When discussions about clericalism arise in the Catholic Church, attention often focuses on priests and bishops. The term itself is traditionally associated with the clergy. Yet limiting clericalism to ordained ministers alone risks overlooking a deeper reality.
Clericalism is often understood as an excessive concentration of authority and influence in the hands of Church leaders. While the term historically refers to clergy, the attitudes associated with clericalism can emerge wherever authority is exercised without sufficient accountability, participation, or openness to dialogue.
At its core, clericalism is not simply about who holds authority. It is about how authority is exercised.
This reality deserves attention because it can also manifest among non-ordained leaders, including religious sisters and laypeople entrusted with significant responsibilities in schools, hospitals, diocesan offices, social action ministries, and other Catholic institutions.
The issue is not that women religious or the laity hold positions of authority. Across the world, countless Catholic institutions have been built and sustained through the dedication, competence, and sacrifice of religious sisters and the lay faithful. Their contributions to education, health care, social services, and pastoral ministry remain indispensable to the life of the Church.
The concern arises when any leader, regardless of vocation or title, begins to adopt patterns commonly associated with clericalism.
In some cases, religious sisters or laypeople who are entrusted with authority may unconsciously adopt patterns associated with clericalism. This can manifest in an excessive reliance on rank, an expectation of deference, resistance to accountability, or decision-making that excludes consultation and participation.
Holding authority is not itself a problem. Every institution requires leadership. The challenge arises when authority becomes disconnected from consultation, transparency, and accountability.
Such tendencies rarely emerge overnight. They often develop gradually through institutional habits, organizational culture, and long-standing assumptions about authority. Over time, these patterns can discourage open discussion and make honest feedback more difficult.
One of the most significant consequences is the narrowing of spaces for free expression. In environments where criticism is viewed primarily as opposition, individuals may become reluctant to raise concerns, offer alternative perspectives, or question decisions. The result may not be open censorship, but it can create a culture in which people become hesitant to speak openly or raise difficult concerns.
When this occurs, institutions risk losing opportunities for reflection, correction, and growth. They may also overlook the experiences and insights of the very people they are called to serve.
This dynamic stands in tension with the vision of a synodal Church. Synodality depends on listening, dialogue, participation, and communal discernment. It assumes that the life and mission of the Church are enriched when people are able to speak honestly, listen respectfully, and engage one another in good faith.
A synodal culture does not eliminate disagreement. Rather, it creates conditions in which disagreement can be expressed constructively and discerned together. Difficult questions and diverse perspectives are not obstacles to communion. They can contribute to a deeper search for truth and a stronger sense of shared responsibility.
For this reason, leadership in Church institutions requires more than administrative competence. It requires the humility to listen, the willingness to be accountable, and the confidence to welcome perspectives that differ from one’s own.
The challenge, therefore, is not whether authority belongs to clergy, religious, or lay leaders. The more important question is how authority is exercised.
Whenever power is used to discourage participation, silence legitimate concerns, or shield leaders from accountability, the culture of clericalism can take root regardless of who holds office.
A genuinely synodal Church requires leaders who listen as readily as they lead. Only then can Church institutions become places where authority serves mission, dialogue strengthens communion, and every person is given the dignity of being heard.
Mark Saludes is the managing editor of LiCAS News. He is a Manila-based journalist reporting on human rights, social justice, environmental issues, and the role of faith communities across Asia.
