What are the guidelines that define the limits for the laity to criticize the clergy?

[Abba]

In our modern times when the laity is in shock and suffering upon learning of the hideous crimes committed by some members of the clergy, priests and bishops; about errant priests and bishops misleading souls, negligence, satanism within the church; where do we draw the line in criticizing them?

I am in shock with the sexual abuse to minors by priests and bishops, I never thought that I would hear such things in my life and I suffer. All my life I have honored priests and will continue to do so to the day I die. But, there are priests that are errant who have forgotton the creed, there is infiltration in the church from groups with different agendas including satanism (some of whom are priests, e.g. Haiti), robbery, crimes; I wonder what the limits are to criticizes these situations without violating our respect for the priesthood?

I thank you in advance for your response.

Abba

 

[Joe_5859]

Charity and Truth are our guides. Part of this is avoiding the following:

CCC 2477 Respect for the reputation of persons forbids every attitude and word likely to cause them unjust injury. [278] He becomes guilty:

• of rash judgment who, even tacitly, assumes as true, without sufficient foundation, the moral fault of a neighbor;
• of detraction who, without objectively valid reason, discloses another’s faults and failings to persons who did not know them; [279]
• of calumny who, by remarks contrary to the truth, harms the reputation of others and gives occasion for false judgments concerning them.

[278] Cf. CIC, can. 220.
[279] Cf. Sir 21:28.

 

[Bookcat]

Code of Canon Law:

Can. 212 §1. Conscious of their own responsibility, the Christian faithful are bound to follow with Christian obedience those things which the sacred pastors, inasmuch as they represent Christ, declare as teachers of the faith or establish as rulers of the Church.

§2. The Christian faithful are free to make known to the pastors of the Church their needs, especially spiritual ones, and their desires.

§3. According to the knowledge, competence, and prestige which they possess, they have the right and even at times the duty to manifest to the sacred pastors their opinion on matters which pertain to the good of the Church and to make their opinion known to the rest of the Christian faithful, without prejudice to the integrity of faith and morals, with reverence toward their pastors, and attentive to common advantage and the dignity of persons.

 

[doanli]

In our modern times when the laity is in shock and suffering upon learning of the hideous crimes committed by some members of the clergy, priests and bishops; about errant priests and bishops misleading souls, negligence, satanism within the church; where do we draw the line in criticizing them?

I am in shock with the sexual abuse to minors by priests and bishops, I never thought that I would hear such things in my life and I suffer. All my life I have honored priests and will continue to do so to the day I die. But, there are priests that are errant who have forgotton the creed, there is infiltration in the church from groups with different agendas including satanism (some of whom are priests, e.g. Haiti), robbery, crimes; I wonder what the limits are to criticizes these situations without violating our respect for the priesthood?

I thank you in advance for your response.

Abba

My thinking is akin to yours and I have no answers to offer but to pray. I want to cry because I feel like I cannot trust them 100% anymore. But I will NOT allow it to destroy my faith in Christ Jesus and His Church.

I think you will find this filth in any human organization, not that this is any excuse because there is NO excuse for this kind of crime especially with Religious, those who are to represent God to the rest of us.

 

[catharina]

In our modern times when the laity is in shock and suffering upon learning of the hideous crimes committed by some members of the clergy, priests and bishops; about errant priests and bishops misleading souls, negligence, satanism within the church; where do we draw the line in criticizing them?

I am in shock with the sexual abuse to minors by priests and bishops, I never thought that I would hear such things in my life and I suffer. All my life I have honored priests and will continue to do so to the day I die. But, there are priests that are errant who have forgotton the creed, there is infiltration in the church from groups with different agendas including satanism (some of whom are priests, e.g. Haiti), robbery, crimes; I wonder what the limits are to criticizes these situations without violating our respect for the priesthood?

I thank you in advance for your response.

Abba

See Posts # 2 and 3.

 

[Langdell]

Code of Canon Law:

Can. 212 §1. Conscious of their own responsibility, the Christian faithful are bound to follow with Christian obedience those things which the sacred pastors, inasmuch as they represent Christ, declare as teachers of the faith or establish as rulers of the Church.

§2. The Christian faithful are free to make known to the pastors of the Church their needs, especially spiritual ones, and their desires.

§3. According to the knowledge, competence, and prestige which they possess, they have the right and even at times the duty to manifest to the sacred pastors their opinion on matters which pertain to the good of the Church and to make their opinion known to the rest of the Christian faithful, without prejudice to the integrity of faith and morals, with reverence toward their pastors, and attentive to common advantage and the dignity of persons.

This is very helpful. Do you know if there’s any commentary that elaborates on section 3?

.

 

[stuart12]

You must always respect their office as a priest, one who offers the most holy Sacrifice. Yet if they stray from their sacred duty to guard the folk, criticism should be given. This should never be reduced to personal insults, but with the desire for their conversion and repentence.

 

[Bookcat]

This is very helpful. Do you know if there’s any commentary that elaborates on section 3?

.

I imagine there is.

§3. According to the knowledge, competence, and prestige which they possess, they have the right and even at times the duty to manifest to the sacred pastors their opinion on matters which pertain to the good of the Church and to make their opinion known to the rest of the Christian faithful, without prejudice to the integrity of faith and morals, with reverence toward their pastors, and attentive to common advantage and the dignity of persons.

…

One must do so as a Christian…in a Christian way.

 

[Abba]

Thank you all for your posts.

It’s a difficult balance to find. It’s still not clear to me. I think one of the reasons is that the laity seems to only be able to acknowledge that a priest or bishop is preaching contrary to the Church’s teachings or is committing sacrilige or is deceiving the parishioners regarding his celibacy etc… We seems to be free to voice our view that a member of the clergy is, let’s say behaving contrary to the teachings of the Church but that seems to be about it. We can post and speak all we want but it seems that we have no real say in rectifying a situation and this diminishes the voice of the laity to almost - gossip.

Please allow me the freedom to mention one situation. A couple of years ago, I was shocked to see videos on Youtube of a Catholic church in San Francisco. The Bishop allowed people who practice homosexuality to meet in the basement of the parish. There people had meetings and raffles and some of the things being raffled were sex paraphanelia. I was shocked! It really seemed to me that Satan had taken over that parish and demons were having a ball. I forget now who exactly it was that gave the Eucharist at that same parish to people dressed in rags rather it was the bishop or a priests. The bishop did not think much of the complaints and is pro-homosexuality. What happens? People go to the next scandal. The same thing is happening with Father Pfleger, who is misleading souls. His bishop commands him to sign an apololy and he obeys only to retract it. Now, what? Nothing? What about that situation with Father Murphy? His bishop was doing some serious stuff himself and did not act responsibly in response to the horrible crimes Father Murphy was committing.

I guess what I am trying to say is that I do not see the boundaries clearly enough, even given all that has been posted, I do not see it clearly, and maybe because it seems that all we can do is speak out but who is listening and who is going to react?

Gotta go…I’m taking my son to the dentist…will be back…

 

[Bookcat]

One can always report such things to the Bishop…or even in the end to Rome …

(we also often do not see what things are tried by the Bishop etc to stop such things…

after all they do not have a police force…)