The Pillar on +Pierre
Two U.S. Catholic podcasters and their whiff of clericalism in the Cardinal’s Words.
In Episode 138 of The Pillar podcast, named, A Paradigm shift and American Catholicism, JD Flynn and Ed Condon discuss an interview in America magazine with Cardinal Christophe Pierre.
Cardinal Pierre is presently the Vatican’s Apostolic nuncio to the United States and serves as the Pope’s representative in this country.
He is a newbie Cardinal as of September 30 of 2023.
In the interview the Cardinal, having worked and lived here since 2016, shares his reflections on the Church in the United States.
Cardinal Pierre’s vision for the Church is in synch with the vision of Pope Francis.
It is based on a model of Church rooted in the Synod on Synodality, an initiative of Pope Francis for the Church emphasizing listening, discernment and mission.
A General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops, which included many lay men and women, convened in Rome from October 4-29, 2023, where Synodality was the topic of discussion.
In the article the Cardinal cites a Latin American bishop’s conference on Synodality that took place in Aparecida, Brazil, in 2007.
He notes:
The bishops developed a kind of dynamic of working together and looking for solutions together, to evangelize better, which is what the synod [on synodality] is all about.
When the then Archbishop came to the United States in 2016, he was, in his words:
Shocked to learn that many U.S. Catholic bishops did not know that synodality had developed in South America and are still struggling to understand what it is.
The Cardinal is being kind in his choice of words.
The truth is that certain elements of powerful Catholics in the United States are not on board with Pope Francis and his vision for the Church.
Some are not shy from publishing their harsh critiques of Pope Francis.
See this letter signed by more than 1500 people questioning his theology?
This also means they are not on board with Cardinal Pierre’s vision for the Church either.
The absence of synchronicity with Cardinal Pierre’s vision for the Church can be glimpsed from the choice of words Condon and Flynn use to describe his words as presented in the article:
clericalist, clericalism, hierarchical, and institutionalist.
A clericalist is someone who supports clericalism and clericalism in general is someone who emphasizes the authority and importance of the clergy over the laity.
The grounds that Condon uses as the basis for the Cardinal’s apparent clericalism are what Condon refers to as the Cardinal’s “reference points,” which he finds “strange,” as he notes:
“His reference points were all to do with religious sisters and young priests.”
Flynn agrees by saying “that is a very good point,” and raises his own issues with the Cardinal by citing clericalism as well.
Flynn points out that when Cardinal Pierre is asked about where he see signs of hope in the Church in the United States today, the Cardinal said:
I think we cannot separate the good things and the bad. I think the church is like that. We cannot say there are bishops who are on the left and ones that are on the right. This is a false analysis. I say that because I know the bishops. They are all struggling. They are all struggling in their own corner. They are all good people. Their desire is to evangelize. Some feel one way, some another way. They are overwhelmed by big problems. They have the problem of the abuse, and now the lawyers are emptying the money from their dioceses. Many bishops are in bankruptcy. So they are struggling. It’s not easy for them.”
Flynn continues, quoting the Cardinal.
On the other hand, I think all of them, in some way, feel they have to evangelize, but they don’t always find the ways to do so. And often they are surrounded by people who are just saying, ‘Do this, do that.’
Flynn says that the signs of hope in the Church the Cardinal is asked about has him point out:
“two hundred words about bishops” “the only reference to people who are not bishops are blood sucking lawyers or bossy laity saying do this do that.”
Flynn says rightly that the Cardinal believes that the bishops…
Need to pause, to stop and to reflect together. Don’t have only meetings about administration. Listen to one another. Look at the reality. Pray together, discern and decide.
Flynn adds that if Cardinal Burke had been asked about signs of hope and the meaning of synodality and Burke said,
“bishops need to pray together and discern, I mean, he would have been lit up as clericalist.”
Flynn ends with:
“clericalism is not limited to sort of the theological right or the theological left, it is a field of vision.”
“Oh…yea,” says Condon.
Their “good conversation” comes to an end.
What is going on here?
I am not certain.
I imagine this podcast does not represent the fullness of Condon and Flynn’s thoughts on the matter, but from what they present in this podcast, they certainly failed to affirm most of the underlying principles and values inherent in the Cardinal’s words and vision for the Church.
Instead they focus on him mentioning “religious sisters” and “young priests” as his “reference points” and on the Cardinal’s failure to affirm the American laity for their work and evangelization in the U.S. Church.
This apparently earns his words the name “clericalism.”
Clericalism, if I may add, is when the clergy including the hierarchy refuse to embrace the reality the Cardinal describes as the dynamic of working together and looking for solutions together.
It is true that the context for this quote in the article is in reference to the bishops of Latin America, but it is also a dynamic that is at the heart of all ecclesial relationships in the Church.
Suggesting that since the Cardinal is speaking only of bishops is not to suggest he does not believe the importance of this dynamic among the bishops and the clergy, religious, and laity alike.
We must all work together and we must all find solutions together. This begins with the bishops and once there it encourages the clergy, religious, and laity, to do the same.
That is the hope, and is at the heart of the meaning of synodality.
It is opposed to clericalism since in synodality people irregardless of rank come together to listen and discern the mission of the Church together.
This is what we saw in Rome last month when the Pope with Cardinals and bishops, religious and clergy, lay men and women, convened over a number of weeks to listen and discern together.
This is what is missing in parts of the American church that I have experienced first hand since being honorably laicized yet still ministering to dying Catholics.
One day, wanting to share my experience, I wrote the then Archbishop Pierre and shared my story with him. This was in February of 2021.
I spoke of seeking out dialogue and approval of my ministry to Catholics from a particularly important cleric and getting no replies.
The then Archbishop wrote me back.
He thanked me for the letter.
He affirmed my ministry.
He assured me of his prayers.
So when Flynn spoke of the Cardinal in the way he did, it certainly did not resonate with my lived experience of him.
Rather than experiencing a Cardinal that failed to affirm the American laity, albeit in this interview, the Cardinal reached out to this “layman” and laicized priest in a way others had not.
It is they who are silent; not the Cardinal.
When considering Cardinal Pierre’s positive influence in the life of the Church, I hope people remember my story over the assessment presented in this podcast.
The complexity and depth of the Cardinal’s life and vision for the Church cannot be fully understood when his partial words are labeled with the reality of “clericalism.”
Cardinal Pierre, on the contrary, embodied for me the synodal heart of Francis so in synch with the heart of Our Lord in the present age.
Laudem Dei.
I apologize to the Cardinal in advance for breaking his confidence.
The article with Cardinal Pierre can be found here.
The podcast by The Pillar can be found here.