Our good friends at Tradition and Sanity have an excellent article on their Substack by John Mac Ghlionn about the Latin priesthood and ‘how the Church must reclaim the sacred masculinity it abandoned.’ The heart of the article captures an obvious truth: the priesthood will not recover until men recover their masculinity and the Church rediscovers Her need of it. I will not spoil the article or try to summarise it. It is well worth your time and attention. What I want to do is to write a follow-up. A kind of part II, if I may be so bold.
As a priest of almost 25 years and very much in the John Paul II generation of clergy, it is hard to underestimate just how important St John Paul II was for us. We not only believed he had our backs, when most of the seminary staff were looking to plunge their knives into them; we also very much wanted to be like him. I loved his stories of resisting the Nazis and the Communists and the tales of his hiking and adventures. They captured something of the masculine spirit and were something to be emulated. But what happened? Where did all those young men go and what happened to their dreams of heroic self-sacrifice?
We all grow up. And we grow out of our childish ways. But the desire to be manly is not something to be abandoned, no matter the age of the man. Whether you are a teenager or an octogenarian- you are always and everywhere a man. And that is whether you are a pastor of a parish or the father of a family. The world needs masculinity and it does not matter one jot that the world does not understand this or even care that it does. You show up and you do what is right. But what happened to that generation of young men so inspired? Why are we still not seeing some kind of renaissance in masculinity and a more masculine priesthood?
No doubt, there are pockets of clergy that are doing better than others. There is no doubt that some young priests are living into this understanding of their priesthood- but it is not the norm. Indeed, it is still not the desire of most seminaries and the chanceries who ‘supervise’ them. Before we can actually have the reform that Tradition and Sanity have described, we need to know what is in the way. What is holding back this most obvious path to renewal?
Mac Ghlionn’s article outlines a number of issues at play- the unnaturally feminised clerical world, the overly bureaucratic approach to spiritual matters and a general apathy to the demands of the Gospel. (You should read his account, because he nails many of the issues.) But why are they issues in the first place? Everyone of sound mind hates effete men and the idea of spending hours in meetings drives even the most ‘clerical’ to scramble to find an excuse to flee. Yet, should a priest not attend a meeting- his vocation is questioned. Should a priest actually try and correct bad behaviour, he is labelled ‘difficult’. We say we don’t want the very things we demand. This, like much of what we have made of modern Catholicism, just does not add up. We have created a Catholicism of split personalities.
The reason why these things, although detestable, are the norm is because they are safe. They are reliable and predictable and above all- controllable. And whether we like it or not, they appeal to everyone of us. Even traditionalists. Don’t worry- there are plenty of traditionalists who love to police father’s sermons- and not because of doctrine, but because of taste. But the answer is not just to blame the bishops, although they do have their fair share; it is not to blame the priests, although we bare some of the burden; or even the parishioners who demand that father be nice, rather than effective. The answer is not in committees, support groups or ‘meetings to discuss’- rather the answer is that a few priests, maybe even just one, have to find the courage to say ‘no’ to all this nonsense. And not just the courage to say no, but the strength to endure the consequences. And there will be consequences. The thing about masculinity is that you can’t study it in order to embody it- you have to act. Not rashly or out of ego- that will just inflict another set of unfortunate consequences on the church. But in order for father to be able to endure will require people of good will to be vocal in their support. But also wise in how they go about it. There is no point in father leading the charge when no one follows. But, be vigilant- because this is the kind of situation where wolves in sheep’s clothing can thrive. We want heroes not renegades- we to encourage the brave, not bravado.
Christian tradition teaches that the Church does not come up with a theory and then seek consensus- the apostles started to preach, they did not organise days of communal reflection. And then they dealt with the risks. It only takes one- but far better if there are twelve- and a whole bunch of holy and unruly people whole will follow them. Even when that priest turns around and corrects… you.
Read the article that inspired this editorial:
Preventing a Priestless Future by Peter Kwasniewski