The Dispatch: More from CWR...

No, the Church doesn’t think that being a layperson is a punishment

A laicized priest, far from being a “regular layperson” again, often cannot participate in many things lay people usually can.

Former Cardinal Theodore E. McCarrick is seen at a church in Washington Nov. 1, 2017. (CNS photo/Tyler Orsburn)

When the Vatican announced that Theodore McCarrick had been found guilty of several serious crimes, including the abuse of children and adults and solicitation in the confessional, it also announced that he was to be punished by what is technically termed “loss of the clerical state”, or as it is known colloquially, “laicization”. A number of commentators, while happy to see McCarrick face justice, have objected to the idea that the worst possible punishment the Church could impose upon the former Cardinal was to have him be a layman.

Is this not, some asked, something of an insult? Is this not just one more example of the very sort of clericalism that Pope Francis has decried as a root cause of the abuse crisis? Isn’t it contradictory to say, “An overemphasis on the privileges of the ordained has led to this scandal; therefore, let us punish them by taking those privileges away from them?”

By no means. Understanding this penalty, what it means and what it does not mean, tells us much about the Church’s understanding of the lay state, the realities created by ordination, and the relationship between laity and the clergy within the Body of Christ.

The Psalm used for ordination Masses is typically Psalm 110, which includes the following: “You are a priest forever, according to the order of Melchizedek” (Psa 110:4). Though this line was written under the old dispensation, it is all the more true for the priesthood of the New Testament. The Church teaches clearly that the Sacrament of Holy Orders configures the man being ordained to the character of Christ the Priest. While all Christians are baptized into the priesthood of Christ, ordination enables the cleric to act in persona Christi capitis—“in the person of Christ the head”. Thus, as Pope St. John Paul II taught in his document on the laity, Christifideles Laici, “The ordained ministries… express and realize a participation in the priesthood of Jesus Christ that is different, not simply in degree but in essence, from the participation given to all the lay faithful through Baptism and Confirmation” (CL 22).

Ordination therefore grants to the cleric a unique privilege in the Christian life: to act in Jesus’ name for the sanctification of His Church.

Thus, there is a certain objective superiority of the priesthood to the laity. While all Christians share in the incredible dignity granted by baptism, that of being an adopted child of God and a co-heir of Christ called to partake in the divine nature (see CCC, 1265), the ordained, in addition to all of that, also participate in the life of Christ in a profound and unique way.

It is simply a matter of comparatives: it is a tremendous gift to be a lay Christian, but an even more tremendous gift to be called to ordination. Seen in this light, we understand that to be a lay person is not at all a bad thing—and certainly not in itself a “punishment”.

Likewise, current events have made it abundantly clear that ordination does not make one morally superior to the laity. A priest is not a better person than a layman merely for being a priest. This could only be the case if ordination were something one earned, some achievement, rather than a call and a gift, unmerited.

Another important factor is the fact that this configuration of the ordained to Christ is irreversible. In classic terms, the ordained man receives an “indelible mark,” so that this configuring can never be taken away. (It is the same with baptism and confirmation.) No sin or crime, and no power of the Church, can remove a man’s ordination.

Thus, when a bishop, priest, or deacon is judged to be no longer worthy of exercising ecclesial ministry, the Church removes the clerics authorization to celebrate the sacraments—but it cannot remove his ability. As the Catechism says:

It is true that someone validly ordained can, for grave reasons, be discharged from the obligations and functions linked to ordination, or can be forbidden to exercise them; but he cannot become a layman again in the strict sense, because the character imprinted by ordination is for ever. The vocation and mission received on the day of his ordination mark him permanently. (CCC 1583)

To be returned to the lay state (which is a better translation of the word reductio) is not to make a man no longer a priest, but to take away from that man the privilege of fulfilling the priestly duties, and the obligation of the Church toward him as a priest.

Indeed, a laicized priest, far from being a “regular layperson” again, often cannot participate in many things lay people usually can. According to a report from CNA, “ordinarily, the Church does not permit a person who has been dismissed from the clerical state to teach, as a layman, in a Catholic college or school, to be a lector or extraordinary ministry of Holy Communion, or to exercise other functions in the name of the Church. This is determined on an individual basis, and exceptions and dispensations can be made.”

To be laicized, then, is not to be “punished with being a layperson.” Rather, it is to be punished by no longer being allowed to function as a priest. Put another way, it is not that being a layperson is bad, but that being a priest is great.

If you value the news and views Catholic World Report provides, please consider donating to support our efforts. Your contribution will help us continue to make CWR available to all readers worldwide for free, without a subscription. Thank you for your generosity!

Click here for more information on donating to CWR. Click here to sign up for our newsletter.

About Nicholas Senz 29 Articles
Nicholas Senz is Pastoral Associate at Holy Spirit Catholic Church in Fishers, IN. He holds Master's degrees in philosophy and theology from the Dominican School of Philosophy and Theology in Berkeley, CA. Nicholas lives with his wife and three children.


  1. McCarrick still lives on the faithful pew sitters dime at the friary in Victoria, KS., today, April 9th. McCarrick is not poor. McCarrick is not helpless. He has powerful friends. He is no longer a priest… so what? McCarrick continues his scam. He laughs at us, as do the bishops and cardinals laugh at us.
    What a joke the RCC has become.

    • To take away a man’s priesthood IS a punishment. He is disgraced and will be ever remembered with a shudder. What a terrible fate. Outside of the friary he would still live on your dime, on social security and medicare. It is also likely he is paying his expenses at the friary and they can keep an eye on him. Would you prefer he move in next door to you?

      • You are comparing compulsory taxes paid to the government to the voluntary contributions to the church by the faithful. No comparison.
        This beast has no claim on the collection basket any longer. He has his thirty pieces of silver. McCarrick has never voiced guilt or contrition to his flock. Be done with him.
        Moving next door to me would be very uncomfortable, indeed…for him.

  2. An article justifying clerical superiority and clerical privilege — lay people required to accept an inferior status in a relationship with the deity, and feel fortunate and be pleased in having even that.

    What a crock.

    • Baptism, the entrance into the ranks of the lay faithful, elevates a person above the unbaptized. It is not that the person is better than others, since we all share an equality of human dignity. Rather, the gift is better–sanctifying grace, or a share in divine life. St. Paul says it better, ‘We hold this treasure in earthen vessels.’ Perhaps if that is understood, it will help understand the difference between Baptism and Holy Orders.

  3. “there is a certain objective superiority of the priesthood to the laity.”

    I would say objective difference versus objective superiority. The latter phrase to my ears smacks of the “priestcraft” that supplied some timber to Reformation fires.

  4. question: if laicization of McCarrick is NOT a punishment, is he really being punished?
    question: if and when does the Church decide to ex-communicate a priest who is culpably accused?

  5. So, McCarrick cannot teach at a Catholic school, but they could make an exception if they wanted (although he’s still living on church funds). That is your argument for why this is a good punishment?

    Not to be inflammatory, but we *are* talking about the statutory rape of little kids.

    Why does this author feel the need to cover for the Vatican? Is it really so evil to consider that the Vatican made the wrong call?

  6. I had a bishop kiss me on the side of my face and said I was sealed in the order of Maccabee. What does that mean? Give me your take feel free to ask me any questions.

2 Trackbacks / Pingbacks

  1. No, the Church doesn’t think that being a layperson is a punishment -
  2. Scott Hahn en el Show de John-Henry Westen: una evaluación crítica | cubacatolica

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

All comments posted at Catholic World Report are moderated. While vigorous debate is welcome and encouraged, please note that in the interest of maintaining a civilized and helpful level of discussion, comments containing obscene language or personal attacks—or those that are deemed by the editors to be needlessly combative or inflammatory—will not be published. Thank you.