I recognize at once that any viewpoint I express on the Synodal Document on the priesthood is necessarily unrepresentative. There are relatively few of us who are priests in ‘secular’ employments. Because I have no specific mandate, as I would if I were a full-time priest-teacher in a diocesan seminary or school, or if I were a religious pursuing the community’s special ‘work’, it may be that I have put any opinion of mine out of court. I would hope, however, that there would be some who might accept that even two years’ experience in extra-diocesan work could be the basis of a small contribution to the debate on the nature and contemporary forms of priestly ministry.

While the Synodal Document has many indisputable matters in it, and also poses some questions more radically than one might have expected, I cannot help feeling that the difficulties it faces in the current crisis are intractable on the basis of its theological view of the ministerial priesthood. Almost by its own definitions, which have been our standard fare for centuries, it can allow for little development. The document seems to have settled, as matters not open to question, that the specifically priestly functions are clearly defined ontologically; and further that the priestly character pervades the whole life of the ordained man. In doing so, some facts of the church’s history are overlooked; or, if recognized, are touched on so lightly as to minimize their relevance to the contemporary situation.