The Danger of Criticizing Bishops and
Priests
"Alas, how sad it is that some are far
more ready to judge (and criticize) priests than they are to
pray for them."
By Thomas G. Morrow
In the thirteenth century many priests were involved in
seeking wealth and having a pleasant life. They hardly
preached at all, virtually never studied, and paid for
important positions so that they could get even more money.
A number of priests openly lived with women, causing great
scandal. Some of the bishops lived in unbelievable wealth,
and would sell Church positions to keep their rich life
style. Many of the people were just as bad as their
leaders.
As a result, many so-called prophets had appeared, some
good, some not-so-good, who promised terrible punishments if
people did not reform. Peter Waldo was one of the reformers
who had a great beginning. He gave up his riches to live in
poverty and spread the faith. He had many followers who
also lived as poor men, and did penance. However, when they
began to preach without permission against the lazy and
sinful priests, the Archbishop of Lyons, France,
excommunicated them.
The group, called the Waldensians, took their case to the
pope, and he encouraged them. He praised Peter for living
in poverty and gave him and his followers permission to urge
the people to live moral and holy lives wherever the bishops
allowed them to do so. But since they had not studied
theology they were not permitted to explain the Bible or to
instruct people in the faith. Unfortunately, they began to
do both.
In time they got into all sorts of errors, such as
placing their interpretation of the Bible over the authority
of the pope, denying both purgatory, and veneration of the
saints. They also refused to go to confession to immoral
priests, preferring to confess to good people who were not
priests. As a result, the Waldensians were excommunicated
by the pope in 1184.
However, there were still a number of them going all
over, spreading their errors. And, there were also the
Albigensians or Cathari, as they were called in Italy, who
condemned the material world as evil. As a result they
denied the sacraments, and marriage in particular. Many
people listened to both the leftover Waldensians and Cathari
because they lived Gospel poverty, unlike the priests.
Despite their sincerity, and their living radical Gospel
poverty, they all fell astray. They lost the faith. But,
their contemporary, Francis of Assisi did not. Why not?
Because he never went anywhere to preach the Gospel without
permission of the priests. Furthermore, he would never
criticize the priests and bishops „ even the most lazy and
immoral ones „ nor would he allow his friars to do so. (As
a result, the Franciscans were always welcome just about
everywhere they went.)
Once a Waldensian challenged Francis on his unshakeable
reverence for priests, by pointing out the local pastor who
was living in sin. ñMust we believe in his teaching and
respect the sacraments he performs?î
In response, Francis went to the priestÍs home and knelt
before him saying, ñI donÍt know whether these hands are
stained as the other man says they are. [But] I do know
that even if they are, that in no way lessens the power and
effectiveness of the sacraments of Godƒ That is why I kiss
these hands out of respect for what they perform and out of
respect for Him who gave His authority to them.î His
challenger left in silence.
The Franciscan Order revolutionized the faith in Europe
during the 19 years from FrancisÍs conversion at age 25 to
his death. There were thousands of Franciscans by the time
he died, spreading the true faith, not by pointing out the
sins of the priests and bishops (of which there were
certainly many), but by living the gospel so simply and so
joyfully that people found it irresistible.
Today there are many priests and even bishops who seem to
invite criticism by what they say and do, but most are far
less culpable than the priests and bishops of St. FrancisÍ
time. The recent scandals in the U.S. priesthood are much
uglier but they have been dealt with far more strongly than
those lesser but more widespread faults of the thirteenth
century.
Rejecting Doctrines
And, I believe the people who will bring about a new
springtime in the Church will be more like Francis of Assisi
than todayÍs harsh critics of priests and bishops. Perhaps
the example of the Waldensians and Albigensians gives us an
insight into what happens when people focus on the sins of
priests and bishops.
I believe such criticism can feed our own pride, and make
us feel superior to our Church leaders. From that point it
is not a great leap to begin to lump their teaching in with
their behavior, and to begin to reject the doctrines of the
Church. The danger is real.
Jesus warned his followers not to reject the doctrines of
the scribes and pharisees despite their shameful behavior:
Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples, ñThe
scribes and the Pharisees sit on MosesÍ seat; so practice
and observe whatever they tell you, but not what they do;
for they preach, but do not practice. They bind heavy
burdens, hard to bear, and lay them on menÍs shoulders; but
they themselves will not move them with their finger. They
do all their deeds to be seen by men; for they make their
phylacteries broad and their fringes long, and they love the
place of honor at feasts and the best seats in the
synagogues, and salutations in the market places, and being
called rabbi by men. (Matt. 3:1-7)
A few verses later he proclaims, ñWoe to you, scribes and
pharisees, hypocrites,î and calls them ñblind guides,î and
ñbrood of vipers.î Nonetheless, people are to ñpractice and
observe whatever they tell you,î because they are, in
effect, descendants of Moses.
I would venture to say that most of our bishops are far
better than the scribes and pharisees, and they are the
descendants of the apostles. How important it is that we
listen to them, especially in light of the fact that Jesus
told them, ñHe who hears you hears me, and he who rejects
you rejects me, and he who rejects me rejects him who sent
meî (Luke 10:16).
Liturgical Tampering
Another problem that emerges some times among those who
would rather criticize than pray for bishops is deciding for
themselves the form the liturgy should take. Some take on
themselves the prerogative to make little changes in their
responses at Mass, thereby causing division in precisely the
place where we should be most unified. Whether it be
rejecting a certain memorial acclamation, or responding in
Latin when the congregation is responding in English, or
substituting the word ñGodî for ñheî or ñhimî for feminist
purposes, any of these can be a distraction for others
trying to lift their hearts and minds to God.
It is not up to us to decide what is apt in the Mass, but
the bishops. Surely, we should avoid doing something
immoral, but besides that unlikely case, we should
obediently follow the liturgy given to us by those chosen to
do so. Whether we like a translation or not (and some seem
to be lacking at times), we should accept and use what our
superiors have given us. Far better to write a humble
letter to the bishops than to change things on our own
authority. And far better to pray for better translations.
Losing Joy
There is a further danger of being so ready to criticize
bishops or priests: we can become very dour Catholics. The
more we criticize and complain, the more we bring down the
morale of the Church and the more gloomy we become. (St.
Teresa of Avila said once, ñGod deliver me from gloomy
saints!î) Many sincere, orthodox Catholics have become sour
people because they continued to dwell on the faults of the
clergy, so sour that they have been unable to contribute
something positive to the Church, despite their many
talents.
This is not to say we may not acknowledge the wrongs of
priests and bishops, but we should do so reluctantly and
with understatement. And then, we should move on to the
positive, the things that will build up the Church and her
morale. We should never dwell on the negative elements of
priests and bishops „ or anyone else, for that matter „
because it will make us melancholy people, always ready to
point out the negative aspect of any situation.
The devil is most clever in bringing down those who
sincerely love God and the Church. He gets them to dwell on
the negative elements of the Church and thereby destroys
their joy. We mustnÍt fall for this ruse. If we want to be
holy, we must focus on the positive, and let nothing destroy
our joy.
God the Father spoke to St. Catherine of Siena about his
ñministers,î the priests. She recorded it in her Dialogue:
ƒ[It] is my intention that they be held in due reverence,
not for what they are in themselves, but for my sake,
because of the authority I have given them. Therefore the
virtuous must not lessen their reverence, even should these
ministers fall short in virtue. And, as far as the virtues
of my ministers are concerned, I have described them for you
by setting them before you as stewards of ... my SonÍs body
and blood and of the other sacraments. This dignity belongs
to all who are appointed as such stewards, to the bad as
well as to the good.
ƒ[Because] of their virtue and because of their
sacramental dignity you ought to love them. And you ought
to hate the sins of those who live evil lives. But you may
not for all that set ourselves up as their judges; this is
not my will because they are my Christs, and you ought to
love and reverence the authority I have given them.
You know well enough that if someone filthy or poorly
dressed were to offer you a great treasure that would give
you life, you would not disdain the bearer for love of the
treasure, and the lord who had sent it, even though the
bearer was ragged and filthy... You ought to despise and
hate the ministersÍ sins and try to dress them in the
clothes of charity and holy prayer and wash away their filth
with your tears.
Indeed, I have appointed them and given them to you to be
angels on earth and suns, as I have told you. When they are
less than that you ought to pray for them. But you are not
to judge them. Leave the judging to me, and I, because of
your prayers and my own desire, will be merciful to them.
[1]
Is judging the same as criticizing? ItÍs close. The
Random House American College Dictionary defines the word
ñcriticizeî as ñ1. To make judgments as to merits and
faults. 2. To find fault.î
Clearly, the Lord wants prayers, not judgment for his
priests. Alas, how sad that some are far more ready to
judge (and criticize) priests than they are to pray for
them! Imagine how much better off the Church would be if
all the energy given to criticizing priests and bishops here
devoted to prayer and penance for these men; and how much
better off those who prayed and fasted would be!
As a seminarian I once was visiting my sister, and we
proceeded to tear apart all the dissenting theologians in
the Church. It seemed like such fun. But, then we caught
ourselves, and I said, ñYou know, we probably should not
take such delight in criticizing the theologians. It can be
a pride thing.î She agreed, ñYes, by saying how wrong they
are, we are proclaiming how right we are.î
ItÍs an easy trap to fall into. We call it the ñIsnÍt it
awful syndrome.î
As a priest, I donÍt believe I am exempt from the warning
from the Lord to St. Catherine about judging other priests.
I donÍt have any more right than a layperson to criticize
my brother priests. Sometimes this involves biting my
tongue when the subject is a less-than-perfect priest.
As I mentioned earlier, it is not wrong to acknowledge
the errors of priests or bishops, or gently point them out.
But, when it becomes a zealous sport to pontificate about
such errors, and to verbally attack these clerics
personally, it goes too far.
Love the Bishops
People have a rather rose-colored idea of the life of a
bishop. ItÍs not so pleasant. About 15% of his work is
making decisions. The other 85% is dealing with headaches.
I remember well the quip of my pre-ordination retreat
director: ñIsnÍt it interesting that in this age when we
have so few vocations to the priesthood, we have so many
vocations to the episcopacy.î And, we might add, to the
papacy!
When people publicly criticize a bishop, or any man, for
that matter, the one criticized will often dig in his heels
for his position even he may not care that much about it.
He does that to show that he wonÍt be manipulated by those
who try to strong-arm him, even if the criticism is
well-intended or well-placed.
On the other hand, people such as St. Catherine of Siena
and St. Bernard of Clairvaux had tremendous influence over
bishops by their letters. It is not hard to see why: their
letters were humble and respectful, and full of love. ñBut
they were saints,î one might argue. They became saints, but
if you examine their lives you will find that many did not
recognize their sanctity when they were alive. Furthermore,
it was their sanctity that inspired them to urge reform with
love, and so it will be with our sanctity, if we strive for
it.
The priests and bishops are probably no worse than they
were in the time of St. Catherine of Siena, or St. Francis
of Assisi. In fact, they are much better, in general,
despite the shameful scandals of a few, in recent years. We
have a choice to make: to give in to our sadness and become
a ñpriest-basherî or ñbishop-basher,î always ready to lament
with great energy the faults of our clergy; or, while
acknowledging the errors of the clergy, we can become
morale-builders in the Church, always emphasizing the
positive, always ready to build up, not tear down. And, if
we look closely, weÍll see a lot of positives in the Church
today, and in every age.
St. Paul said it well: ñTherefore encourage one another
and build one another up, just as you are doing. But we
beseech you, brethren, to respect those who labor among you
and are over you in the Lord and admonish you, and to esteem
them very highly in love because of their work. Be at peace
among yourselvesî (1 Thess. 5:11-13). This is the way to
true holiness, and the joy which always accompanies it.
And, this Christian joy, unlike sullenness, is infectious.
NOTES
1. Catherine of Siena; The
Dialogue, translated by Suzanne Noffke, O.P., New York:
Paulist Press, 1980, pp. 229-231.
Reverend Thomas G. Morrow has a doctorate in Sacred
Theology from the John Paul II Institute for Studies on
Marriage and the Family. His book, Saints for Families
(Emmaus Road), a compilation of 27 lives of the saints
appropriate for family reading time, appeared in 2002. He is
a parochial vicar of St. Catherine Laboure Parish in
Wheaton, Md. His published booklets and leaflets can be seen
at www.cfalive.org. In his last appearance in HPR he
composed the homilies in the October 2003 issue.
