Let the Priests be Human

by Editor · June 12, 2013

Does the laity expect too much from its priests? Conversely, do some priests expect too little from lay people? For many Catholics, a priest’s misdemeanour trivial or severe is magnified in relation to those of practitioners of non-sacred professions.

“We dehumanise our priests when we expect perfection from them, when our idea of the priesthood belongs in the world of black-and-white Hollywood movies rather than of the real world. ” Pictured is Fr Moses Kago of Kenya

For sure, by virtue of their consecration, priests and religious assume an expectation that they should conduct their lives with a greater awareness of decorum and ethics than those who have followed more temporal vocations. Many priests do, many others try and fail. All, of course, have the capacity for sin.

That is the priesthood: a truly sacred calling, but also a mixed bag of individuals and experiences.

Priests stand to be criticised if they are perceived to be too liberal or too conservative; if they state a political view or state none; if they dress too casually or too formally; if they are thought to be too close to parishioners or if they keep a distance; if they are believed to be too uninhibited or too introverted. They are walking a perpetual tightrope of frequently conflicting expectations.

Sometimes these expectations are informed by an idealised picture of the priest, one that sees him not as a fallible human being but as some kind of holy superhero.

No doubt, a few priests come close to that ideal; for most clergy, however, the expectations of a romanticised priesthood is bound to be a burden perhaps more so in the age of social communications, where discretion tends to be trumped by the impulse to make one’s opinion known instantly.

We dehumanise our priests when we expect perfection from them, when our idea of the priesthood belongs in the world of black-and-white Hollywood movies rather than of the real world.

Two millennia ago in Galilee, our Lord knew what he was doing when he assembled his inner cabinet of twelve men. Among them was the fisherman Simon Peter, an anxious man of wavering faith and ferocious temper; Thomas, a suspicious rationalist; Matthew, a man of disreputable credentials; and, of course Judas, who went on to betray Jesus.

The apostles bickered over who should be promoted and which of them would be the greatest. They thoroughly tended to misunderstand their Master, suggesting that the hungry not be fed, trying to turn away those they deemed to be unworthy of being in the Lord’s presence, hoping to talk him out of his salvific sacrifice.

Yet, we venerate the apostles except, of course, Judas with all their flaws and foibles. Should priests be held to higher standards than the wholly human motley crew that Christ conscripted to evangelise the nations?

The proverbial pedestal is not the right place for our clergy. Our priests have a right to be treated as real human beings: men who by virtue of their position command respect, but also need understanding, compassion and sound counsel.

Give them a strong drink instead of tea, if they are so inclined. Let them wear shorts and T-shirts in the summer if they prefer it to traditional clerical dress. Should they be given to occasional strong language, one should not view this as a deficiency in sanctity, but as a sign that imperfection is not alien to the consecrated state.

At the same time, some priests have yet to acknowledge the vast array of skill, experience and talent that many lay people have to offer.

It is a positive sign that the clergy is increasingly soliciting the input of the laity by providing them positions of leadership in the parishes and in the Church. The fruitful collaboration between priests and laity (and, where applicable, religious) must be encouraged.

The old adage of Father knows best belongs on the scrapheap of cliches. Sometimes he certainly does, sometimes he does not. After all, priests are only human.