I have been
reading the admirable French daily La Croix’s decennial survey of the state of
the French Catholic church and its presumed development over the next ten
years. It is dire, of course: the number of baptisms is falling, the number of
committed lay persons is falling, the number of those calling themselves
Catholic is falling, and the number of vocations is plunging.
The suggested
remedies are many, various, energetic and coming from all over. They include
foreign priests, more work by the laity, reorganising dioceses, etcetera. And
yet there is a vast and dense silence on a number of possibilities that
instantly suggest themselves to a non-Roman-Catholic.
In the first
place, married priests. Admittedly, that would prove complicated in terms of
salaries, pensions, and adaptability to movement. But it would instantly
augment the number of vocations, and in the face of 450 years of Anglican
experience it is impossible to maintain that married men make less good parish
clergy. To do the Pope justice, he did recently tell a bishop from Amazonia
that the church would not exclude the consecration of viri probati, “proven” married men. But only in such extreme cases.
Secondly, women
priests. This would double the pool of vocations if not triple it. And again,
as the Anglicans are discovering, women make excellent priests.
Thirdly, a
conservative redefinition of celibacy. Conservative in the sense of going back
to medieval practice. Celibacy should mean not living in the context of a
marriage and a family, and thus being available on a permanent basis. It should
not mean giving up all sexual relations for the rest of one’s life. That is a
great deal to ask of young males: and such a demand may be fine when there are
many – in ages where priesthood confers status, education, and security --, but
it should be completely reconsidered when the flood of vocations is reduced to
a trickle.
Fourthly, the
possibility of couples, straight or gay, both serving as priests, perhaps in
the same parish or neighbouring parishes.
Pope Francis
memorably said, a year or so ago, that it would be wonderful if the Church
could stop thinking about sex all the time. Notice that all the solutions I’ve
mentioned as not being discussed or
(publicly) envisaged have to do with sex.
As for the
dwindling of the laity, I have long suspected that it had something to do with
the Church’s (no: the churches’) relentless “updating” and “modernizing” of
their habitus. And I notice that all
the suggested remedies in the La Croix issue go in the same direction.
If each diocese
decided to have a number of churches where a traditional liturgy was used – and
not only at 8 a.m. -- , these might stop the drifting away, or the not turning
up, of those whose faith is best served by a liturgy of reverence, of formal
beauty, and of some distance. At the moment, such believers are faced with the
choice of either post-Vatican II liturgical chumminess or Lefebvrist
theological archaism. An unfair choice, that I’m sure alienates a larger number
of the faithful than the Church realizes.
Finally, a number
of French dioceses are moving in the direction of laymen getting together for
church services without a priest. I have attended one or two of those, and they
are embarrassing in their lack of direction and form. Once again, if there were
more contact between French Catholics and Anglicans, the latter could suggest a
translated version (which exists already) of their Prayer-Book Matins and
Evensong services (minus the prayers for the Royal Family), which would meet
the case admirably. This would also mean going back to an earlier conception of
Communion, or Mass, as an occasional, say monthly, liturgical high point; something
the Reformation instituted but has been moving away from.
In a time when the
seas are rising, Christians should reflect on the nature and course of the ship
they are manning. Are we bound for an iceberg or for Ararat?
No comments:
Post a Comment