Priestly Unity
It wasn’t until I entered the seminary that I saw the ugliness of church politics that expresses itself in ways that are strikingly and unfortunately similar to so many television news networks. Probably one of the first ways I was to see it expressed was between those who argued among one another about the proper placement of the tabernacle in Catholic churches. Should it be behind the altar or in its own special chapel? When I mentioned to a group from the Knights of Columbus on one of my first trips home they responded, “Who cares where the tabernacle is, as long as there is a tabernacle?” Those were wise words to a young seminarian.
The director of our recent priest retreat, Fr. Ron Knott, challenged my brother priests and I to take seriously priestly unity. He pointed out that though we in our span of years represent at least seven different groups, who were each formed under different seminary structures, we are called to work together with our bishop as a team to serve the people of our diocese. I honestly believe that every priest in our diocese would agree that priestly unity is an absolute necessity. If we are honest, however, we should also be able to admit that this can be a difficult task. It is not hard to see that there is sometimes suspicion, even among the clergy, that there may be some of us who are not completely orthodox in our theology. There is also the feeling that some of us are so close minded to others that it is impossible to even begin a conversation of how to work together. Yet, if we really desire unity, there is no choice but to take up the challenge to build ways that draw us closer together in our shared ministry.
Fr. Ron gave us several things to ponder and I would like to share a couple of things I found useful in his presentations. First he pointed out that we priests, just like our congregations, have many different ways of seeing the church. We each relate in varied ways to how we would define our role within the church. He suggested that to be successful we must be able to move from our own point of view to a viewing point. It is natural to have a point of view, but we must be able to see other people’s as well if we are to be effective priests. He also made a good point in reminding us that many different gifts are needed to successfully preach the Gospel to all the people of God.
The other part of his presentation that struck me was his drawing from Pope Paul VI’s encyclical, Eccelesium Suam, where he laid out guidelines for dialogue. Fr. Ron pointed out three characteristics, those being 1) agreement on the essentials, 2) an attitude of mutual respect, and 3) consensus on the non-essentials. The encyclical itself goes into more detail and is, in my opinion, useful for dialogue of any kind.
The dialogue is, then, a method of accomplishing the apostolic mission. It is an example of the art of spiritual communication. Its characteristics are the following:
(1) Clearness above all; the dialogue supposes and demands comprehensibility. It is an outpouring of thought; it is an invitation to the exercise of the highest powers which man possesses. This very claim would be enough to classify the dialogue among the best manifestations of human activity and culture. This fundamental requirement is enough to enlist our apostolic care to review every angle of our language to guarantee that it be understandable, acceptable, and well-chosen.
(2) A second characteristic of the dialogue is its meekness, the virtue which Christ sets before us to be learned from Him: “Learn of me, because I am meek and humble of heart.” The dialogue is not proud, it is not bitter, it is not offensive. Its authority is intrinsic to the truth it explains, to the charity it communicates, to the example it proposes; it is not a command, it is not an imposition. It is peaceful; it avoids violent methods; it is patient; it is generous.
(3) Trust, not only in the power of one’s words, but also in an attitude of welcoming the trust of the interlocutor. Trust promotes confidence and friendship. It binds hearts in mutual adherence to the good which excludes all self-seeking.
(4) Finally, pedagogical prudence, which esteems highly the psychological and moral circumstances of the listener, whether he be a child, uneducated, unprepared, diffident, hostile. Prudence strives to learn the sensitivities of the hearer and requires that we adapt ourselves and the manner of our presentation in a reasonable way lest we be displeasing and incomprehensible to him.
In the dialogue, conducted in this manner, the union of truth and charity, of understanding and love is achieved.
So we are challenged to speak the truth with clarity to one another in love. These guidelines are ones I readily and easily agree with, but I know they will not be easy to put into practice. It is essential that we do so, however, if we are to be people who put our words into action.
Please continue to pray for a stronger unity among all Christians, but especially those who serve as spiritual leaders to others.
Related Posts:
About The Author
Comments