What is Clericalism?

All, just a question: How do you define what is known as “clericalism”??? I heard it’s when a priest, no matter if recently ordained, lauds his priesthood over the laity.

A lot of lay people think they know it all and think they have the right to tell the priest what to do. We are not a democracy…period!

Christ is risen…truly He is risen!
Shoshana

A Preist doesn’t know it all, but he does know a lot. After all, he did spent 4 years at Major Seminary studying the Catholic Faith. For the most part, the Laity go by what the learn from the Preist, and that’s the way it should be.

[quote=Shoshana]A lot of lay people think they know it all and think they have the right to tell the priest what to do. We are not a democracy…period!

Christ is risen…truly He is risen!
Shoshana
[/quote]

If you read here correctly, that is not what is implied. I don’t know what type of priests you have in your parish, but there is not one diocese in the the whole USA which has a policy of MUTUAL respect and collaboration between the laity and the priests. Of course this will be followed IF THE PRIEST IS FAITHFUL TO WHAT THE SECOND VATICAN II’S DOCUMENT LUMEN GENTIUM STATES, THAT THEY ARE TO NOT THINK THEMSELVES SUPERIOR TO THE LAITY, BUT AS JESUS THEY CAME TO SERVE. Clericalism, may be a symptom of a controling power trip on the part of a very FEW amount of priests: as another wonderful Christ-like priest told me: priests like that, will end up usually with 5 old ladies saying "yes father, no father to every whim of the priest OUT OF FEAR, not love, collections will be low, and they will usually saty with those parish members who are used to being submissive, and with no self-esteem. Vatican II clearly mentions FREE will=I guess those types of priests here described don’t believe in free will, just a CONTROLLING, hostile mentality. These usually end up frustrated and leave the priesthood anyway down the road. These preach Charity, but when it comes to do Charity, that is where they lack most.

[quote=Allen537]A Preist doesn’t know it all, but he does know a lot. After all, he did spent 4 years at Major Seminary studying the Catholic Faith. For the most part, the Laity go by what the learn from the Preist, and that’s the way it should be.
[/quote]

Considering his laity have never learned theology, or are UNeducated. However, in Philosophical and theological studies, believe me, there are those lay people that are way more advanced in formal education, also who have studied either at a seminary (GRADUATE degrees in Theology) or who have studied side by side with them. Not all LAY are from third world countries, some actually are encouraged by the US Bishops to study as well. I knew a wonderful good priest friend who not only had a Licentiate degree from the Gregorian University in Rome: Dogma, but a Master’s degree from a secular Ive League University, and he consulted with me on various occasions, and even acted upon my advice, though we both knew HE was the Pastor and could even fire me if he wanted as his religion director. But of course, he was humble, and God filled, PRIDE never was his pead in the pot.

[quote=misericordie]…and he consulted with me on various occasions, and even acted upon my advice, though we both knew HE was the Pastor and could even fire me if he wanted as his religion director. But of course, he was humble, and God filled, PRIDE never was his pead in the pot.
[/quote]

And that’s what this is all about, isn’t it? You’re still smoldering with resentment at that priest who, according to your other thread, did some horrible offensive thing that you won’t describe… but on the other hand, there’s this other priest, who is clearly wise – how do we know? Because he consulted you and took your advice.

So, no, Misericordie, I don’t believe that you are “just interested.” You seem to be committed to being the victim, or offended, or annoyed, or… something. Lately you’ve been very focused on the notion of Priest as Servant. What’s the corollary… Parishioner as Master?

Anyway, I think the phrase you had in mind was “lord it over,” not “laud it over” – although, come to think of it, maybe it was a subconscious slip… maybe lauds are what you really want. Think about it.

:hmmm:

[quote=Pentecost2005]And that’s what this is all about, isn’t it? You’re still smoldering with resentment at that priest who, according to your other thread, did some horrible offensive thing that you won’t describe… but on the other hand, there’s this other priest, who is clearly wise – how do we know? Because he consulted you and took your advice.

So, no, Misericordie, I don’t believe that you are “just interested.” You seem to be committed to being the victim, or offended, or annoyed, or… something. Lately you’ve been very focused on the notion of Priest as Servant. What’s the corollary… Parishioner as Master?

Anyway, I think the phrase you had in mind was “lord it over,” not “laud it over” – although, come to think of it, maybe it was a subconscious slip… maybe lauds are what you really want. Think about it.

:hmmm:
[/quote]

You seem to project your inner fears outwardly as I wrote in response to another post you were not able to respond to, so you went on the defensive. You seem in ALL your posts to do the same to not only me, put many many other posters. If you had to take a logic course in argumentation, you would probably try to analyze the teacher’s motives for teaching the course. Careful with playing God, and being not responsive to an argument, but to go on the offensive at the one posing the argument: shows much insecurity, and since you have done it so many times with various posters here, my friend you have lost credibility.
Much blessings though, I will pray for you.:dancing:

[quote=Shoshana]A lot of lay people think they know it all and think they have the right to tell the priest what to do. We are not a democracy…period!

Christ is risen…truly He is risen!
Shoshana
[/quote]

Clericalism is sinful behavior though. A Priest presides in charity over his flock. Clericalism is a repudiation of the legitimate dignity and respect of the layperson. The layman’s role is distinct from the Priest’s, but the Priest is not a superior human being than the layman. That is what the universal call to holiness is all about.

[quote=BillyT92679]Clericalism is sinful behavior though. A Priest presides in charity over his flock. Clericalism is a repudiation of the legitimate dignity and respect of the layperson. The layman’s role is distinct from the Priest’s, but the Priest is not a superior human being than the layman. That is what the universal call to holiness is all about.
[/quote]

AMEN, AND ALL THE OTHER WONDERFUL PRIESTS WHOM I HAVE KNOWN BOTH DIOCESAN AND RELIGIOUS, WHO ARE LOVING AND CHARITABLE SAY THIS TOO!! Oh yes, and they are no liberals, but actually just NON arrogant.
RIGHT ON. AMEN FRIEND.:slight_smile:

Clericalism does not appear in the Catholic Encylopedia.

Cleric does,

A person who has been legitimately received into the ranks of the clergy. By clergy in the strict sense is meant the entire ecclesiastical hierarchy. Consequently a cleric is one who belongs in some sense to the hierarchy. For this it is necessary that he have received at least the tonsure. The clergy by Divine right form an order or state which is essentially distinct from that of the laity. (Conc. Trid., Sess. XXIV, De sac. ord., can. i, 6.) Christ did not commit the preaching of the Gospel and the administration of the sacraments to the faithful in general, but to certain carefully defined persons, as the Apostles and seventy-two Disciples. They also received the power of governing the flocks; which power is represented by the Keys, a well-known Oriental symbol for authority. That the distinction between clergy and laity was recognized in New Testament times is plain from St. Paul’s statement that the bishops have been placed by the Holy Ghost to rule the Church (Acts, xx, 28), for the right to rule implies a correlative obligation to obey.

I believe that you will find that in the 13th Century after Monastisim had matured some of the Monks/Priests were devoted to Theology, Philosophy and the Intellect, they were called Schoolatics. Some Schoolastics were said to be of the Clerical Class. Clericalism is not a word.

[quote=Exporter]Clericalism does not appear in the Catholic Encylopedia.

Cleric does,

A person who has been legitimately received into the ranks of the clergy. By clergy in the strict sense is meant the entire ecclesiastical hierarchy. Consequently a cleric is one who belongs in some sense to the hierarchy. For this it is necessary that he have received at least the tonsure. The clergy by Divine right form an order or state which is essentially distinct from that of the laity. (Conc. Trid., Sess. XXIV, De sac. ord., can. i, 6.) Christ did not commit the preaching of the Gospel and the administration of the sacraments to the faithful in general, but to certain carefully defined persons, as the Apostles and seventy-two Disciples. They also received the power of governing the flocks; which power is represented by the Keys, a well-known Oriental symbol for authority. That the distinction between clergy and laity was recognized in New Testament times is plain from St. Paul’s statement that the bishops have been placed by the Holy Ghost to rule the Church (Acts, xx, 28), for the right to rule implies a correlative obligation to obey.

I believe that you will find that in the 13th Century after Monastisim had matured some of the Monks/Priests were devoted to Theology, Philosophy and the Intellect, they were called Schoolatics. Some Schoolastics were said to be of the Clerical Class. Clericalism is not a word.
[/quote]

Actually it is a word. It technically means maintaining or increasing the power of church hierarchy. In common parlance thoug it’s a belief system that says that clerics by dint of their ordination are a superior caste of people in comparison to lay faithful. In AmChurch there is a new type of clericalism, dubbed “lay clericalism” by orthodox Catholics wherein lay ecclesial ministers run the day to day operations of a church in lieu of or with a priest. They oftentime posit a belief system of the church that is radically progressive. Clericalism runs counterintutive to Christ’s call for humility of his priests.

[quote=Exporter]Clericalism does not appear in the Catholic Encylopedia.

Cleric does,

A person who has been legitimately received into the ranks of the clergy. By clergy in the strict sense is meant the entire ecclesiastical hierarchy. Consequently a cleric is one who belongs in some sense to the hierarchy. For this it is necessary that he have received at least the tonsure. The clergy by Divine right form an order or state which is essentially distinct from that of the laity. (Conc. Trid., Sess. XXIV, De sac. ord., can. i, 6.) Christ did not commit the preaching of the Gospel and the administration of the sacraments to the faithful in general, but to certain carefully defined persons, as the Apostles and seventy-two Disciples. They also received the power of governing the flocks; which power is represented by the Keys, a well-known Oriental symbol for authority. That the distinction between clergy and laity was recognized in New Testament times is plain from St. Paul’s statement that the bishops have been placed by the Holy Ghost to rule the Church (Acts, xx, 28), for the right to rule implies a correlative obligation to obey.

I believe that you will find that in the 13th Century after Monastisim had matured some of the Monks/Priests were devoted to Theology, Philosophy and the Intellect, they were called Schoolatics. Some Schoolastics were said to be of the Clerical Class. Clericalism is not a word.
[/quote]

Yes, but ummm, 13th century?? Well, LUMEN Gentium of Vatican II say: “the priest is as Christ to serve.” No one is saying that the laity in the spiritual sense are priests. What is described as an “ISM” here and clericalism IS a word (of course not in the century you described)is an abuse of POWER OVER the laity, in which the lay person HAS NO VOICE. SORRY, NOT! what Vatican II says in Lumen Gentium in the role of the laity, and I am not asking WITHIN the liturgy to equal the priest, I am no liberal on the contrary, a conservative. However, we must distinguish the priest in Mass as in persona Christi, contrary to just his everyday attitudes and interaction with the laity on a day to day basis, even in the supermarket. Sorry, I don’t genuflect before a priest. Though with regards to the POPE, yes, I do: but LEFT knee only.

[quote=BillyT92679]Actually it is a word. It technically means maintaining or increasing the power of church hierarchy. In common parlance thoug it’s a belief system that says that clerics by dint of their ordination are a superior caste of people in comparison to lay faithful. In AmChurch there is a new type of clericalism, dubbed “lay clericalism” by orthodox Catholics wherein lay ecclesial ministers run the day to day operations of a church in lieu of or with a priest. They oftentime posit a belief system of the church that is radically progressive. Clericalism runs counterintutive to Christ’s call for humility of his priests.
[/quote]

Amen.

Is there a name for the idea that the rest of the Church became redundant after the Pope’s infallibility was officially declared in Vatican I? You know, the idea that there isn’t any need for future ecumenical councils, because the Pope can just declare whatever needs to be defined by his own authority.

[quote=Catholic2003]Is there a name for the idea that the rest of the Church became redundant after the Pope’s infallibility was officially declared in Vatican I? You know, the idea that there isn’t any need for future ecumenical councils, because the Pope can just declare whatever needs to be defined by his own authority.
[/quote]

That’s known as Ultramontanism.

[quote=Catholic2003]Is there a name for the idea that the rest of the Church became redundant after the Pope’s infallibility was officially declared in Vatican I? You know, the idea that there isn’t any need for future ecumenical councils, because the Pope can just declare whatever needs to be defined by his own authority.
[/quote]

I don’t know, but I will tell you=contray to some rookie priest who is arrogant and has not even been ordained 5 years yet (I like the 15 year test, when TIME proves them) I sure would obey the POPE.

I still stand firm with my statement that there is a lot of spiritual pride within the lay people. Many may be humble in their journey but there is so many more who are arrogant and offensive. Just because there is the odd priest that is overbearing (and this could very well be his personlaity) I have seen so many lay people who think they know it all and MUST tell the priest that he is not Christ-like and should follow in His footsteps.

We will have to account to God for our lack of humility and charity that we may have before the man who confects Christ to us…

As far as his lack of humility or charity…well…he will have to account to God about it.

Christ is risen…truly he is risen!
Shoshana

[quote=Shoshana]I still stand firm with my statement that there is a lot of spiritual pride within the lay people. Many may be humble in their journey but there is so many more who are arrogant and offensive. Just because there is the odd priest that is overbearing (and this could very well be his personlaity) I have seen so many lay people who think they know it all and MUST tell the priest that he is not Christ-like and should follow in His footsteps.

We will have to account to God for our lack of humility and charity that we may have before the man who confects Christ to us…

As far as his lack of humility or charity…well…he will have to account to God about it.

Christ is risen…truly he is risen!
Shoshana
[/quote]

Totally, that’s why they must be more humble(oh man, believe me, not ONE CASE, I am sure MOST catholics have encountered this nasty attitude) and especially more so, don’t forget, MORE SO, they are to represent Christ, and hence should be understanding, a good listener, and merciful especially in the confessional. I have reported ONE instance of arrogance and even HOSTILITY on the part of a priest, to the diocese PERSONALLY.
Ummm, I must say that many a priest with bad attitudes have been responsible for people leaving the church or in some cases I know, of avoiding even the confessional for more than 30 years becuase some priest who was frustrated (I am sure in a certain other way too) regarding his choice of vocation literally yelled at her, screamed and called her a $%$ offensive word. Of course she had the guts to leave the confessional right then and there, and left him with the words still in his mouth.

[quote=misericordie]Totally, that’s why they must be more humble(oh man, believe me, not ONE CASE, I am sure MOST catholics have encountered this nasty attitude) and especially more so, don’t forget, MORE SO, they are to represent Christ, and hence should be understanding, a good listener, and merciful especially in the confessional. I have reported ONE instance of arrogance and even HOSTILITY on the part of a priest, to the diocese PERSONALLY.
Ummm, I must say that many a priest with bad attitudes have been responsible for people leaving the church or in some cases I know, of avoiding even the confessional for more than 30 years becuase some priest who was frustrated (I am sure in a certain other way too) regarding his choice of vocation literally yelled at her, screamed and called her a $%$ offensive word. Of course she had the guts to leave the confessional right then and there, and left him with the words still in his mouth.
[/quote]


Mis,

I don’t want you upset here…what the priests are responsible for will be in God’s mercy. As for me, after reading many, many Saints’ lives it was brought home to me that the best way to deal with this kind of attitude is one of meekness and humility. And of course, to pray for that priest and all priests. I have experienced two pastors like this…and I worked extensively with the one. And again and again, I offered this abuse to the Lord as reparation. This priest was physically sick, was tired, was not welcomed in the parish due to lay people who thought they knew better than the pastor. This pastor cried right in front of me. He yelled but tried to stop, he was angry but tried not to be…no one knows the struglle any priest is going through trying to change their ways. Before I tell a priest how to change, I will look at myself first. To this day, this same priest who has been retired for about 7 years, is happy now…and makes sure he tells people to say hello to me. I loved/love him because he did represent Christ to me…in all of his flaws.

And, in the same breath, I hope that the Father accepts me into His Kingdom because He sees His Son in me…even with all of my flaws.

Arrogant or not, if we must respect and pray for them…

Christ is risen…truly He is risen!
Shoshana

Poor guy, wow he sure needed therapy. Well, that’s why I guess the USA Bishop’s conference REQUIRES all those candidates who apply to the Novitiates/seminaries be evaluated with a series of Psychological battery tests: don’t say me here, nope: the US BISHOPS ESTABLISHED THE POLICY. WONDER WHY?

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.