Going viral these days are posts from the Facebook page “Whispers from the Walls.” The center of controversy in all these posts is Msgr. Roberto Alesna. A number of friends have sent me attachments from this FB page. My first reaction to these posts is that they are well-written, with biting sarcasm and a witty play on words.
To spare my readers of my own reconstruction of the timeline of the controversy, I invite them instead to visit the FB page mentioned above. Suffice it to state that it started with a sincere inquiry on why, despite having reached the retirement age of 75 years, Monsignor Alesna was still given a new assignment. The inquiry has quickly metamorphosed into an enumeration of his alleged questionable acquisition of some luxurious properties which do not befit someone who ought to embrace the spirit of poverty.
At the outset, I want to confess that I am not comfortable writing about this issue. On the one hand, I do not want to be misconstrued as having a holier-than-thou attitude. I will be the first to admit that I am far from perfect. But on the other hand, I want to contribute in my own way to the renewal of the clergy. I do not want the laity to have the impression that the presbyteral community is an all-boys club whose members defend each other once one is attacked by an outsider. Clerics cannot have a bunker mentality in the face of external criticism.
This piece is not about the veracity or the falsity of the accusations against Monsignor Alesna. Rather, I mean to reflect on how to handle criticisms. Thus, I would go beyond the current brouhaha.
First of all, clerics must not use their religious calling as a shield from well-meaning and legitimate criticism. It is nothing but unwanted clericalism to believe that a presbyter must be spared from criticism since, without him, the bread cannot be transformed into the body of Christ. Unfortunately, this is the mentality of a number of men of the cloth. It is good to be reminded that the cassock is not a criticism-proof vestment. Rather, we in fact must be judged by higher moral standards precisely because we are tasked to give moral exhortations.
But even more unfortunately, many lay people embrace clericalism, whether or not they are conscious of it. These lay people think that the clergy is over and above them and must be spared from any negative comment. Thus, even if a priest is dishonest and unfaithful to his vows, or even if the priest is guilty of child abuse or of financial shenanigans, he has to be shielded from criticism. The presence of priests who abuse their office is bad enough. But silence over this abuse can also be equivalent to complicity. Lay people with such mentality think that they are doing what faithful Catholics must do. But ultimately, they are doing the Church a great disservice.
This brings us to the second point. People who give well-meaning criticism must not be seen as enemies of the Church. The possibility of being criticized keeps us on our tiptoes. Thus, people who give responsible criticism actually contribute to the constant renewal of the Church. It is important to note that prophetic denunciations of Church people done by persons within the Church is part of the Christian tradition. In fact, the posts in “Whispers from the Walls,” while witty, are rather tame compared to prophetic denunciations done by canonized saints themselves like Bernard of Clairvaux and Catherine of Sienna. Just to prove my point, let us hear the St. Bernard denounce “the ambitious, the avaricious, the simoniacal, the sacrilegious, the fornicating, the incestuous and every other kind of monstrous person” gathered “to obtain or retain ecclesiastical honors.” Dear reader, compare this statement with the posts “In Whispers from the Walls” and you get my point.
Lastly, while the posts are mainly about one person, they also provide us with materials for a collective examination of conscience. The danger is we focus only on one person and not on the system itself, or the worldview behind the system. Is it just a case of some rotten individual rotten apples or is there something wrong with the barrel that is responsible for the rotten apples? I cannot tackle the question for now. For now, let us just be open to criticisms.