There is a place for charitable criticism of prelates…..

…..even at the highest levels of the Church.  So says a noted Italian Catholic below.

I posted earlier today on Michael Matt’s chastisement of overly critical traddies.  I wrote a response, but it was probably muddled.  Here, via Tancred (who has been bringing the gold of late), is a commentary from Mario Palmaro (he who received the papal thanks for criticism from the traditional perspective) on the subject of papal criticism and bad behavior of trads.  He sums up very well, even beautifully, my own feelings I could not articulate earlier today:

Whether people “like” the pope is completely irrelevant in the two thousand year old logic of the Church: the Pope is the Vicar of Christ on earth and must please our Lord. This means that the exercise of his authority is not absolute, but subordinate to the doctrine of Christ, which is found in the Catholic Church, in Her tradition, and is nourished by the life of grace through the sacraments.   This means that the Catholics may be critical of the Pope himself and criticize under the condition that this is done out of love for the truth and that the tradition, the Magisterium is used as a standard gauge. [My sentiment exactly. And I think an excessive ultramontanism inculcated after Vatican I played a huge role in the success of the revolution after Vatican II, because Catholics had been taught to never, ever criticize.]  A pope who would contradict a predecessor in matters of faith and morals should be criticized without doubt.  [And failing to do so is a tantamount joining in the criticism of the predecessor?] We must be against both the secular logic and suspicious of a pope, assessed according to the good pleasure of the democratic majority, as well as to the temptation of a papolatry, according to a “the Pope is always right”. In addition, we are accustomed for decades to criticize destructively dozens of popes of the past, by applying the small historiographical seriousness of the day. So there is no apparent reason why the reigning popes should be immune from all forms of criticism. When Boniface VIII and Pius V is evaluated, why doesn’t that also go for Paul VI, or Francis?  [Yes! That was the point I tried to make in my post earlier today. I read and hear some folks just blasting traditional/conservative Catholics for expressing criticisms or concerns about the current pope, and yet many of these same folks will turn around and blast Alexander VI, Formosus, etc.  Why is it only the current popes, or at least the post-conciliar ones, that are above reproach?  Is there a time limit, because I read critiques and analyses of popes long dead, and yet we aren’t allowed to discuss the current pope?  Very convenient!]

[When asked about grouchy, uncharitable trads….]  The attitude of some of the individuals or groups connected to tradition is a serious problem and can not be denied. [I agree.]  One explanation advanced is that truth without love is a betrayal of truth. Christ is our way, our truth and our life, so we have to take Him as a model, who was unbeatable in the truth, always inflexible, and in love. I think the world of tradition is sometimes pointed and polemical for three reasons: First, because of a certain syndrome of isolation that they can be suspicious and resentful, and it is also expressed by problematic personalities; Second, because of the sincere scandal, the specific directions of contemporary Catholicism provokes in those who know the doctrine of the Popes and the Church well up to the Second Vatican Council; Third, because of the lack of love that is shown by the official catholicity towards these brothers on the day, who are entitled with a contemptuous tone as “traditionalists” or ” Lefebvrians”, in which one forgets, that in the Church they are definitely much closer than any other Christian denomination, or even any other religion. For the official Catholic media this reality of hundreds of  [traditional]  priests and seminarians isn’t worth devoting a line, while devoting entire pages to some thinkers who have not once said anything remotely Catholic.

I’ve beat you guys down with enough long posts today, so I won’t add anymore commentary.  I will say again, these are difficult times, and many people are going to have to make choices with respect to how they conduct themselves, always keeping within the bounds of charity.  There can be respectful disagreement on the best manner in which to handle scandal in the Church, especially when it comes from the highest level. Some may feel very powerfully that the only thing to do is to pray and practice mortification, but some may feel called to take a more active approach.  I would think there might be room, and a genuine need, for both.

But, then again, that could just be some self-serving thinking on my part.  But there is much of that to go around.