Most of the images of John Vianney available on the net seem to be sickeningly pious and childish. The best I could find was this contemporary portrait by Canadian artist, Michael O'Brien. His website, www.studiobrien.com, contains a wonderful collection of other contemporary religious art that is well worth a visit.

Critique, questions, discussion starter

by Brian Coyne, editor Catholica Australia

Where I find myself sympathetic to Nathanael's reflection is in the very Catholic insight that our lives are basically a series of challenges. God does not deliberately plant these challenges in our path. They exist there as part of the Divine or Cosmic plan — and also possibly/more than likely because of the "original choice" that humankind made which we endeavour to understand in that mythological tale of Adam and Eve, the "fall" of humankind, and "original sin". The authentic Catholic, and Jesus Christ-inspired insight is that the pathway by which we escape or transcend these challenges is by going through them rather than by various "escapist" strategies seeking to burrow under them, fly over them, pretend they are not there, or by seeking to run away from them. These are all the "rational" and very human responses to challenge, pain, insecurity, anxiety and suffering. It is a paradoxical insight that the way to overcome a challenge is by embracing or "entering into it". It is actually the process of "embracing our challenges or afflictions" which "grows" or matures us as individuals. It is the process by which we grow in personal nobility, wholeness and ultimately "sanctity" or "holiness". Such a philosophy or theology stands in marked contrast to the analgesic-addicted philosophy that abounds in much of contemporary secular Western culture.

Yet, somewhere in Catholicism — possibly through the influence of Jansenism — these profound insights have been lost and populist, immature Catholicism has endeavoured to replace it with this sickeningly sweet piety, goody-two shoes "innocence and naivety", "embracing" their humility, their stupidity, their "crosses" as some kind of martyrdom mistakenly believing that the more they suffer, wallow in it, and exhibit it (while pretending they are not exhibiting it), this demonstrates to Jesus – usually some imaging of the infant lying in a manger – that they are worthy of heaven. Such thinking is actually an abomination of what Jesus Christ is pointing to — and, I suspect, what Nathanael is also endeavouring to point to.

These two images I have endeavoured to paint here are, I suspect, somewhere close to the heart of the cause why the Church is in a crisis of participation today. Not only a crisis in participation in terms of the numbers who continue to practice but a crisis in terms of the numbers who are willing to put themselves forward as spiritual guides, ministers of the sacraments, and pastors. The priesthood, and leadership of the institution is itself in crisis and no longer really understand what "the word" and "message" of Jesus Christ really is. In this country we actually have senior bishops who are endeavouring to inflict on this nation a priesthood modelled on the abomination of Catholic insight that I have endeavoured to outline in graphic detail in the previous paragraph. The priests who are induced into priestly ministry by that "con" are going to find themselves totally ill-equipped to serve the Australian people when they are finally released into pastoral duties and will only exacerbate "the flight to reality" that so many lay Catholics have already embraced. The people will reject them in the same way that 85% have already rejected the indecision and lack of leadership that has characterised the recent contemporary history of the institutional Church. Such theology does appeal to a tiny segment in any society – and almost to the point of zealotry. To appease these people is eventually a pathway to the terrorism we see unleashed in Islam today. It is not a pathway to the authentic traditions and unlimitless depth, beauty and insight of authentic Catholic thinking exhibited in "the mind, spirit or example of Jesus Christ". It is also not a pathway to the eventual reward of "salvation, resurrection or heaven". All it satisfies is the emotional insecurities of the present moment — that "moment" we all constantly have to live in and which follows us around like the proverbial puppy dog's tail.

It would be interesting for someone to conduct a survey of the broad sweep of lay people — including a good sampling from those who have become disenchanted — as to what we look to in our spiritual advisors and guides today. I hope the words of both myself and Nathanael may in fact induce perhaps the start of such a discussion in our forum.

On a number of occasions in recent years in different diocese I've seen large line-ups of priests assembled in one place usually for liturgies like the annual Chrism Mass. The line-ups do not induce great confidence. Many of our priests today look thoroughly disillusioned and are just "going through the motions" seemingly because they do not know what else to do with their lives. As in any story, there are exceptions, but they are, I suggest, the exceptions rather than the general rule. Many priests look as though they are stuck in something they actually no longer, if they were thoroughly honest with themselves, believe in. But to resign at an advanced age is hardly a viable option in the materialistic world we live in. I suspect the "disillusion" that seems so evident on the assembled collective faces of our priests only mirrors the "disillusion" that is now manifest in the wider population to the extent where 85% of the baptised population don't even pretend anymore.

For some bishops to try and counter this disillusion by recruiting future priests from that small psychological subset that exists in any population, even the young, will solve nothing. It will produce "sacrament dispensers" ministering to a remnant Catholic population and unable totally to communicate with the larger population they are commissioned by none other than Jesus Christ himself to be serving. These seminarians are already a standing joke amongst the educated, socially sophisticated parts of the Catholic population in a city like Sydney if one is only moderately attuned to conversations in the privacy of Catholic homes these days. They are actually a laughing stock. We want a priesthood, spiritual guides whom we can look up to and respect. We want a priesthood who speak our language, who understand our problems and challenges, who are not forever looking over their shoulders trying to ensure they are not upsetting the thought police who might "report" them to their superiors in Rome.

Deep down, but not yet well articulated as far as I can see, is we do not want priests who are merely dispensers of liturgy and sacraments. We want men, and women, who haven't lived "sheltered" lives in cloisters and presbyteries remote from the insights and pain that are gained not from sex but from intimacy (shared joy and pain) with another human being over an extended period of years or decades. We no longer want the saccharine-sweet, nauseous, butter-wouldn't-melt-in-the-mouth-innocence, naivety and piety saturating these "holy pictures" of saints like Jean Vianney and Padre Pio as the imaging of what "holiness" and "wholeness" of personhood is supposed to be that is still the prevailing picture that so many in positions of authority insist on inflicting on the lay population of the Western world — and then they wonder why nobody bothers to rock up to the sacramental life of the Church anymore.

I would welcome your own reflections, criticisms and thoughts on the matters raised by both Nathanael and myself in our discussion forum. What do you look for in the spiritual guides who might minister to you?