Stipe Mlikotić
Ivica Jurić
University of Split,
Catholic Faculty of Theology
Zrinsko-frankopanska 19,
21 000 Split, Croatia
Aim: To examine the criticisms directed at Pope Francis’s pontificate by certain high-ranking Church prelates and Croatian Catholic-themed websites, with the aim of showing that negative criticism of Pope Francis constitutes an obstacle to evangelization because it creates divisions within the Church.
Methods: The study was conducted using the theological-pastoral methodology of the Lateran School, in which the criticisms directed at Pope Francis are presented, followed by the role and importance of the pope as the successor of the Apostle Peter, and finally, the reasons why public criticism of the pope is neither in the Catholic spirit nor in the Church’s interest.
Results: Our findings are presented in three parts. The first addresses the manner and motives behind the attacks on Pope Francis. The second outlines the Catholic Church’s teaching on the Roman Pontiff. The third part highlights the presence of postmodernity within the Church and the internal conflict and inconsistency among Pope Francis’s critics, many of whom passionately defended tradition, yet fiercely attack the papacy as the institution that safeguards that tradition. Collectively, these actions, cantering on negative criticisms of Pope Francis, hinder evangelization by enabling divisions within the Church. After analysing over 70 articles from two Croatian catholic websites (katolik.hr and vjera-idjela.com) in which Pope Francis is explicitly mentioned, results show that katolik.hr had 4 articles presented Pope Francis in a positive light, 20 were neutral, and 26 portrayed him in a distinctly negative tone. On vjeraidjela.com, one article portrayed Pope Francis positively as someone who contributes to the faith, three were neutral, and six were negative, with a critical perspective on his papacy.
Conclusions: Public criticism of the Roman pontiff through mass media presents a real barrier to the evangelizing mission of the Church, especially when such criticisms come from within the Catholic community, whether from clergy or laity. Criticisms directed at Pope Francis often reflected an immature faith and a theologically rigid mindset.
Keywords: Pope Francis; criticism; tradition; postmodernity; evangelization
Introduction
Criticizing popes was historically not an uncommon practice, particularly among European kings and Protestants. The former clashed with them over temporal supremacy, whereas the latter did so over religious authority ((1), p. 56–57, 75). Yet unlike all other popes in the history of the Church, Pope Francis (2013–2025) was most criticized by Catholics themselves, both high-ranking prelates and ordinary faithful. Certain media frequently accused him of heresy, deficiencies in teaching Catholic doctrine, and a lack of trust in Church tradition ((2), p. 202; (3)).
This article, therefore, reflects on the consequences of these criticisms for the Church’s pastoral mission. The focus of this paper is not on defending Pope Francis from criticism, the Manichaean opposition to criticism and apologetics, or an uncritical and unequivocal adherence to one side; rather, it seeks nuanced reflection and subsequently attempts to distinguish between constructive, beneficial, and unhelpful, harmful criticism ((3), p. 173). In addressing this topic, we will first list certain Church prelates and Catholic websites who frequently criticized Pope Francis. Then, we will examine the significance of the papal primacy for the Church and finally highlight the presence of postmodernity within it, the dangers of publicly criticizing the Pope for the unity and evangelization mission of the Church, and the internal conflicts of his critics. In this paper, we primarily focused on negative criticism found in selected Croatian Catholic media, aiming to highlight its adverse consequences for the Church’s mission.
Positive criticisms are constructive and based on facts, while negative ones are destructive and aimed at devaluing their target, rather than at improving the Church. The latter were therefore not so much directed at the critique of a papal document, but at Pope Francis as a person, who had repeatedly emphasized his willingness to accept constructive criticism (4). More precisely, it is entirely appropriate to criticize the Pope if it serves to build up the Church as such, and he, as a person, is subject to criticism; however, for such criticism to be fruitful, it must be expressed truthfully and respectfully. It is not appropriate to criticize the Pope’s person and his pastoral approach in a way that generates animosity toward him.
The destructive criticisms indicate a lack of acceptance of Pope Francis as the leader of the Catholic Church. First, they often offered an implicit rejection of him as a Latin American who speaks in an informal tone, avoids academic language typical of most cardinals, and instead communicates in a direct, unfiltered, and approachable way. From the very beginning, Pope Francis’s pontificate has been marked by a departure from codified ecclesiastical language. Pope Francis’ voice is not that of a sovereign who tightly controls his people, nor a theological expert who defends the unquestionable authority of dogma; rather, it is above all the voice of a pastor who bends down before human suffering and problems, offering help without any condemnation (5, 6). Prelates who criticize Pope Francis often refer to documents issued during his pontificate and highlight their ambiguity and doctrinal divergence from Catholic theology ((7); (2), p. 202). Furthermore, a troubling phenomenon among Pope Francis’s critics is a subtle rejection of the Second Vatican Council (1962–1965) and their interpretation of the most recent ecumenical council as the true cause of the current crisis in the Catholic Church (8).
Although it is legitimate to offer constructive criticism of papal documents, it is important to remember that destructive criticism that exists solely for its own sake is not in the spirit of the Christian faith. This is especially true when such criticism comes from Catholics who blame the Pope for a crisis in the Church that predated his pontificate. The very fact that Pope Benedict XVI abdicated the Chair of Peter indicates that the Church faced serious internal problems even before Pope Francis, as well as difficulties in proclaiming the Gospel in the modern world.
Click here to read all article.
St open 6 (2025), 1-30.