THE INTERMEDIARY

There has always been a universal craving for some form of intermediary between human beings and their god(s), some form of professional who would “handle” the god and smooth relationships.  The type of intermediary depended on the type of god being worshipped.

All people have within them both profound fears and insatiable longings.  Throughout human history the fears have led to ideas of an angry god and the longings to ideas of a loving god.  When people finally reached the idea of the one God of the whole universe, the two concepts were often confused in the idea of a god who is sometimes angry and sometimes loving (cf. many passages in the Old Testament).

Paradoxically, the angry god was seen as being too close and the task demanded of the intermediary was that of keeping this god at a distance, while the loving god was seen as too distant and the task demanded of the intermediary was that of bringing this god closer. 

In our own day there has been a strong reaction against the angry god, but, like most reactions, it has gone to an opposite extreme.  In an analogy, it has gone all the way from parents who beat their children into submission to parents who spoil their children.  It has produced the idea of a god of indulgent and unintelligent love who asks nothing of us.

In any religious system everything without exception depends on the kind of god who is being worshipped, so there is no more important question for any intermediary than this: In all I do and say, do I present to people an angry god who makes impossible demands, an indulgent god who makes no demands, or a confused god who is sometimes angry and sometimes loving?  Or do I consistently seek to present a god who, like a good parent or teacher, loves deeply and, precisely because of this love, wants people to grow to become all they are capable of being and is not afraid to challenge them?

ALL PRIESTHOOD

The literature concerning all forms of priesthood over the millennia would say that there are four essential tasks of priesthood.  A priest must:

 

THE CATHOLIC PRIESTHOOD

No.28 of Lumen Gentium presents the Catholic priesthood in terms of five relationships, with

All five relationships are essential and the Catholic priesthood does not exist without them.  Within a diocese they express the concept of the Presbyteriumas a group of priests who are united in these relationships.  The relationship with God’s people is not the last and least important of the five, for it is the goal of the other four. 

 

COLLABORATIVE MINISTRY

The Letter to the Ephesians says: “And to some his gift was that they should be apostles; to some, prophets; to some, evangelists; to some, pastors and teachers; to knit God’s holy people together for the work of service to build up the body of Christ” (4:11-12. cf. Rm.12:6-8; 1Cor.12:8-10, 28).  These gifts are given to different persons, so the people should never expect their priest to possess all of them and the priest should never claim to possess all of them.   The task of the priest is not to exercise all these different gifts himself, but to recognise and draw them out from the community and thus ensure that all roles are present in the community.

 

THE UNIQUE ROLE OF THE PRIEST

If I go to listen to a piano concerto by e.g. Beethoven, I will at first be aware of all the sights and sounds of a concert hall.  But if the pianist is very good, there can come a moment when I forget all these things and am caught up into direct contact with Beethoven himself who speaks to me through his music.  The pianist has fully succeeded when the only people present in that hall are myself and Beethoven.  The pianist could then paraphrase the words of Paul and say, “I live now, not I, but Beethoven lives in me.”   

It is Beethoven alone who must sustain this moment, for it is his genius, inspiration and divine spark that make it possible.  If the pianist suffered a sudden memory blackout, the music would crash to a halt, for there is no one else in that hall who can supply Beethoven’s greatness.

And yet there is the paradox that the moment when I have forgotten the very existence of the pianist is that pianist’s supreme moment, the moment in which the pianist is most completely everything he or she is capable of being.  There will have been decades of hard work, sacrifice and dedication behind the performance, for it is never achieved easily, and it is a moment of greatness.

This is the ideal for the priest in celebrating Mass and in preaching.  In the homily, at the consecration or at any moment during the Mass, it is good if the people have the experience of Jesus himself speaking to them, Jesus taking bread and wine and saying, “This is my body, this is my blood”.  The priest has fully succeeded if the people forget he is present and are in direct communion with Jesus, if the priest can say, “I live now, not I, but Christ lives in me.”  It is Jesus alone who can sustain the greatness of the Mass or homily and his input is required at every second, for there is no one else in the church who can supply his greatness.  And yet the moment of seeming oblivion is the priest’s greatest moment.

Above all else people expect in their priest a person who is in touch with God, who listens to God and speaks with God, who is a familiar of God like Moses, who reflects God, who makes God present.

 

BUILDING PRIESTHOOD

The document that came from the Synod on priests, Pastores Dabo Vobis, tells us that, if we want a good priest, we must first have a good Christian, and if we want a good Christian, we must first have a good human being.  These are the essential building blocks and it is not possible to have a good priest unless we are building on the foundation of the good Christian and the good human being.  If we want to be good priests, we must constantly check to ensure that the foundations are beingattended to and kept in good repair.

 

THE SPIRITUAL AND THE SOCIAL

For nearly two thousand years the parish was not only the spiritual centre of the village, but also the social centre, for the church was where one went to meet people and most social activities started from there.  Whether people went to the church for purely spiritual reasons, or purely social reasons, or a mixture of both, they were there and the priest could exercise his spiritual role towards them.

In a few short years the car, the TV and the telephone have changed all that, for the car made people mobile in seeking social activities, the TV entertained them at home and the telephone enabled each person to develop a personal social network of friends.  The parish is no longer the centre of social life and probably never will be again.  Those not strongly motivated by religious reasons are simply not there any more, so the priest cannot exercise a spiritual role towards them.  This is arguably the biggest single change in parish life in 2000 years.

The priest now faces the daunting task of creating a spiritual centre without the benefit of being a social centre.  Bishops, priests and people must all adapt to this seismic shift.