This article was originally published in Danish on April 10, 2019.
Being a priest has gradually become a woman’s job. It simply doesn’t seem to be attractive to men anymore, which is perhaps a little surprising. It’s not hard to understand why women love it. The role of the sweet, endlessly kind and all-understanding caregiver fits well with a woman’s core competencies. However, there’s more to a priestly calling than that – and being a priest is a calling, not a job. It’s important to make that distinction clear.
The priest’s job is not only to comfort, but also to provide a theologically and philosophically sound interpretation of the scriptures on which the church is based. Last time there was an election for bishop, it was interesting to compare the election statements of the different candidates: the women hit on all the soft values, while the men tried a more theologically based approach. The men lost – naturally. The Danish National Church’s starting point is no longer the Bible and God, but man. I’ve mentioned this before. Such an approach is made for women.
The objections to female priests have probably gradually fallen silent, except where Inner Mission still has power over souls. The theological basis for the objections is that Eve is the origin of the original sin that we all carry around with us, and that Paul believes that women should keep silent in congregations for this reason. The priest can’t do that, of course. Other Christian denominations cross their fingers when they hear about female priests – not to mention gay priests and gay marriages. The Russian Orthodox Church no longer recognizes the sacraments of the Danish National Church. There is a good reason for this. The Danish National Church is no longer considered to be Christian.
However, there is a much more down-to-earth and practical reason why the idea of female priests may not be such a good idea – and it is devoid of any theology.
Back when the world was still in its infancy, the entire ecclesiastical and cultural life of parishes was centered around the parsonage, where there lived a priest who had a priest’s wife – and a flock of children. They served as an example. The priest took care of the theological side of things – he took care of the interpretation of the text, he sat on the school commission, participated in associations, gave lectures, organized – possibly together with some of the school teachers – literature circles, etc. In the background was the pastor’s wife, but she was no less important because she was responsible for all the organizational matters. She answered the phone, took care of the coffee and buns, ensured that rooms were available, etc. Her efforts in the parishes must never be forgotten. And the pastoral care was usually shared by the priest couple. There were many situations where the priest’s wife could accomplish far more than the priest – it depended on the circumstances. Both the priest and his wife were central figures in the parish, they helped keep it together, and the priest was often consulted about everything between heaven and earth, which may not have been entirely within his area of expertise, but he and the doctor were the most highly educated people in the parish, and the doctor could not be bothered with such things. In all this, the priest’s wife supported him, gave him good advice – and made sure he could concentrate on what he had to do. And the priest was almost always available.
Today, the priest is a woman. She may be married to the priest of a neighboring parish or a parish further away, perhaps to a carpenter or high school teacher. In practice, she has two jobs, the pastor’s and the pastor’s wife’s, and she can’t expect any support in her work from her husband – if she has one – because he has his own life, his own career and his own interests. She has to deal with both the theological and the practical. One of the two will suffer, and it is often the theological, both because it may not be the priest’s main interest and because it is the least immediately visible. Her role in the parish is diminished. In the middle of it all, she has to take a year’s maternity leave. During that time, the parish no longer has a church center. Then she comes back for a year before going on maternity leave again. Don’t get me wrong: It’s great that children are born – even in our parsonages – but it’s bad that it’s the priest who has to deliver them!
Did I say parsonage? That’s the next problem. The carpenter or high school teacher doesn’t really want to live in a big parsonage where there’s a constant stream of people, he’d rather live in an ordinary detached house. If the pastor’s husband is also a pastor (and that’s probably not that rare), then there may be two parsonages, one of which will be empty and will be sold by the parish council, even if it has historical value. Thyregod parish has sold the parsonage where N.F.S. Grundtvig grew up. It was too expensive to keep, they said. With that kind of thinking, I fear that they might also sell the church, because it must surely be cheaper to rent a room at the inn for the few hours a week that it’s needed. And the small room can probably do that, even in Thyregod…
In this way, the parsonage culture is dying – and its death is helping to kill what remains of the village life. It’s all connected.
The priest is now to be found in some random house. There are no open doors. Inquiries can be made at the church office during opening hours. Private is private! Holidays are more sacred than the sacraments. The phone is disconnected outside working hours. There is nowhere for the spiritually distressed to turn if he or she needs help.
Usually there are several priests in the parish, so the church will function like a “health clinic”. “No, your priest is not at work today. Would you like to talk to someone else?” Anyone who is in deep crisis and seeks help from the person they know is told to go out and hang themselves. But maybe there is no help at all. Today, the priest is seeing a psychologist himself. That’s how sad it looks for the church.
This development is making the church irrelevant to a large extent. The priest’s vocation has become a 9-16 job. This is development, you might say, but “development” is created by people through their actions or lack of actions. Our society is in a death spiral, and the church has jumped on the bandwagon towards the abyss.
Another objection – apart from the eternal clichéd refrain about equality – would be that without women there would be almost no priests at all. It’s a valid objection, but perhaps the church should ask itself why being a priest has apparently become so unattractive. Is the pay too low? Or is it because society has become so secularized that there is no interest in spiritual matters? Perhaps it’s even because no one today can believe in the Christian myths? The answer is probably a combination of all of the above. Maybe we should think about coming up with some general solutions to the church’s problems instead of denying them – or maybe we should just close up shop.
In any case, the politicians’ control over the church’s internal affairs must be removed through the introduction of the church constitution promised in the constitution, and perhaps it would be healthier for the church – but not necessarily for society – if the bond between church and state was severed. Then the church would also have to stand on its own two feet financially, which would force it to find solutions that would make the church relevant again.
However, it would hardly solve the problem of female priests – or perhaps better the problem of female priests – because women are flocking to the priesthood like flies to carrion.
Poor God!
Povl H. Riis-Knudsen
Translated by means of AI
Danmarks Frihedsraad 