S
Shoshana
Guest
Code:
May Laity Question, Critisize, or Complain about our Clergy? Vote and Discuss
- Status
S
Shoshana
Guest
Code:
I had a situation once when our pastor did a great boo-boo. We possibly lost a soul to catholicism due to it. I was angry as I was involved with the husband who passed away. I never take any action without following God’s will for me. And yes, it is that simple. On the surface I would’ve been justified to challenge him…but I prayed and prayed. After a much sleepless night, I opened the bible and He told me to have mercy! I shut my bible and thanked Him and fell asleep like a baby.
Be very careful in assuming that we are justified in every battle…
M
MusicMan
Guest
The presumption that the laity know more than the priests and have the duty of policing them is what is completely preposturous. Priests go through rigorous training in seminary on how the Mass is to be celebrated. Celebration of the Mass is one of the primary responsibilities of their vocation. It is truly arrogant presumption on the part of the laity that we would know more about it.
Worse, by attending Mass and focusing on every little thing that we perceive to be abusive, we are no longer there for the right reasons, and have ceased to be properly disposed to receive the Eucharist.
At Mass we should be focusing on removing the 2x4 in our own eye, not on searching for a splinter in the priest’s eye, then tattling to the Bishop about what we claim is a 2x4 in the priest’s eye, and then demanding that the Bishop remove it for him.
B
Brendan
Guest
Kate,
We are all part of the Body of Christ, our brother’s failing is our own too. Even if they are clergy. In fact, especially if they are clergy, as the error of a shepard can lead a whole flock into danger.
Reproachment of Sinners is one of the Spiritual Works of Mercy and a true mark of Love.
So, yes, we ARE called to police each other, but must always do so in the spirit of charity and in the interest of fraternal correction.
T
tee_eff_em
Guest
Indeed. I believe this is the reason that any course of “correction” needs be done with utmost caution – Out of respect for the office of the priest. Even if an individual is in need of correction, the office he holds still deserves respect. (Indeed, respect for the office is a secondary reason for correction – Not only for the sake of the priest, but also to prevent him bringing scandal to said office).
It is said of St Francis of Assisi that, if he were to meet the most sinful, drunkard, fornicator of a priest, he would kneel down and kiss the hands that consecrate and carry the Blessed Sacrament.
:twocents:
tee
B
bear06
Guest
Well, Carole, what can I tell you? Would it make you feel any better about our actions to let you know that Cardinal Ratzinger, as he was known at the time, got word to our group that the CD idea was the way to fight abuses and that all diocese that have the same problem should employ this method? I actually probably wouldn’t be spreading this “error” around if he hadn’t told us to do so. I never in my dreams thought we would find out why we got the bishop we did and if our coalition did things the right way. I thank God everyday that I don’t have to be axious over that anymore. It would seem that you might want to give canon 212 another gander and tell me where you think my errors lie.
M
mosher
Guest
Exactly but we must always remember that we are our brothers keeper.
M
mosher
Guest
No they don’t. I attended two different seminaries and their emphasis on the liturgy and knowing the rubrics were completely different. And in fact the second seminary taught error when it came to liturgical correctness. One cannot say that in the seminaries today there is sufficient instruction in the liturgy and there has not been since prior to Vatican II. There is indeed a cut off date. One of my rectors spok about how at his seminary there was a radical difference in the seminary liturgical discipline when he returned from a summer break.
Correct, and that is why I personally make sure that I attend mass only at parishes that follow the proper liturgical norms. It has nothing to do with perception it has to do with obedience.
We are our brothers keeper - are we not?
N
netmilsmom
Guest
Excellent!
Who are we hurting if we “go with the flow” and not make waves?
How do we validate that we are correct in our thinking and the way a priest or Bishops acts is in error.
I have no problem, especially here in a DISCUSSION forum bringing my concerns to other Catholics before I act on them.
I would really rather bring it here and have someone tell me I am wrong, than take it to the Diocese and have them look at me like I am stupid.
And for something that is fact, that has been in the news or quoted from an article about facts, it is not slander or libel. Gone are the times that someone could do something and it could be shuffled away, never to be seen again. That is good for all of us.
If you have a suspicion that something wrong is going on in your parish, especially concerning children, DO NOT hesitate to bring it to the correct authorites.
We can all high five each other about being more Christian than someone else in the way we handle a problem but the bottom line is, we played the good and humble Christians for a long time in this church and look where it got us. Many young lives were ruined. A couple of friends of mine were among them.
B
bear06
Guest
I don’t think we can ever be positive that the Holy Spirit is guiding our actions. Basically, very few can know the mind of God. We do have to pray fervently for guidance and do the best we can to make sure we are doing God’s will and are not being motivated by pride or spite. Like I said before, what God is calling you to do and what God is calling me to do may be quite different things. I never assume I’m justified in anything. All I can do is what I believe God wants me to do and hope that it is the correct thing to do. I’d warn to be careful in deciding that others actions are wrong because that’s not what we feel called to do. They might just be doing God’s will.
J
Joysong
Guest
Hello again, Bear,
If you look back at my posts, I recommended using the CD method, so I need to repeat my favor of it, in case you missed my post. I believe this is probably the best way of resolving reports of abuse, since it should leave little doubt in the mind of those in authority as to whether or not the complaint is warranted.
What I see as wrong is taking out a website and specifying the sins of a cleric publicly, even though it may be common knowledge of a good number of people. No matter the “good” end hoped for in doing this, it is still detraction, slander, or possibly even calumny. There would be many on the website that are not aware of these failings, and would then have all the problems of conscience that were discussed earlier in the thread, such as dealing with their own judgment after they come to know of it.
Detraction is defined in the CCC #2477: He becomes guilty who, without objectively valid reason, discloses another’s faults and failings to persons who did not know them.
I see no valid reason for taking out a website, and revealing this to persons who did not know of it. If one merely wanted to educate the faithful about abuses, do you believe this is the responsibility of the laity to teach others to discern abuse? There is a great deal an untrained person will not know how to evaluate.
This is analgous to instructing students to report improper teaching methods to their principals. Students have no training to evaluate it, other than possibly to state they are not learning. The final analysis would be up to the principal to investigate and apply a remedy, if any is due. This is just so unseemly to me to permit subordinates to judge trained authority. I worked in a school district for many years, and I know that teachers are regularly evaluated in the classroom, but not by the students.
I’m open to correction, for I myself do not have the full training of a priest, but from what I have learned in studying moral theology, I have to maintain my present understanding of the Church’s teaching concerning the end vs. means principle, until shown that I am mistaken.
It seems good to me that we are trying on this thread to find an alternative method of reporting **serious **and most grave abuses, and I have to admit again that I do not see a method yet that is better than using a CD.
Peace,
Carole
If you look back at my posts, I recommended using the CD method, so I need to repeat my favor of it, in case you missed my post. I believe this is probably the best way of resolving reports of abuse, since it should leave little doubt in the mind of those in authority as to whether or not the complaint is warranted.
What I see as wrong is taking out a website and specifying the sins of a cleric publicly, even though it may be common knowledge of a good number of people. No matter the “good” end hoped for in doing this, it is still detraction, slander, or possibly even calumny. There would be many on the website that are not aware of these failings, and would then have all the problems of conscience that were discussed earlier in the thread, such as dealing with their own judgment after they come to know of it.
Detraction is defined in the CCC #2477: He becomes guilty who, without objectively valid reason, discloses another’s faults and failings to persons who did not know them.
I see no valid reason for taking out a website, and revealing this to persons who did not know of it. If one merely wanted to educate the faithful about abuses, do you believe this is the responsibility of the laity to teach others to discern abuse? There is a great deal an untrained person will not know how to evaluate.
This is analgous to instructing students to report improper teaching methods to their principals. Students have no training to evaluate it, other than possibly to state they are not learning. The final analysis would be up to the principal to investigate and apply a remedy, if any is due. This is just so unseemly to me to permit subordinates to judge trained authority. I worked in a school district for many years, and I know that teachers are regularly evaluated in the classroom, but not by the students.
I’m open to correction, for I myself do not have the full training of a priest, but from what I have learned in studying moral theology, I have to maintain my present understanding of the Church’s teaching concerning the end vs. means principle, until shown that I am mistaken.
It seems good to me that we are trying on this thread to find an alternative method of reporting **serious **and most grave abuses, and I have to admit again that I do not see a method yet that is better than using a CD.
Peace,
Carole
G
Gottle_of_Geer
Guest
The first choice was too narrow, because there is far more to Catholicism than doctrine.
I chose the second answer.I think it is entirely permissible to criticise them (it is certainly traditional; more so than some things that are so described) - provided one is open to receiving criticism from them or from anyone else
Sometimes bishops have been given the chop by their critics - Simon Sudbury, Archbishop of Canterbury, for example, in 1381. This is going further than even the severest critic of Bernie Law would ask for.
Since bumping off clergy is not really a good idea, verbal criticism is a useful vent for people’s frustrations: it prevents the Church turning into the Id Monster on the “Forbidden Planet”. Which is a superb film, full of theology; even if it does star Leslie Nielsen in a major role - but not as a member of the clergy. ##
B
Brendan
Guest
Just because you cannot see a reason, does it follow that such a reason does not exist?
You just hit on a reason right there. And yes, it is the responsiblity of ALL the Faithful to instruct others in the the teachings of the Catholic Church, is it not?
So would it then be beneficial to allow that person to remain in ignorance, or would teaching and instruction be in order?
And if the Principal had his chief staff issue a guide of good teaching methods, and outlined specific instances of what would be bad (and called this document Redemptoris Sacramentum) and specifically addressed it to the whole school.
What then, could not the students, who are also part of the school, not then compare what their teacher was doing to this document the Principal had issued, to see if there was any specifically mentioned bad teaching practices?
And what if this document that the Principal issued specifically authorized the students to bring potential bad teaching practices to his attention?
J
Joysong
Guest
Dear Brendan,
:bigyikes: Think a minute, my friend… how would you feel as the teacher in that classroom, knowing every move you made was being evaluated by a student who is willing to press the button and report what they feel is improper procedure! And imagine the poor principal who receives scores of these complaints!
Yes, I do not discount learning whatsoever, and many of the laity should be familiar with RS and other documents. If something jumps out at them as being gravely wrong, then a report should be initiated, so that proper authority is able to evaluate and make corrections, if necessary.
Lacking solid formal training that the clergy receive in the seminary, a layperson is highly apt to be wrong, and in many cases, I believe that people err in reporting the lesser abuses. They are not really critical to having a valid liturgy, nor do they fall under the category of sacriligeous or most grave.
I remember a recent thread where a poster considered as an “abuse” that the responsorial psalm was improper. However, upon investigation, it was no abuse whatsoever, but this person did not have sufficient knowledge to know that. Imagine if these types of charges are circulated within a given parish to the laity at large! I truly feel very sorry for our priests!
Again, my head is not in the sand with regard to potentially grave situations. But I believe the laity ought not to take in their own hands and should defer it to higher authority. Remember, if it is not addressed at this level, they may go higher if necessary until it is resolved.
Carole
:bigyikes: Think a minute, my friend… how would you feel as the teacher in that classroom, knowing every move you made was being evaluated by a student who is willing to press the button and report what they feel is improper procedure! And imagine the poor principal who receives scores of these complaints!
Yes, I do not discount learning whatsoever, and many of the laity should be familiar with RS and other documents. If something jumps out at them as being gravely wrong, then a report should be initiated, so that proper authority is able to evaluate and make corrections, if necessary.
Lacking solid formal training that the clergy receive in the seminary, a layperson is highly apt to be wrong, and in many cases, I believe that people err in reporting the lesser abuses. They are not really critical to having a valid liturgy, nor do they fall under the category of sacriligeous or most grave.
I remember a recent thread where a poster considered as an “abuse” that the responsorial psalm was improper. However, upon investigation, it was no abuse whatsoever, but this person did not have sufficient knowledge to know that. Imagine if these types of charges are circulated within a given parish to the laity at large! I truly feel very sorry for our priests!
Again, my head is not in the sand with regard to potentially grave situations. But I believe the laity ought not to take in their own hands and should defer it to higher authority. Remember, if it is not addressed at this level, they may go higher if necessary until it is resolved.
Carole
B
Brendan
Guest
That would really be an issue between them and the Principal, would it not. After all, the Principal said that the violations should be reported, didn’t he? Should a student NOT listen to the Principal
Cool, we agree
Well, would that not be for the Principal to decide, not the students.
And are the Faithful not entitled to a Liturgy that is more than ‘valid’, but rather the one most in accord with the Principal’s wishes. After all, each T.A. and each Teacher has taken an oath of obedience to the Principal.
Isn’t it wonderful that we have these fora, so people can post questions like that and find out if what they witnessed is actually an abuse or not
I agree, anyone with a complain should first investigate it, if it appears to be illicit, then it should be first addressed with the clergy who performed the action.
If a resolution is not forth coming, then most, in charity to the higher authority.
B
bear06
Guest
Because you see no “valid” reason does not mean it wrong. Actually, I think it the responsibility of the clergy to educate the faithful. Unfortunately, when the faithful are abusing their authority, we have the right and duty to make our concerns known to our pastors and to the laity according to Canon 212. I think it funny to think that we don’t give Church teachings a flying fig around here. I can assure you that our actions were taken after much prayer and under spiritual direction.
If a student fears that a teacher is teaching in error or even know this to be true, they should report to their principals. If the principals don’t listen, then they should go over their heads. BTW, we’re not talking about teaching methods anyway. We are talking about big time errors that are harmful to the faithful.
You are coming from a position of not knowing what has happened in our diocese. You seem to think these are hard to discern or subtle problems that occured in our diocese. They were about as subtle as a brick to the head! Training for the priesthood was hardly needed in most of the occurances in our diocese. This is not about the priest not holding his hands the right way. It’s more in the realm of Fr. So-and-so fathering two children with the parish secretary and being allowed to remain as pastor (BTW, all examples are made up).
Once again, this is your opinion. The Vatican quite clearly were told of our methods. We even told our new bishop what we did when we let him know that we were fading away after his appointment. Not a rebuke has come down yet. From everything we’ve been told, we were correctly excercising our duty according to Canon 212. That said, we made very sure to go through the proper chain of command before we published the website. You must go to the priest, the bishop and anyone higher that you can reach first. If they fail to act, you may make your concerns known to the laity.
Let me use the example of a child abusing priest. If you know for a fact that a priest has abused, you must go to him and ask him to let the bishop know and to remove himself and you should probably tell the bishop as well. If they both refuse to address the situation, you are well within your rights and duty to make this known to the public for the protection of children. Once again, we’re not talking about a possible molestation. You must not act on suspicions when bringing it to the laity. One does not have to be a priest to know that molestation is wrong. In fact, one does not have to be a priest to know that a good many things are wrong.
BTW, the use of the word “valid” isn’t in Canon 212. Probably because some will try and determine validity to their own point of view.
J
Joysong
Guest
Dear Brendan,
A search of my previous posts would reveal my agreement with you that it is always good and wise to question and look for answers. No problem. The only difficulty I have is with people who use the internet simply to gripe without attempting to learn. Big difference in motivation, the former being possible detraction.
Carole
A search of my previous posts would reveal my agreement with you that it is always good and wise to question and look for answers. No problem. The only difficulty I have is with people who use the internet simply to gripe without attempting to learn. Big difference in motivation, the former being possible detraction.
Carole
B
bear06
Guest
Griping to gripe gets us nowhere. I’m not for griping for the heck of it. If you’re not actually willing to work to change the problem, then what is the point. That said, you shouldn’t assume that a person isn’t trying to learn or that they don’t already posses the knowledge they need on that issue or even that they aren’t doing anything.
N
netmilsmom
Guest
Well, well said.
When I first came here, I was corrected and corrected. It caused me to do my own research and can now go to my parish or the parishes that I volunteer in and state FACTS.
Discussion is never a bad thing. If you don’t like what someone is saying, prove them wrong.
J
Joysong
Guest
Please, Bear,
For the record, I was not directing my post to you *personally *whatsoever, nor to anyone in particular who might fall into the category of griping. I mentioned to Brendan that I had said this in a previous post, and it is verifiable. Nothing new. Is this not a sample of what laity can do misinterpreting a priest’s words? And then publish them without asking for clarification? And cause others to believe it as well, such as Net has just done in commending you?
)
For the record, I was not directing my post to you *personally *whatsoever, nor to anyone in particular who might fall into the category of griping. I mentioned to Brendan that I had said this in a previous post, and it is verifiable. Nothing new. Is this not a sample of what laity can do misinterpreting a priest’s words? And then publish them without asking for clarification? And cause others to believe it as well, such as Net has just done in commending you?
Thinking positively, I would like to give you the benefit of the doubt, that “you” did not mean “me” but ya’all. (Pronounced “Yuns” in PA
)- Status