Clergy, Ministers and Priests

Stewart Ranson, Alan Bryman, Bob Hinings

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2021
• ISBN:
  9781000544459
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Theology & Religion
• Subtopic: Christianity

First published in 1977, Clergy, Ministers and Priests provides the first sociological analysis to have been undertaken in this country of the differences in value orientation between clergy in the Church of England, ministers in the Methodist Church and priests in the Roman Catholic Church. Five important areas of values are covered: theological outlook, views on the role of the religious functionary, attitudes towards ecumenism, views on institutional reform, and ideas about the organisational nature of the church. Going beyond the description, the authors examine various explanations for the existence of these differences. First, they consider the interplay of the values themselves. A second approach deals with structural factors related to the denomination such as the social role played by the clergy. Finally, non-denominational social experience is considered, including class origins and the educational background of the clergy. This study will be of interest to scholars and researchers of sociology of religion, religion, and Christianity.

1 Introduction

DOI: 10.4324/9781003262770-1

I

Religion has become a fashionable subject once more within sociology, and the practitioners an emergent force. Some have made imperialist intellectual claims for the sociology of religion, believing that it is central to any explanation of structural and cultural life: ‘religion is not only a central concern of sociological theory it is the central concern’ (Hill, 1973). This claim seems strange when we focus upon the contemporary demise of religion in a largely secular world ostensibly stripped of its superstitious, miraculous and magical trappings. But the importance of religion does appear to remain; on the one hand, new faiths and rituals are continually emerging, usually sect-like in character; on the other hand, many attribute the contemporary social malaise to the receding salience of institutionalised religious beliefs and argue from a conviction that religion is crucial to an understanding of the cohesion and transformation of societies.

It has been the case, however, that whether the sociology of religion has been a dormant or dominant interest in the past or present, it has tended to be partial and selective in its treatment of religious belief and behaviour, whether that treatment has been substantive, theoretical or methodological. Substantively sociologists either have written in a speculative and general vein about the place of religion in society, or have produced detailed empirical analyses of religious phenomena. There has been, of course, a particular concern with sectarian organisation and behaviour, rather than with ‘mainstream’ Churches (cf. Wilson (1970) as a good example), and with aspects of individual religious behaviour. Theoretically, as Robertson (1970) has pointed out, sociologists have been preoccupied, often inordinately, with classification rather than explanation. Such explanations as have been preferred tend to be functional or cultural in character (cf. Glock and Stark, 1965; Luckmann, 1967). Methodologically sociologists have usually dealt with the immediate observables of individual religious behaviour, such as church attendance, and shied away from religious beliefs of individuals and structures of large religious organisations. Recently sociologists have begun to identify beliefs as a central problem for the study of religion (cf. Budd, 1973) together with the analysis of the organisational frameworks within which such beliefs are located (cf. Demerath, 1965; Eister, 1967).

This book is about Anglican, Roman Catholic and Methodist clergy, a relatively neglected topic within the sociology of English religion. One of the aims of the book is to adopt a more eclectic and theoretically ecumenical approach to its topic wherever possible. We have sought to elucidate the complexity of any explanation, to unravel the peculiar interrelationship of factors rather than the singular importance of one as against another. The intricate tangle of structural, cultural and demographic factors given in experience belies any simple account. Description must search for accuracy, explanation for balance.

II

The clergy are often considered as a group in crisis. Towler (1969) has pointed to the comprehensive manner in which the clergy are at present subject to social changes: ‘they are lacking in manpower, their social status is declining and there is considerable uncertainty about their true role’. Theological creeds and ritual practices once entrenched and accepted without question are now threatened from secular sources outside the Church, but more disturbingly by incipient doubts and radical movements from within the Church itself.

Similarly, Harrison (1970) has suggested that the modern cleric engages in a greater variety of activities, which are inadequately defined and raise questions of legitimacy. Educationally the clergy are unprepared for many of these activities, which, in any case, are likely to be the preserve of other occupations.

Further uncertainties result from the reactions of the Churches them selves to the recognition of their changing position in society. Every major denomination has, in the past decade, produced a report or reports suggesting restructurings, amalgamations, new ways forward, etc. The Church of England has changed its system of government; in the wake of Vatican II the Roman Catholic Church is in the process of decentralisation, opening the way to more lay participation; the Methodist Church has considered restructuring the districts and reorganising its committee structure; the Presbyterians and Congregationalists have amalgamated to become the United Reformed Church. Thus, apart from his role in relation to the wider society, the organisational and task role of the clergyman has been changing. His institutional position and support is less clear.

Along with this self-searching on organisation have gone commissions and committees on topics such as the nature of ministry, social welfare and responsibility, and the attitude of Churches to revolutionary movements. Also, there has been continuous exploration on the ecumenical front. Taken together all of this activity represents Churches searching for new identities, new stances.

The relative neglect of the clergy as a topic of study is, therefore, a little surprising. A group in transition, held in tension between conservative institutions and radical forces of change, exhorted to react and adjust, is intrinsically of sociological interest. Yet exactly what do we mean by the term ‘clergy’ as such? Most literature has adopted the term ‘clergy’ as a general concept to refer to religious functionaries of all denominations. This is inadequate and will not do. The term ‘clergy’ is possibly a misleading one, a blanket concept, masking and concealing far more than it reveals. The Methodist, Roman Catholic and Anglican Churches have widely diverse traditions, beliefs and ritual procedures, and it is because of this that we prefer to adopt the more specific terms ‘minister’ (Methodist), and ‘priest’ (Roman Catholic), delimiting the ‘clergy’ to its Anglican denotation. These terms, used by the Churches themselves, are part of the traditions of each Church and have come to denote distinctively different ways of conceptualising the nature of the fulltime religious functionary. They represent, semantically, the different realms of meaning and relationship.

Of course, the extent to which the overall label ‘clergy’ or ‘religious functionary’ is a useful one depends largely on the context of description and explanation. This problem will be taken up in more detail later on in the chapter when we deal with the relatively voluminous American literature on religious occupations. Suffice it to say here that a prime aim of the sociology of religion should be to examine critically the empirical bases of its concepts.

An important part of our task, therefore, is to chart such interdenominational differences, that is to say the degree to which differences do exist between the three denominations in our survey. Thus we shall be looking to discover that which is distinctive about the priests of the Roman Catholic Church, for example (their theological beliefs, their liturgical tradition, their organisational context) which mark them as totally different and separate from the clergy of the Church of England, or the ministers of the Methodist Church.

We are interested, equally, in the variations within each denomination, that is, the important intra-denominational differentiation of belief, age and status. Many theorists contend that the within-Church differences are more important than the between-Church differences; thus Krause (1971) asserts that

in all organised religions at present there is a split between the activist clergy and the traditionalists. Both groups, but especially the activists, find allies across denominations and are disagreeing radically about the function of the clergyman in a changing scene. At present knowing whether a clergyman is an activist or a conservative is sociologically more important than knowing whether he is a Minister, Rabbi or Priest.

Whether or not the denominational influence is of consequence in deciding the pattern of religious faith and ritual of the functionaries in our survey is thus a persistent theme throughout the book.

A basic task then is to describe, simply to provide information about variations between and within denominations. It is still the case, as David Martin (1967) said, that ‘we do not know about religion in Britain’. Who are the ministers, priests and clergy? Are they characterised by distinctively different theological beliefs and styles of ministry? Can we attribute to each denominational group a particular kind of social origin and professional experience which members have in common? Is there a distinctive age range and level of status peculiar to each Church? Is there a characteristic denominational response to the pressing issues of the day?

Much has been written recently within the sociology of religion of the need to go beyond empirical studies of institutional forms and levels of church attendance and focus upon the crucial area of religious belief and symbols. Berger and Luckmann (1963) have been instrumental in encouraging this development even to the point of suggesting that the analysis of religious values should be envisaged as part of a wider study of knowledge and culture. The position is neatly expressed by Roland Robertson (1970) who dedicates his book The Sociological Interpretation of Religion to ‘the idea of religion as culture. Religious beliefs symbols and values comprise the departure point’. Budd (1973), however, in her study Sociologists and Religion exhorts us to

go beyond this answer, to avoid the phenomenologists’ tendency to merely state the role of religion in structuring reality and to provide a few illuminating examples. This can only be done by returning to the classical tradition of sociology; that is by trying to quantify beliefs and symbols, to relate them to groups, to relate them to historical experience.

In our study, therefore, we have attempted to elucidate and quantify the belief systems of the clergy, ministers and priests. We examine the Anglican notion of ‘churchmanship’ which we have defined elsewhere as ‘that theological stance or framework of religious belief, which defines a person’s relation to God in specific forms of devotional and ritualistic activities and defines for him how he is to interpret his faith in the secular world’ (Bryman et al., 1974). Michael Daniel (1967) has also defined ‘churchmanship’, more specifically, as referring to ‘ideological differences held by individuals or parties within the Church of England, though differences may sometimes come to be expressed as variations of behaviour’. These categories of belief, include ‘Anglo-Catholic’, ‘Central or Broad Church’, ‘Evangelical’ and so on. Do these churchmanship groupings preclude a distinctively Anglican belief system? We look at Methodist ministers and the extent to which they adhere to categories of churchmanship familiar to Anglican clergy, and the extent to which there is a much more singular evangelical/ecumenical strain to Methodist belief. Finally, we look at the theology of Roman Catholic priests and the degree to which it is informed by a cohesive, uniform, traditional belief in ritualism, visually symbolising an ontological hierarchy. Is this conception of a unitary belief system a reality or a contemporary fiction?

When studying religious functionaries the focus lies usually on theological belief while important social characteristics are taken for granted, their delineation omitted. We tend to neglect the age of the typical clergyman, priest or minister and what kind of social experience we can typically ascribe to him: his origin in a particular social class and form of education. Is there a familiar professional orientation which we can typically attribute to each denomination? Given a particular social and educational background and professional orientation, is there a typical occupational experience by which we can characterise each denomination; that is, what positions do they tend to hold and for how long do they usually work, for example, within a parish or diocese.

But a basic aim in this book, following the notion of the clergy as ‘a group in crisis’ is to consider and describe their response to certain crucial issues, themselves products of social change, as a means of helping us to further characterise and differentiate between religious functionaries. Indeed, it is these responses that form the point of explanation, or dependent variables. Is there uncertainty among religious functionaries about their roles, are ritual practices changing, how far do they feel that restructurings and ecumenical amalgamations are necessary? Thus we will attempt to explore and explain the extent to which clergy, ministers and priests see changes as desirable or not.

We were therefore interested in how they conceive their role or ministry; how they regard the organisation in which they work, whether or not they believe the organisation, the Church, requires reform; the degree of their ecumenism, that is, whether or not they believe their Church should amalgamate or co-operate with other Churches; whether or not they recognise the existence of, or feel the need to develop, self-conscious occupational or professional groups to protect them in a time of upheaval. The religious functionary’s conception of ministry is undergoing considerable change. On the one hand, as is well known, many of his traditional functions have been slowly eroded and passed on to secular specialists – social workers, psychiatrists, magistrates and the like (Wilson, 1966). This is one of the chief causes of role-uncertainty among clergy, priests and ministers. They have been divested of many traditional functions and are trying to forge new ones. Consequently, there is some doubt among both functionaries and laymen concerning what the former really are supposed to be doing.

On the other hand, the religious functionary has become increasingly involved in administrative and organisational duties within the context of an ever-growing ecclesiastical bureaucracy (Blizzard, 1956; Paul, 1968). This in fact contributes even further to uncertainty concerning his role. Although his work is generally conceptualised in spiritual terms, he is none the less supposed to maintain a healthy organisation. That he is not seen as an administrator by his laity does not seem to immunise the clergyman, priest or minister from criticism if he is mishandling his organisational work (cf. Lauer, 1973). Consequently we have been particularly interested in how priests, clergy and ministers conceive their ministry; the specific aspects of their role that are given stress – pastor, administrator, counsellor, leader, celebrant or whatever. What are the denominational differences? Are there important variations within each Church?

We shall also be concerned with the amount of support given by each group to issues surrounding reform in their respective Churches. Talk of reform in the Churches was very prevalent in the 1960s and the reverberations of both talk and action are being felt in the 1970s at the same time that new issues are being raised. Cecil Northcott (1971) has noted the centrality of reform issues in the Churches in the 1960s and has written:

Ever since the Vatican Council of the 1960s change and reform have been the dominant note in the Roman Catholic Church, and during the same period the Church of England has also been under the constant scrutiny of commissions and investigations bent on reordering its structure. In the Free Churches too the dwindling of influence and numbers has been accompanied by some stringent observations about the future of the churches.

In our research we were concerned with the extent to which clergy, ministers and priests in the three Churches we investigated were in favour of a number of important issues regarding reform and change. In addition, we sought to discern variations in the degree of support for such reforms within each Church.

Another issue around which much contemporary theological debate centres and which entails vital consequences for the denominations is the ecumenical movement. There has been considerable effort invested in unity negotiations between Churches in recent years. Although the ecumenical movement was described by Archbishop William Temple in 1942 as ‘the great new fact of our times’, little has been done to indicate the extent of support for unity plans and ventures among religious functionaries. In our research we drew a distinction between support for co-operation between Churches, and what clergy, ministers and priests have actually achieved. We have noted elsewhere that the distinction between unity and co-operation is a very important one, in that in a study of Anglican lay and clergy views, we found that laity were consistently less favourable to unity with other Churches, but were equally favourable to co-operation between Churches (Bryman and Hinings, 1973, 1974).

Description searches for an adequate narrative, one which is complete in detail of event and meaning, but explanation seeks to illuminate the crucial axes upon which the narrative revolves, focusing upon the connection of fundamental events, why one occurrence happens because of another. A central part of our analysis, therefore, is concerned to go beyond the description of the previous section and elucidate those factors which are critical in determining events, crucial in moulding the attitudes and behaviour of our religious functionaries. Thus our explicandum (dependent variables): concept of ministry, ecumenism, reform, organisational context. Our explanatory factors (explicans, independent variables) lie basically within three categories. First, those which stress the denominational setting in accounting for the attitudes and conduct of priests, clergy and ministers, such as denominational experience, organisational status, theological college training; second, the importance of theological beliefs and belief systems in moulding behaviour, a factor which may be completely determined by the denominational context or be relatively independent of it; and third, those exogenous factors which emphasise largely extradenominational influences as crucial for predicting and understanding the religious functionaries’ attitudes and behaviour—such factors may incorporate social class origins, professional allegiance, age and so...

Table of contents

• Cover Page
• Half Title Page
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Original Title Page
• Original Copyright Page
• Dedication Page
• Contents Page
• Illustrations Page
• Preface Page
• 1 Introduction
• 2 Positions, experience, origins
• 3 Beliefs
• 4 Definitions of role
• 5 Ecumenism
• 6 Reform
• 7 The organisational context
• 8 Conclusions
• Epilogue
• Appendix 1 Sample and methods
• Appendix 2 The priest and the church
• Bibliography
• Index