Is Pope Francis Anti-clerical?

Pope Benedict was quintessentially clerical, in the very best sense; Pope John Paul II was non-clerical, to his credit; and Pope Francis is anti-clerical, in a mostly helpful way. Let me explain: "clericalism" as I am using the term refers to the dense, complex, multi-valued culture that arises inevitably when we have a special group, a caste, set aside for special purposes with extraordinary powers, status and responsibilities. I am using it in an objective, anthropological sense: without immediate moral judgment...it is not necessarily good or bad, but is a sociological, organizational fact. As Catholics, we see that our priests are invested with greater than special or even super powers, they have supernatural power: they forgive sin and feed us the bread of eternal life, in the Word and in the Flesh. They are specially chosen: must be intelligent, male, psychologically healthy, morally exemplary and capable of providing intellectual-spiritual leadership. They receive an extended education in a protected, specialized environment. They receive immense reverence from the faithful because of who they represent (Christ himself) and what they do (give us eternal life.) And so, Catholicism essentially entails a distinctive clerical caste, culture, garb, education, and complex system of abilities, virtues, and attitudes. Fundamentally,since it is essential for the Church, clericalism is a good thing. But like all such good but human things (democracy, capitalism, marriage, government, and patriarch-properly-understood), it is subject to abuse and corruption. And so we have a negative type of clericalism: arrogance, distance from the laity, misogyny, formalism, moralism, and so forth. This, of course, breeds a reactive anti-clericalism, which is not necessarily a bad thing. A certain lighthearted, mellow, affectionate anti-clericalism is necessary for a wholesome Catholic life as it corrects and balances the tendency to treat our priests as privileged princes. When I was studying in a college-seminary, a wise man warned me that the laity systematically spoil seminarians and priests by treating them with unusual respect and engendering a quiet, unrecognized pride and arrogance. I was being innoculated with a mild, salutary "anti-clericalism" in order to strengthen in me a more humble priestly identity: it is not me, but Christ in me! I recommend that we view our new pontiff in this light: he has a personal allergy to clerical privilege, careerism, and arrogance; he has an urgent longing to be close to the poor, the alienated, the lost sheep. As a Jesuit, he is already steeped in a non-clerical, if not anti-clerical, tradition: Ignatius did not want his disciples to climb a career ladder into the hierarchy; Jesuits endure an extended time of formation, education and ministry, specifically as Jesuits, long before they are ordained. Their charism involves a muted anti-clericalism which is meant to enhance their priesthood, as a service to the baptized by de-emphasizing the caste dimension. A similar dynamic is at work in a group like the Franciscan Friars of the Renewal who embrace a blatantly, even aggressively religious and evangelical identity with priesthood a option to be considered later. The Jesuits develop, of course, their own elite, intellectual caste which is a clericalism of another sort. The liberal theology that flourished in the university and seminary after the Council entailed a hostile anti-clericalism, as the efficacy of sacrament and word was disparaged; but ironically, it was displaced by counterfeit, corrupted clericalism as priests assumed roles as self-designated "prophets" in regard to social justice and psychology became invested with salvific powers. The sexual abuses by priests were not rooted in clericalism, but in the weakness of the flesh, the sexual revolution, and the lies of Satan. But the cover-up by the bishops and their collaborators was, for many, more scandalous that the actual abuses. This scandal is rooted in clericalism: an anxiety for the reputation of the institutional Church, an exaggerated loyalty to fellow clerics, a distance from and distrust of the victims and their families, a failure to realistically evaluate the evil in clerical circles, and a failure of humility and contrition. Recent developments in our clerical culture are complex; there is a return to the sacramental, and a retreat from the political-psychological secular clericalism; later vocations mean priests with better developed personal identities already as adult laymen and therefore less vulnerable to immature types of clericalism; aspirants generally have a "thicker" appreciation of Catholicism in its counter-cultural aspects and are therefore more clerical in the classic Catholic sense; the scandal has depleted the Catholic priesthood of social status, has humiliated it and hopefully humbled it. Which brings us back to our three prototypical popes. John Paul was larger than clericalism. His identity was formed as an actor, a nationalist, a poet, a scholar, a culture-warrior, a mystic, and an activist...before his priesthood. Even his seminary training took place in hiding in Nazi-occupied Poland: hardly a cozy place of clerical privilege. He was a leader, a saint, a hero, a titan of a man...and miraculously transcended both clericalism and anti-clericalsm. Benedict, by contrast, is clerical from head to toe, in a most beautiful and exemplary way: he dresses, speaks, prays and lives a most priestly life. He does this with a most quiet humility...in contrast to the vaunted humility of Francis which is, in contrast, showy, aggressive, harsh, cocky and judgmental. His taste is classical, refined, baroque and a masterful blend of high culture, erudition and holiness. Francis is different. (Note: I have shifted to a "first-name" basis, expressing my own non-clericalism!) His is an almost Maoist identification with the poor and a hatred for privilege: in the clergy, in capitalists, and in cultural warriors who come across as preachy, superior, and moralistic. This can all be disheartening for our priests, hard working entrepreneurs, and champions of marriage and the unborn. But I prefer to take it in a more positive light: as a correction of our inevitable tendencies to pride; as a purification; as a call to humility. Let us all...priests, conservatives, businessmen...enter our plea: "We are guilty as charged, as charged by our scrutinizing pope!!! We are not humble, not in love with the poor, not generous enough!!!We repent!!!" If we place the three pontiffs in union with each other...in a hermeneutic of continuity...we see Catholic clericalism in all its mystery, depth and richness...its sinfulness and weakness, its splendor and truth, and its transcendence, sanctification and illumination by the humble high priest, our Lord Jesus Christ.