too distant past.
What did those three examples teach me about Clericalism?  Privilege and perks, a behavioral pass, confusion of competence with status, and exaggerated respect, all these elements were part of the package that would foster future resentment. But they are far from the complete package.
To Be Continued...

No comments:

Post a Comment