James Carroll is a contemporary of mine. We were both priests in the 60’s. He was a Paulist priest. I was a diocesan priest. We were both involved in protests regarding Vietnam and Civil Rights. We both left the priesthood about the same time. He has been a well-known and respected author and writes occasionally about issues associated with the Church. I cannot identify anything I have done that measures up to his accomplishments. But my last 50 years is best measured by a wonderful marriage and three children who gave us their love, their inspiring married partners and six beautiful grandchildren. Celebrating our fiftieth anniversary this summer as a family will be awesome.
We have both written about issues generated by our history and our perception of problems associated with the Catholic Church. His latest article came out today in the Atlantic (June 2019). His writing is prompted by the ongoing reports of priest sex abuse.
Of interest, during my six years as a priest, I was totally unaware of any priest involved in sex abuse. If a priest was removed temporally from his assigned parish, I was under the impression that he was involved with alcohol abuse. Looking back on the situations, no one talked to me about such situations. In hindsight, I am surprised that I turned down a request to leave the parish for graduate studies so that I could work with “priests with problems”, presumably alcohol. Never did I consider priests involved in the abuse of children. My reason for not accepting the request to be a clinician serving priests was my mission to share with parishioners the excitement resulting from the teachings of the Vatican Council. To think that I may had the task of dealing with priests involved with sex abuse makes me tremble. I may have ended up unwittingly facilitating clergy sex abuse. I am unaware of any evidence of Church authorities understanding the clinical implications of such behavior. I think that the assumption was behavioral change would occur with appropriate intervention.
During these past fifty years, I have read virtually everything about this issue. James Carroll has forcefully articulated a perspective that I never considered possible, viz., eliminating priests from the Catholic Church. He correctly references the early church that functioned effectively without priests. The clerical priesthood only surfaced in the period establishing the Roman Empire. Constantine wanted to use the clergy to promote stability in the Roman Empire. Until a clergy was established, Christians met in homes to share memories and teachings of Jesus. There was always people who assumed leadership roles without becoming separate from others who shared the memories. But, the need of Constantine to establish control was a force that included regimenting the Catholic Church to support his agenda.
Carroll is aware that the Christianity matured from its infancy without priests. Catholicism is now experiencing a dramatic shortage of priests that will only increase. Associated with the decrease of the clergy has been a decline in parishioners. Clerical sex abuse is clearly a major cause of the decline. There is little evidence that the trend will stop, i.e., the number of priests will continue to decline as well as the number of church goers.
While it seems a stretch of envision the Catholic Church without priests, there is no scenario that can anticipate a return of the past.







