Attacks against the Pope and the Papacy have been something that the Catholic Church has lived with since Peter was first appointed to the position by our Lord Himself. Today we see attacks on the Pope and his authority from three very different sources.

An initial Clarification

Some attacks against the Pope and the Papacy are rooted in false doctrine and are things Catholics in good standing cannot believe. However, there are legitimate reasons to criticize a Pope or disagree with some of his actions or words. If the Pope is speaking very informally, that can be a sign that he does not intend to have his words in that context taken as official Church teaching. Currently we see a sexual abuse scandal rocking the Church. It is perfectly legitimate for Catholics to disagree about how Pope Francis and previous popes have handled these issues, even when that disagreement might involve criticism.

The Pope has the authority given to him by Christ. To be truly Catholic, one must be in communion with the Pope. And using the Pope’s personal flaws to deny that God gave the Pope special authority is wrong. But the Pope as a person is not flawless. St. Catherine of Siena actually rebuked Pope Gregory XI when he continued the practice of living away from Rome, the city of St. Peter! We should be careful in doing this because the office of the Papacy deserves respect. However, if a man is not living up to the requirements of the office Catholics may criticize his actions while still acknowledging the importance of the Pope.

Non-Catholics

Non-Catholics attack the Pope from various different angles. Some, like the High Church Anglicans, Old Catholics, and the Orthodox Churches profess that no bishop has any authority over any other bishop and no bishop can proclaim official teaching except when all the bishops of the world meet in an Ecumenical Council. Most Anglicans and Orthodox deny that an Ecumenical Council can be held until the Church East and West re-unites.

Most Protestants disagree with the Catholic interpretation of the Scriptures about Peter. Catholics believe that when our Lord changed St. Peter’s name from Simon to Kephas (Petros in greek, Rock or Peter in English), it meant that He would build or found His Church on the rock of Peter. Protestants typically think of Peter’s name, Petros, as something different from the word Petra, which means rock. But Petros is merely the masculine form of the word, and Peter would not have been named a feminine name (Petra). Protestants also overlook the commission of Christ to Peter in John 21 to feed His lambs and sheep, or any other authority that Jesus gave to St. Peter.

Anti-Traditional Catholics

Some Catholics have all sorts of things to say about the Pope, most not very Christian, or loving. They deny that he has much authority over them and tell us that he is too old fashioned and needs to get with the times. They will tell you that the Pope needs to stay out of people’s bedrooms, and give in to the ordination of women and open practicing homosexuals. These Catholics deny various core beliefs that the Church has held for nearly 2000 years. One wonders why if the Pope has no authority to tell them what to do, they continue to call themselves Catholics. They say it is because they want to reclaim their voice and power and bring about reform in the Church. Some pay lip service to the Pope, but claim that you don’t have to listen to anything the Pope says unless it is Ex Cathedra. Since so few doctrines have been proclaimed in that manner, there is little they do not question or reject.

Ultra-Traditional Catholics

On the extremely traditional side, some have openly proclaimed that they believe all Popes from Pope John XXIII to Pope Francis were never really Popes. Often these Catholics believe that Vatican II was a heretical council that did not keep to the Tradition of the Church. Because a Pope can never officially teach heresy, and John XXIII convened Vatican II, the argument goes that he must not have been a valid pope. Those elected after him were elected by cardinals invalidly appointed by the “antipope” John XXIII, and so they were not valid Popes either. Furthermore, every Pope since John XXIII has accepted the validity of Vatican II. If Vatican II were a heretical council, then all of these “Popes” would actually be heretics.

The problem with this argument is that no one has the authority to judge something heretical if a Pope, together with an ecumenical council, has declared it to be true.

Most people who believe that the Popes since John XXIII have been antipopes (people claiming to be popes who are not actually the Pope) are sedevacantists. A sedevacantist is someone who believes the the Chair of Peter is empty (sedevacantist comes from Latin words meaning “empty seat”). Therefore, there is no current Pope and there has not been a genuine Pope since Pius XII, the last Pope before John XXIII.

Some people have even gone to the extreme have elected their own “Popes.” In Kansas there is a man who calls himself Pope Michael I. He was elected in a “conclave” of six people, including himself and his parents. There was a former Franciscan priest who claimed to be elected by fax, phone and internet. He called himself Pope Pius XIII. There are a few men in France who also claim to be the Pope. But as there can only be one Pope at a time, we have to look at all the evidence, and currently the only man who has any valid claim to the Papacy is Pope Francis.

What Obedience Means

An example of what it means for someone to trust the authority of the Pope and render obedience to him can be seen in the life of St. Athanasius. St. Athanasius, who lived in the 4th century, was one of the chief defenders of Jesus’ divinity. At the time he lived, the Arian heresy, which said that Jesus was not God, was very widespread. Pope Liberius condemned Athanasius in spite of the fact that Athanasius was defending the faith of the Nicene Creed against heresy.

In spite of the fact that Liberius had condemned him, Athanasius never denied that Liberius had authority as a Pope. Pope Liberius had most likely been imprisoned and tortured by Arians. Therefore his condemnation of Athanasius was made under duress. Athanasius realized that, even if Liberius was acting completely freely, the Pope had been misinformed. Even if Pope Liberius had held some semi-arian personal beliefs for a period of time, he had not proclaimed them as the doctrine of the Church. So St. Athanasius gave respect and honor to the Pope and did not proclaim himself chief over the Pope, or disobey him.

It is no secret that Catholics make use of statues in their worship. Many churches have statues of Mary and other saints, and every church should have a crucifix somewhere near the altar. However, doesn’t this violate the Second Commandment? This commandment states:

You shall not make for yourself an idol or a likeness of anything in the heavens above or on the earth below or in the waters beneath the earth…

Exodus 20:4, New American Bible (NAB)

Given that Catholic churches are often full of the likenesses of things in heaven and on earth, this seems to be a clear violation of the commandment in Exodus.

Looking at the Context: Exodus 20

Exodus 20:4 is what Protestants list as the Second Commandment. Catholics number this differently, as part of the First Commandment. The reason for this is that Catholics look at the context of this verse in light of what precedes and follows it. Whenever we look at the Bible, it is important to look at the context surrounding it.

Immediately preceding Exodus 20:4, we read:

I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt,^b out of the house of slavery. You shall not have other gods beside me.

Exodus 20:2-3 (NAB)

For Catholics, the prohibition against images is understood in the context of having no other gods. Images themselves are not the problem; rather, the problem is using the images in the wrong way. Why do Catholics read it this way? It seems like interpreting Exodus 20:4 as a different commandment, as Protestants do, makes just as much sense as interpreting it the way Catholics do, as a continuation of the First Commandment. To further understand this verse, we need to look at what follows it:

…you shall not bow down before them or serve them.

Exodus 20:5 (NAB)

Now we can see that when the commandment is not referring to the act of carving statues, but of carving them and worshipping them in the place of God. Given that Exodus 20:5 comes right in the middle of verses about worshipping God, it makes sense to interpret it as a prohibition against worshipping images, rather than against making them. Therefore, what the commandments prohibit is not statues, but rather idols.

Looking at the Context: The Rest of Scripture

Just as it is important to look at the immediate context of the command not to make images, it is important to look at the broader context of the Bible. What did the great heroes of the Old Testament do with images? Did they ever make images of anything on earth or in heaven? Or did they completely ban the use of such images?

The Ark of the Covenant

When we read the Bible as a whole we see many instances in which images are used in worship. In some cases we even see God commanding people to make images. The Ark of the Covenant was the place where God’s presence dwelled. When the Ark is made, in accordance with God’s commandments, it includes images of cherubim (Exodus 37:7). This is not only part of the Bible, but part of exactly the same book that contains the prohibition in Exodus 20:4. In this larger context it is clear that images of angels did not contradict the commandment about images. Why? Because people were not worshipping them.

Similarly, when Solomon builds the Temple at God’s command, he decorates it with images of cherubim (1 Kings 6). We see that as the history of Israel progresses, statues and images of heavenly things (namely angels) are not opposed to worship of God. They can even be present in the very place where God is worshipped.

The Bronze Serpent

One incident in the book of Numbers involves God specifically commanding Moses to make a statue. When the Israelites, wandering in the desert, complain against God, God punishes them by sending seraph serpents among them. The serpents bite many people and killed them. Faced with these consequences, the people recognize their sin and repent. They ask Moses to intercede for them. God tells Moses to make a seraph out of bronze and mount it on a pole. If someone was bitten, he or she could look at the bronze serpent and be healed. This is all described in Numbers 21:4-9.

What lessons can we learn from this? First, God sometimes commands the leaders of his people to make images. This fact alone disproves that God has commanded that no images be made. Furthermore, in this instance, God works through an image. Through the bronze serpent, God works images of healing. It is not just an image, but a channel through which God gives the gift of physical health. The bronze serpent is so important that Jesus compares it to himself:

And just as Moses lifted up the serpent in the desert, so must the Son of Man be lifted up, so that everyone who believes in him may have eternal life.

John 3:14-15

It’s highly unlikely that Jesus would point to the bronze serpent as a foreshadowing of himself if the bronze serpent were the result of breaking a commandment.

Later, however, the bronze serpent is destroyed. Looking at the circumstances in which it was destroyed shows us more about how people should relate to the images they made. The Bible says that Hezekiah, a king of Israel, “did what was right in the LORD’s sight” (2 Kings 18:3). Among the things Hezekiah did as king, he “smashed the bronze serpent Moses had made” (2 Kings 18:4). This act of destroying an image is now one of the things he did that was right. The reason he destroyed it was that over time, the serpent had become an object of worship. It is not an image itself that is the problem, but how that image is used.

Catholic Use of Statues and Images

But does this prove that Catholics are not violating the commandments? When you go into a Catholic Church you might see someone kissing an icon or a crucifix, kneeling before a statue of Mary, leaving flowers by a statue of her favorite saint, or otherwise honoring statues. Doesn’t this violate what the commandment means? When people worshipped the bronze serpent, it was right to destroy it. Even if it’s okay to have statues of saints and angels, do Catholics use them the right way?

In accordance to the Bible the Catholic Church does forbid the worship of statues. Catholics may only worship Jesus; the Church forbids us to worship anyone else: angels, saints, and even the Blessed Virgin Mary.  Only God is worthy of worship.

We can venerate statues because of what they represent: saints, angels, and sometimes even Christ himself. However, even if the statue is a statue of Jesus, we should not worship it. The actions listed above are acts of honor for what the statues represent. We display images (photographs) of our loved ones and we place flowers at the graves and headstones of our departed loved ones. We honor these objects because of what they represent. We’re not worshipping our loved ones in honoring images and physical objects associated with them.

Even if a Catholic is kneeling before a statue, this does not mean the Catholic is worshipping the statue. Joshua prostrated himself before the Ark of the Covenant (remember, this had images of cherubim on it) and prayed to God while honoring the Ark (Joshua 7:6-9). Likewise, Catholics can use their bodies to respect a statue while praying to God, and not to the statue.

To be fair, God does ask Joshua to get up from prostrating himself. However, God does not ask this because Joshua shouldn’t be honoring an object with images on it. Rather, God is telling Joshua to get up and start doing things that will help God answer Joshua’s prayer.

Proper Veneration

Catholics use statues, paintings, and mosaics to remind us of those who have gone before us. As saints, they point in the direction of Christ by the virtues of their lives. Reminding ourselves of them reminds us of the virtues we should try to pursue.  Before the invention of photographs, man-made images were the only things we could use as physical reminders of these people.  Just as Jews used graven images in the manner God commanded them to, and those who followed God’s Law in the Old Testament understood those religious images were not to be given worship, Catholics do not worship statues today.

The sacrament of Confession is the sacrament Christ instituted in order to forgive sins. As such, it is classified as a sacrament of healing. When we confess our sins and receive absolution, we have a powerful experience of God’s mercy. The Church recognizes that part of this mercy means that the deeply personal things we confess will not be revealed or used against us. Therefore, the Church binds a priest by the seal of the confessional, which means the priest cannot tell anyone the sins you have confessed for any reason.

Canon Law

Canon law is the law of the Church. It deals not with moral laws (what is right and wrong), but rather with the laws set up to govern the Church. Instead, Canon law deals with rules governing the Church and its members. To see what rules the Church has for a priest hearing confessions, it’s important to look at canon law.

Canon 983 states, “[I]t is absolutely forbidden for a confessor [this is the priest hearing the confession] to betray in any way a penitent [this is the person going to confession] in words or in any manner and for any reason.” Furthermore, if there is an interpreter, for example if the confessor and penitent speak different languages or if one of them is deaf, the interpreter is also bound to secrecy. If you are standing in line for confession and overhear someone else’s confession, you are also not allowed to tell anyone what you heard.

What the Priest Can’t Say

What this means is that the priest cannot say or do anything that would reveal what you said in Confession. Obviously, he can’t say, “John confessed to me yesterday that he lied to his wife.” But he also can’t say anything indirectly to reveal that John lied to his wife. He can’t even hint at it. If he is invited to John’s house, he can’t act in such a way around John that would reveal John’s lie, even if he doesn’t say anything.

The priest cannot reveal what he heard during Confession for any reason. He cannot reveal it even if someone confesses committing a crime. He can encourage the person confessing to hand him- or herself in or make things right, but he cannot go to the authorities himself. If the authorities come to the priest, he does not have to lie and say that the person is innocent, but he cannot reveal what the person confessed. The priest cannot even say, “I can’t tell you if he committed the crime because I heard his confession.”

If you think that a priest should be required to tell people when he hears that someone has committed a crime, keep in mind that people are more likely to confess to a priest if they know he will not turn them in, and then the priest can encourage them to do the right thing. Furthermore, the Church does not want to get into a slippery slope with every priest deciding for himself what sins are serious enough to reveal. In many countries, the laws recognize that the sacrament of Confession is privileged, in a similar way to doctor-patient and attorney-client confidentiality.

What the Priest Can Say

It is possible for a priest to talk about Confessions in general if there is no way the identity those people confessing could be revealed. For example, a priest might talk about the differences between the sins most men confess and the sins most women confess, or the differences between the sins most married people confess and most single people confess, if it is appropriate for a pastoral purpose. Although a priest could not say, “John lied to his wife,” he could say that some issues married people bring to the confessional include lying to their spouses.

A priest could also say something like, “When people confess this kind of sin, this is the kind of penance I usually give.”

On rare occasions, a priest might be more specific. Even then, however, he is not allowed to say anything that will reveal whose confession he is referring to. If a priest is teaching people how to go to Confession, he may use examples from his experience, but he must not do so unless there is absolutely no way anyone’s identity could be revealed. For instance, a priest who is trying to explain why it is important to be direct when you confess might mention a time when a penitent’s attempt to use a euphemism for sin led to a misunderstanding. But if the priest does this, he must not do so in any way that would reveal the identity of the person with whom he had the misunderstanding.

Your Sins Cannot be Held Against You

Canon law also prohibits a confessor from using his knowledge of what you confess in confession against you, even if he wouldn’t reveal your sins to anyone else (Canon 984).

Your Obligations 

The seal of the confessional binds the priest who hears your confession, but it does not bind you when you confess. If you want to, you can talk with your priest outside of the confessional about your sins or anything he said during Confession if you need more spiritual advice or want to clarify something. You can also tell anyone else about your confession, both what you said and what the priest said.

Keep in Mind

It is easy to think that your confession will stand out to a priest because it stands out to you. However, priests hear many thousands of confessions over the course of their ministry. It is very unlikely that your confession will surprise or shock a priest. Because he hears so many confessions, he has almost certainly heard other people confess whatever sins you will confess. The sheer number of confessions he hears will make it harder for him to remember yours in detail. Furthermore, some priests report that they experience “holy amnesia,” an inability to remember confessions as well as they remember other things.

So go to Confession (here’s how) with confidence that the priest will keep your sins secret! God’s mercy is waiting for you!