tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14168956.post113564762281302409..comments2024-03-29T08:14:32.748-04:00Comments on Bonfire of the Vanities: You can't be a priest without the bishopFr Martin Foxhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01375628123126091747noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14168956.post-1136258205505941682006-01-02T22:16:00.000-05:002006-01-02T22:16:00.000-05:00anonymoose:I wouldn't say, or want to be understoo...anonymoose:<BR/><BR/>I wouldn't say, or want to be understood as saying, that a good Catholic can't find fault, publicly, with his bishop. As you say, there are appropriate ways to do that.<BR/><BR/>One appropriate way is to communicate directly with the bishop; another is to speak <I>about</I> him with utmost charity and generosity.<BR/><BR/>My mother taught me a principle, which comes from the other famous St. Ignatius (of Loyola), which I call the "rule of generosity": always impute to ones opponent the best possible motives and understanding of the facts" --"best possible" being within reason, of course.<BR/><BR/>Then, there is the question about whether ones criticism is certainly <I>true</I>: one is bound, before repeating something seriously derogatory, to be sure it's true! Otherwise, one is engaging in calumny, and to be reckless -- not to care too much about the truth of it -- is as sinful as to repeat what is false, it seems to me, since you don't care!<BR/><BR/>Finally, supposing one is satisfied it is true, then there is the question of <I>necessity</I>. How many know it is a sin to repeat what is <I>true,</I> when there is no need to do so? It's called "detraction."<BR/><BR/>When I read or hear the criticisms offered, I mentally apply these standards: St. Ignatius's "rule of generosity," the question of whether it is <I>true,</I> and then, is it <I>necessary</I>.<BR/><BR/>I think most of the criticism wouldn't pass these tests. Including most of the critical comments I offer about others.Fr Martin Foxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01375628123126091747noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14168956.post-1135703397199953092005-12-27T12:09:00.000-05:002005-12-27T12:09:00.000-05:00The correct ordering of the Church is, I concur, o...The correct ordering of the Church is, I concur, of profound importance. I am also pretty sick and tired of those who who exibit little or no obedience - or worse yet, feign obedience while doing the opposite - despite being entirely outside of the exceedingly rare edge-case of an act ordered by valid authority that goes against a well-formed conscience. Pray for me that I may never fall prey to this vice of self-will.<BR/><BR/>That said, we do have to acknowledge that there are, in fact, bad Bishops, and something must be done about them - fraternal correction in attempting to return them to the regular and universal magisterium by their brother bishops seems all too rare - if not nonexistant - these days.<BR/><BR/>Gregory Nianzian once remarked "You may boldly face a lion; a leopard is a gentle beast after all; a snake may frighten you and yet flee from you: there is just one animal to be dreaded—a bad bishop." Chrysostom also, if my memory serves, has some pointed things to say about bad Bishops leading to dissenting and disordered clergy.<BR/><BR/>Recognizing that humans are as they are, Canon law gives lay and priest the right - and in some instances the duty - to bitch and moan to their superiors in an appropriate way. (It's a little too bad this isn't formalized and ordered more than it is.) But it certainly does not give license to cause scandal or lead others to schism if one's pet peeve with the Church goes unaddressed. To do this goes beyond merely the failing of a human spirit, but rather requires the inspiration of the diabolical.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com