Criticisms of Clergy

[ethelzguy]

In countless threads, I see various posts criticizing the Church and her clergymembers. The criticisms seem to come mostly from those who consider themselves “Traditional Catholics”.

What puzzles me, is that it is the “TCs” who claim we should more closely follow the Church, yet they are the ones more prone to the criticisms.

How do we explain this contradiction? Isn’t one of the basic tenets of Catholicism that we should be obedient?

 

[onetruechurch]

Mother Angelica was not afraid to “take on” the Bishops when she was starting her orthodox satellite TV EWTN. When she was competing for air time, a bishop’s group CTNA was also on air. They were hosting guests that, according to Mother, were confusing Catholics with their liberal teachings. The following is a quote from Raymond Arroyo’s book, “Mother Angelica”:

"...Mother believed EWTN represented the 'voice of the Pope' in a church confused about its future and forgetful of its past.  Theologians, priests, laity, and even a few bishops openly agitated for optional celibacy for priests, changes in the Church's sexual teaching, and greater lay control of Church governance."

 Mother also exposed some of the statements Cardinal Mahoney had made that confused Catholics such as "Jesus is    "IN" the bread and wine.  Cardinal Mahoney of Los Angeles is still extremely liberal in his teachings.  We need more Mother Angelicas to help bring orthodoxy to Los Angeles.

PS I am not sure if this is the correct forum for this type of discussion.

 

[ethelzguy]

Well, I wasn’t sure if it really belonged under “Traditional Catholicism”, and since it was in regard to clergy, “Vocations” seemed the best place.

I guess what I’m getting at, is that it is the hard-core “traditionalists” that seem to be the most harsh on our clergy, yet the same people are the ones that insist that they are higher beings held to a higher standard.

Kind of like declaring that they are the leaders, but then criticizing them all the time. I don’t hear or see the more “modern” Catholics doing the complaining. And the same “modern” Catholics are much more understanding of the clergy’s humanity.

Does that make better sense?

TBL

 

[kathielee]

In countless threads, I see various posts criticizing the Church and her clergymembers. The criticisms seem to come mostly from those who consider themselves “Traditional Catholics”.

What puzzles me, is that it is the “TCs” who claim we should more closely follow the Church, yet they are the ones more prone to the criticisms.

How do we explain this contradiction? Isn’t one of the basic tenets of Catholicism that we should be obedient?

It would depend on a few things…what is the reason for the criticism? Is it pride? No doubt most of it is pride because pride is the root of all sin. Detraction? No doubt !

In the areas of dogma and doctrine, yep, we must be obedient. If a priest is doing something that is completely contrary to the teachings of the Church, then appropriate means to effect a change are in order.

BUT, to get on a forum to priest bash is NOT appropriate. It’s pride.

People need to really understand the 7 deadly sins and take them to heart. And, bashing of any kind is rooted in pride and definitely needs to be taken to the confessional.

Kathie

 

[EasterJoy]

Oh, I hear plenty of Church- and priest-bashing from baptized Catholics who don’t like it that women aren’t ordained, or that gays can’t marry in the Church, or that the Church won’t change her stand on abortion, or that the Church isn’t a democracy. They are hardly traditional.

Human nature is the same, across the spectrum. One of the beautiful things about the Church is that the whole spectrum is here. Why? This is the only answer I can come up with: “Simon Peter answered him, ‘Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life. We have come to believe; we are convinced that you are God’s holy one.’” (John 6:68-69) Even when we can’t figure out how to follow, there is no place else we can go.

 

[ethelzguy]

BUT, to get on a forum to priest bash is NOT appropriate. It’s pride.

People need to really understand the 7 deadly sins and take them to heart. And, bashing of any kind is rooted in pride and definitely needs to be taken to the confessional.

Kathie

:tiphat: :bowdown:

 

[Johndigger]

Priests need our support and prayers more than anyone!

However, in a sense, support is not just giving him a pat on the back when he does a good job, but also mentioning when we’re dissatisfied or confused about something.

A Priest is not a Priest for himself, but for us. If, by abandoning the teachings of the Church and the traditions of the Church, and people are not being sanctified then it needs to be mentioned, lovingly but firmly.

Of course, in most instances when its actually the laity that are in the wrong and its us that need to change. But unless we actually go and mentioned why we’re annoyed, then he has no chance to explain himself and we have no chance to change.

Priest’s will be judged more harshly than anyone when they die. As long as the motivation is charity, we have a duty to critique them with empathy - so that we can all grow closer to God.

However, simply critising a Priest online for not doing something the way we want him to do out of pride is obviously wrong.

JD

 

[m134e5]

It is ok to criticize clergy if they are teaching something incorrect, or aren’t showing proper reverence. Still, this criticism must be done with charity- and respect for who they are as a priest. (See the quote in my signature line).

 

[nannygirl]

In countless threads, I see various posts criticizing the Church and her clergymembers. The criticisms seem to come mostly from those who consider themselves “Traditional Catholics”.

What puzzles me, is that it is the “TCs” who claim we should more closely follow the Church, yet they are the ones more prone to the criticisms.

How do we explain this contradiction? Isn’t one of the basic tenets of Catholicism that we should be obedient?

MMM…interesting…sounds like you’re criticizing “TC’s” in this post!

 

[nannygirl]

It would depend on a few things…what is the reason for the criticism? Is it pride? No doubt most of it is pride because pride is the root of all sin. Detraction? No doubt !

In the areas of dogma and doctrine, yep, we must be obedient. If a priest is doing something that is completely contrary to the teachings of the Church, then appropriate means to effect a change are in order.

BUT, to get on a forum to priest bash is NOT appropriate. It’s pride.

People need to really understand the 7 deadly sins and take them to heart. And, bashing of any kind is rooted in pride and definitely needs to be taken to the confessional.

Kathie

This is kinda hilarious…complaining about complainers!

 

[JReducation]

Mother Angelica was not afraid to “take on” the Bishops when she was starting her orthodox satellite TV EWTN. When she was competing for air time, a bishop’s group CTNA was also on air. They were hosting guests that, according to Mother, were confusing Catholics with their liberal teachings. The following is a quote from Raymond Arroyo’s book, “Mother Angelica”:

"...Mother believed EWTN represented the 'voice of the Pope' in a church confused about its future and forgetful of its past.  Theologians, priests, laity, and even a few bishops openly agitated for optional celibacy for priests, changes in the Church's sexual teaching, and greater lay control of Church governance."

 Mother also exposed some of the statements Cardinal Mahoney had made that confused Catholics such as "Jesus is    "IN" the bread and wine.  Cardinal Mahoney of Los Angeles is still extremely liberal in his teachings.  We need more Mother Angelicas to help bring orthodoxy to Los Angeles.

PS I am not sure if this is the correct forum for this type of discussion.

Mother Angelic was also ordered by the Superior General of the Franciscan Order to retract her statements against the Cardinal, in public and to apologize or he would order her off the air immediately and censure her. He also ordered her never again to criticize the clergy or the bishops as this was against the rule of St. Clare. The order was given under holy obedience.

When a Major Superior gives an order under holy obedience and you disobey you face excommunication. I would not use this as a good example to encourage other Catholics, because it can lead you into very serious trouble.

The Major Superior never said that Mother was wrong and the Cardinal was right. What he said was that she had no right to say what she did, because of her place. Clerics cannot be corrected by lay persons, unless that lay person is a Major Superior of a religioius order and the cleric in question is under his jurisdiction.

This applies to all the laity. We have no authority to correct the clergy (deacons, priests, or bishops) unless we are an Ordinary in the Church. The only persons who are Ordinaries in the Church are bishops and major religious superiors (Provincial Superiors and Superior Generals). Women who are major religious superiors, such as Mother Angelica, are not Ordinaries. An Ordinary must always be male, except for an abbess. That’s the only time a female has Ordinary powers. There are few abbesses in the Church.

JR

 

[nannygirl]

In countless threads, I see various posts criticizing the Church and her clergymembers. The criticisms seem to come mostly from those who consider themselves “Traditional Catholics”.

What puzzles me, is that it is the “TCs” who claim we should more closely follow the Church, yet they are the ones more prone to the criticisms.

How do we explain this contradiction? Isn’t one of the basic tenets of Catholicism that we should be obedient?

All kidding aside, I agree that it is not our place to correct a priest.

 

[JReducation]

As I stated in another thread. I don’t believe the problem is one of Traditional Catholics only. I think the problem has to do with the clericalization of the laity.

Many lay people assume roles that are explcitly reserved for the clergy and religious. Correcting a cleric (deacon, priest or bishop) the the job of a Bishop or a Major Religious Superior, not of the laity.

The laity has the right to ask questions and even to voice their concerns to the proper authority. Once that’s done, the lay person’s job is over. The Bishop or the Religious Superior has the final word, end of story.

We live in a society where freedom of expression is often over generalized. We sometimes take it into the Church where there is not such freedom or it’s limited to certain situations under certain rules.

If you go up to your priest and you correct the way that he celebrates mass or the fact that he has altar girls, you’re going to get a well deserved blast. This is the job of his Bishop, if he is a diocesan priest or of his religious superior if he belongs to a religious community.

If you take the same concern to the Vicar General of the Diocese, in the case of a Diocesan Priest or the Religoius Superior in the case of a member of a religious community, you may get a different kind of response.

If you get no response or you get a blast anyway, at least you can say to yourself, that you did what you thought was right and be on your way. You did it the correct way.

A lay person who tries to correct a cleric or religious is just asking for trouble. The laity is at the lowest rung on the Catholic hierarchy. While clerics are ordained to teach and sanctify. The laity has neither order given to them by any sacrament. Only those lay people who are commissioned to teach by the Church have that authority to teach and redirect priests.

In the USA I know of only two lay men who have that kind of authority, Dr. Scott Hahn and Rabbi Klenicki. They are both official theologians of the Catholic Church with the authority to train and educate clergy. There may by others, but I don’t know of them. The only women who have this authority are abbesses. An abbess has the same authority, not sacramental power, as a bishop.

JR

JR

 

[Tsuwano]

The laity have the right (and duty) to critique the clergy in the same way the clergy have the responsibility to critique and admonish the laity when they fall short of the Gospel. We are called to be brothers and sisters to one another. No one should be exempt or separated from the love of the community of the Church, and part of what it means to love one another within the context of a Christian community is to admonish one another with love and charity when we fall into sin or fall short of what the Lord has called us to. The call of the priesthood is not a call to an elitist state within the Church, high above the lowly lay person. In fact, it is a call to assume the lowest rung on the ladder and to become the servant of the people of God. When the cleric falls short of this call, the laity should remind him of it and call him back to the service he has vowed his life to.

 

[Johndigger]

So, if a Priest teaches heresy, we can’t object? We just have to let other people be taken in by it?

In general, of course, it’s not our place to criticise clergy but everyone surely has the authority (and the duty) to decry heresy, by the authority and law of God and His Church?

This isn’t making the laity clerics - it’s simply loving the Truth and protecting others from the lies of Satan.

JD

 

[Joannm]

In the USA I know of only two lay men who have that kind of authority, Dr. Scott Hahn and Rabbi Klenicki. They are both official theologians of the Catholic Church with the authority to train and educate clergy. There may by others, but I don’t know of them. The only women who have this authority are abbesses. An abbess has the same authority, not sacramental power, as a bishop.

JR

JR

I usually find your posts right on target but I am a bit confused by your remark regarding people authorised to teach and correct priests.

There are many many lay people who have the authority to educate seminarians and priests. in seminaries and universities (Pontifical ones at that). An STL or STD usually authorises a person to be able to teach in a seminary although people with PhDs often do so as well. My friend’s (who is a priest) mentor at Catholic U. was a lay man as were many of his teachers when he went for his STL. There are many lay people in high diocesan postions who do have the authority and the right to correct priests. I am thinking of the sister in our Office of Worship who very often has to correct priests for things they are doing wrong in their parish, and she has the authority from the Bishop to do so.

 

[Joysong]

There is nothing so diabolical in our day as the attack on the priesthood. It began with the sex scandals, but takes the form today of perpetual diatribes about what they are doing wrong - unfortunately, a belief that exists solely in the mind of the criticiquer who rails in the townhall to find support and agreement.

Rather than go privately to the person, as Jesus taught, or to one with the authority to discipline, should the critique be legitimate, the haranguer runs to the web or the phone and publicly airs their discontent as though a cardinal abuse has taken away their rights.

The result of this unending stream of complaints, particularly from those who cite church documents to back up their position, is flagrant misinformation that causes many faithful to distrust the priesthood of Jesus Christ, and eventually lose faith.

This sin is so vile, yet often completely undetected in an examination of conscience. It gives the devil an open door to insidiously attack the church from her very roots. One who caught the virus now attends mass with a skeptical frame of mind on the alert to discover potential abuses, rather than worship with the freedom and trust of a Child of God. And whoa betide when they find a scrap of anything that seems amiss … the entire world will hear of it. Imagine this scene multiplied in thread after thread, complaint after complaint, and multiple nervous inquiries that seek, “Is this an abuse?”

Psalm 2

Why do the nations protest and the peoples grumble in vain?
Kings on earth rise up and princes plot together against the LORD and his anointed:
“Let us break their shackles and cast off their chains!”
The one enthroned in heaven laughs; the Lord derides them,
Then speaks to them in anger, terrifies them in wrath:
“I myself have installed my king on Zion, my holy mountain.”

Psalm 105
25. Touch NOT my anointed!

 

[HOLYHEARTS]

Mother Angelic was also ordered by the Superior General of the Franciscan Order to retract her statements against the Cardinal, in public and to apologize or he would order her off the air immediately and censure her. He also ordered her never again to criticize the clergy or the bishops as this was against the rule of St. Clare. The order was given under holy obedience.

When a Major Superior gives an order under holy obedience and you disobey you face excommunication. I would not use this as a good example to encourage other Catholics, because it can lead you into very serious trouble.

The Major Superior never said that Mother was wrong and the Cardinal was right. What he said was that she had no right to say what she did, because of her place. Clerics cannot be corrected by lay persons, unless that lay person is a Major Superior of a religioius order and the cleric in question is under his jurisdiction.

This applies to all the laity. We have no authority to correct the clergy (deacons, priests, or bishops) unless we are an Ordinary in the Church. The only persons who are Ordinaries in the Church are bishops and major religious superiors (Provincial Superiors and Superior Generals). Women who are major religious superiors, such as Mother Angelica, are not Ordinaries. An Ordinary must always be male, except for an abbess. That’s the only time a female has Ordinary powers. There are few abbesses in the Church.

JR

I do beg to differ here… Mother Angelica`s Order the Poor
Clares of Perpetual Adoration are an Order of Pontifical
Jurisdiction and like most other monasteries of cloistered/
contemplative life, each monastery is autonomous. Mother
has NO Superior General… Someone else may have ASKED
her to apologize; but no one except the Pope could command
her to do so. And, commands given in virtue of the vow of
obedience are something VERY rare. The Church has always
admonished Superiors to go very slowly, prayerfully, & wisely
before giving a command in virtue of the vow.

 

[HOLYHEARTS]

We have to remember that St. Catherine of Siena was not
afraid to correct (not criticize) the Pope himself. There is a dif-
ference between correction & criticism. Point 2) When we cor-
rect a person, we should be charitable & point out to or about
the person what is wrong. Therefore, we do not agree with
what the person is saying and/or doing; but we must not hate
the person himself & keep holding a grudge or anything else
against the person. All correction must be given for the good
of the person & out of the charitable desire to see the person
amend his or her ways. A correction should never be given
when one is under the influence of anger, pride, etc. Only the
greater good of the person must be the motive of the one giv-
ing the correction. Having said all this, when public scandal
is given by people who are public figures( religious or politi-
cal) correction is needed for the good of the the community.
If something IS wrong, then, we cannot believe we are being
chariable by just agreeing w/the person. We all have the right
& duty to correct: both for the person in question & for the
greater good & edification (building up) of the community.
There is a distinct & definite difference between correction
& criticism. One builds up; the other destroys.
And, of course, none of us is yet perfect so we should care-
fully examine ouselves & our personal intentions & motives
before seeking to correct our neighbor. Then, we should correct
only w/that same love with which we would like to be corrected.

 

[ethelzguy]

MMM…interesting…sounds like you’re criticizing “TC’s” in this post!

Rebuking those who criticize my clergy is a different animal than bashing our church leaders, the desendents of Peter and the Apostles.