May Laity Question, Critisize, or Complain about our Clergy? Vote and Discuss

[LighthouseRon]

katewithak:

By virtue of our baptism, it would seem we would want to police ourselves first, not the priest and everyone else at Mass. If charity begins at home, with one’s own soul, why not the policing?
This sickens me after a while. Simply because the priests sit in the Confessional week after week hearing the laity confess the same sins that the laity want to “police” out of the clergy.
Somewhere on this forum there is a poster who is outraged that as a volunteer for a youth group, he was asked to submit his fingerprints to the Diocese. He feels that is unfair because he is not a priest- he is donating his time for free therefore should not have to submit his fingerprints. Only the priests should. Since when did priests become the only sinners in the Church? The nitpicking, policing, self righteousness has got to stop before it threatens to tear the Church apart more than the scandals have done. It is just too much. People police yourselves, please.

I agree totally. Too many people go to church with the intention of finding something wrong with what the priest does while, I suspect, they may have a blind eye to their own actions. While I’m sure there are many abuses out there, I think we need to be careful as I have saw first hand what damage can be done when there are a few folks running to the bishop every time they see something they feel is an abuse. (My favorite is the lady EMHC that went to the bishop accusing our pastor of sexism because more women administered the Blood of Christ and she felt the pastor did not like women to administer the Body of Christ. She said the Body of Christ was more important.) This kind of thing can really divide a parish and it did to ours. It is only now that things are becoming more normal, if there is such a thing.

 

[katewithak]

Brendan:

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.

I guess what is bothering me here, Brendan, and on other threads is the focus on others. It is not charity to make it one’s life’s work noticing others faults while oblivious to our own. If it was all about noticing where a priest was in error and then discussing it with him for his sake, that would be one thing. But what I see on these threads is no benefit of the doubt, a tendency to accuse where there has been no wrong doing, a constant admonishment to not trust the clergy, a tendency to denigrate what the clergy does do right, a lack of respect and extreme venom. And I am saying let’s not throw the baby out with the bath water. Yes, correct each other. But that does not mean telling the whole world about the fault. If I have a fight with my husband, and in the course of the argument one of us threatens divorce and you overhear it, yes correct us. But why make it headline news? Why put it all over the internet? Why go and find other parishioners to tell it to until the whole parish knows we had a fight? Where is the percentage in that? What is the motive? To correct or to hurt? It would be to hurt. Period. And then if one went on a hunt to look for other couples fighting so it could be broadcast, more hurt and and urge to destroy. I simply don’t believe the reason people need these discussions on the failings of the clergy and how to repair them in order to correct the clergy. I think what I have seen on these threads is an intent, deliberate attempt wrapped in charitable titles, to destroy the Church, not build it up. If a person is bringing scandal to others by their revelations of the clergy wrongdoings, and these wrongdoings are not EXTREMELY serious, than they are committing a greater sin than the clergy. If people are causing scandal to others by their disrespect for the clergy when the disrespect is not SERIOUSLY warranted, and disrespect is never warranted, then they are committing a greater sin than those they desire to correct.

 

[bear06]

Joysong:

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?

I didn’t think it addressed to me. It seemed to be quite a general statement. Actually, I agreed with you for the most part.

Just so you know, we did ask the clegy for clarification before the pubication of our site if there was an error. In fact, we even had a button on the site to submit any errors found on the site. Because we were sure to fact check, there was never a clarification.

My problem is that there are a lot of assumptions being made. Unless you ask someone if they are trying to learn, unless you ask people if they asked for clarification, etc. whether it be directed to me or others, one shouldn’t assume. Or rather, one should assume the best until proven otherwise.

 

[bear06]

Once again, if a priest is abusing children and you’ve gone to both the priest and your bishop and the bishop refuses to do anything about it, what would you do? I’m betting most would probably make a very public statement, right? It would seem for most, it would just depend upon the type of abuse.

Of course you go to the person, then his superior and to there superior. Heck, I’ve even written the Vatican. That said, it’s almost impossible to get a response via letter due to the fact that there are sooooooooooo many. Sometimes the only way for correction to occur is to make you concerns known to the rest of the laity.

Matt 18:15-17 Actually tells his disciples to handle things in this manner.

 

[katewithak]

Sometimes one does have to wonder at the powers to be. I remember the Little Flower, St. Therese. She was so horrified at the sins committed when people spoke she took a vow of silence herself. She meant to make reparation to our Lord for the injuries incurred when people sin verbally. So she would not speak unless she absolutely had to. The Vatican made her a saint. Do you think it was because she was participating in a cover up therefore they approved her? Perhaps she was wrong. Maybe she should have burned those sins in a CD or advertised them on the Internet.Or perhaps she could have simply started a discussion group.

 

[katewithak]

From the Catholic Catechism: 1868
Sin is a personal act. Moreover, we have a responsibility for the sins committed by others when we cooperate in them:
by participating directly and voluntarily in them;
by ordering, advising, praising, or approving them;
by not disclosing or not hindering them when we have an obligation to do so;
by protecting evil-doers.

At the same time, something that is occurring more and more:
1858
Grave matter is specified by the Ten Commandments, corresponding to the answer of Jesus to the rich young man: "Do not kill, Do not commit adultery, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Do not defraud, Honor your father and your mother."132 The gravity of sins is more or less great: murder is graver than theft. One must also take into account who is wronged: violence against parents is in itself graver than violence against a stranger.

These are the two things I would keep in mind when criticising. That I am not cooperating in bearing false witness, that I am not acting purely on hearsay, that I have no direct evidence of the wrong doing.
Once I have determined that I am not cooperating in bearing false witness, then yes, seek help for the person who is in the wrong.

 

[netmilsmom]

katewithak:

. Maybe she should have burned those sins in a CD or advertised them on the Internet.Or perhaps she could have simply started a discussion group.

I don’t think there were CD burners at her time.

 

[netmilsmom]

katewithak:

Do not bear false witness,
.

And if it is not false?

 

[katewithak]

netmil(name removed by moderator):

And if it is not false?

Already answered in same post, but thanks for asking.

 

[netmilsmom]

katewithak:

Once I have determined that I am not cooperating in bearing false witness, then yes, seek help for the person who is in the wrong.

Is this the answer?

Already answered in same post, but thanks for asking

Well quoting what a person missed is polite. Thank you for the curt answer. How Christian of you!

 

[Joysong]

Excerpts from Catholic Encyclopedia on Detraction:

Thus it is conceivable that a relatively small defect alleged against a person of eminent station, such as a bishop, might seriously tarnish his good name and be a mortal sin, whilst an offence of considerable magnitude attributed to an individual of a class in which such things frequently happen might constitute only a venial sin, such as, for instance, to say that a common sailor had been drunk.

When, however, knowledge of the happening is possessed only by the members of a particular community or society, such as a college or monastery and the like, it would not be lawful to publish the fact to others than those belonging to such a body.

 

[katewithak]

netmil(name removed by moderator):

Is this the answer?

Well quoting what a person missed is polite. Thank you for the curt answer. How Christian of you!

I really do wish you would stop looking for every opportunity to take offense or insult me. I have noticed this on other threads as well. I am not trying to insult you- no one is being curt. I am suggesting you read the entire post rahter than picking out one thing and asking me to re write what was already stated. Looking for reason to feel injured by me is not very Christian of you. Peace.

 

[katewithak]

Excerpts from Catholic Encyclopedia on Detraction:

Thus it is conceivable that a relatively small defect alleged against a person of eminent station, such as a bishop, might seriously tarnish his good name and be a mortal sin, whilst an offence of considerable magnitude attributed to an individual of a class in which such things frequently happen might constitute only a venial sin, such as, for instance, to say that a common sailor had been drunk.

When, however, knowledge of the happening is possessed only by the members of a particular community or society, such as a college or monastery and the like, it would not be lawful to publish the fact to others than those belonging to such a body.

Thank you, thank you, thank you, :clapping: :clapping:
Brilliant work.

 

[bear06]

katewithak:

Sometimes one does have to wonder at the powers to be. I remember the Little Flower, St. Therese. She was so horrified at the sins committed when people spoke she took a vow of silence herself. She meant to make reparation to our Lord for the injuries incurred when people sin verbally. So she would not speak unless she absolutely had to. The Vatican made her a saint. Do you think it was because she was participating in a cover up therefore they approved her? Perhaps she was wrong. Maybe she should have burned those sins in a CD or advertised them on the Internet.Or perhaps she could have simply started a discussion group.

See, there you go. Like the saints, we are not all called to the same course of action. I am not telling you that you have to burn a CD. I am telling you that members of our group felt called to do so and Cardinal Ratzinger asked us to tell others that if they have abuses in there diocese, this is the way to go. I always think it’s funny that if someone thinks that God want them to do things a certain way that others must do it the exact same way.

 

[katewithak]

bear06:

See, there you go. Like the saints, we are not all called to the same course of action. I am not telling you that you have to burn a CD. I am telling you that members of our group felt called to do so and Cardinal Ratzinger asked us to tell others that if they have abuses in there diocese, this is the way to go. I always think it’s funny that if someone thinks that God want them to do things a certain way that others must do it the exact same way.

Oh, dear Bear, I was not responding to you but to brendan. The question had to do with our obligation to correct the sinner. I used your method as merely one of the examples. Please do not be so touchy.

 

[bear06]

katewithak:

From the Catholic Catechism: 1868
Sin is a personal act. Moreover, we have a responsibility for the sins committed by others when we cooperate in them:
by participating directly and voluntarily in them;
by ordering, advising, praising, or approving them;
by not disclosing or not hindering them when we have an obligation to do so;
by protecting evil-doers.

At the same time, something that is occurring more and more:
1858
Grave matter is specified by the Ten Commandments, corresponding to the answer of Jesus to the rich young man: "Do not kill, Do not commit adultery, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Do not defraud, Honor your father and your mother."132 The gravity of sins is more or less great: murder is graver than theft. One must also take into account who is wronged: violence against parents is in itself graver than violence against a stranger.

These are the two things I would keep in mind when criticising. That I am not cooperating in bearing false witness, that I am not acting purely on hearsay, that I have no direct evidence of the wrong doing.
Once I have determined that I am not cooperating in bearing false witness, then yes, seek help for the person who is in the wrong.

Well, I’d agree with you on all of this. I don’t think anyone here has said we should bear false witness.

 

[bear06]

Excerpts from Catholic Encyclopedia on Detraction:

Thus it is conceivable that a relatively small defect alleged against a person of eminent station, such as a bishop, might seriously tarnish his good name and be a mortal sin, whilst an offence of considerable magnitude attributed to an individual of a class in which such things frequently happen might constitute only a venial sin, such as, for instance, to say that a common sailor had been drunk.

When, however, knowledge of the happening is possessed only by the members of a particular community or society, such as a college or monastery and the like, it would not be lawful to publish the fact to others than those belonging to such a body.

Sorry. These abuses were always public record. They were definitely not possessed only by members of a particular community. In fact, some were actually published on the front page or our diocesan newspaper!

 

[katewithak]

bear06:

Well, I’d agree with you on all of this. I don’t think anyone here has said we should bear false witness.

The question as I understood it was:
Does the laity have the right to criticise or correct the clergy? I am answering out of the Catholic Catechism. Period. What I am saying is frequently it is done as false witness for a variety of reasons. We need to examine our motives first, before we go public. We need to make sure of our facts. Otherwise, it runs the gambit of venia to serious sin, as Joysong pointed out. I am answering the original question with: yes, as long as these conditions are met…

 

[bear06]

katewithak:

Oh, dear Bear, I was not responding to you but to brendan. The question had to do with our obligation to correct the sinner. I used your method as merely one of the examples. Please do not be so touchy.

But you fail to see it doesn’t matter who it was addressed to. Don’t worry, I don’t easily get my feelings hurt.

 

[netmilsmom]

katewithak:

I really do wish you would stop looking for every opportunity to take offense or insult me. I have noticed this on other threads as well. I am not trying to insult you- no one is being curt. I am suggesting you read the entire post rahter than picking out one thing and asking me to re write what was already stated. Looking for reason to feel injured by me is not very Christian of you. Peace.

Kate, please trust me, I am not hunting you down.
If in my 2000 posts I have encountered your 300 it was purely by chance.

As I said, when someone asks a question here and has missed what you wrote, it is polite to point it out. Cut and paste is not hard. Or you could just say something like, “Check the third paragraph of post number such and such.”

Adding “…thanks for asking.” is antagonistic. But politely pointing to what one missed makes friends.