Are There Saints Who Criticized the Pope?

Brief Overview

• The Catholic Church recognizes that some saints offered honest correction and criticism to popes during their lifetimes, which the Church views as an act of faithfulness rather than disloyalty.
• Saint Catherine of Siena, a Doctor of the Church, wrote direct letters to Pope Gregory XI urging him to return from Avignon to Rome and to reform his clergy.
• Saint Bernard of Clairvaux, another Doctor of the Church, wrote pointed letters to Pope Eugenius III about matters of Church discipline and papal governance that he believed needed correction.
• The tradition of respectful correction by saints reflects the virtue of fortitude and the understanding that serving the truth sometimes requires speaking honestly to those in authority.
• Catholic teaching acknowledges that popes are human and fallible in their personal conduct and administrative decisions, though the Church maintains that the Pope’s official teachings on faith and morals are protected by God’s guidance.
• The correction offered by these saints was always motivated by love for the Church and the Pope’s own spiritual good, not by a desire for power or personal gain.

The Historical Reality of Saint Criticism

The history of the Catholic Church shows us that some of the greatest saints felt called to offer correction to popes in their time. This reality can surprise modern Catholics who sometimes think that only recent decades have seen honest disagreement within the Church. The truth is that throughout the centuries, holy men and women recognized that loyalty to the Pope and the Church sometimes meant speaking up about real problems. When we look at the lives of canonized saints who offered such criticism, we find that they did so with genuine love and respect for the papal office. Their actions teach us that the Church values truth and integrity even when those values require difficult conversations. The saints understood that silence in the face of wrongdoing could harm the very institution they loved. These faithful followers worked within the Church to address concerns rather than leaving or attacking the Pope from outside. Their examples show us that being a good Catholic does not mean accepting everything without question. Instead, it means caring enough about the Church and its leader to speak the truth with humility and charity. The Pope’s role as head of the Church makes criticism more delicate, but not impossible when done with proper respect and motivation.

Saint Catherine of Siena and Pope Gregory XI

Saint Catherine of Siena lived in the fourteenth century and became one of the most forceful voices in the Church offering correction to the Pope. She was a Dominican tertiary, meaning she belonged to the lay branch of the Dominican order, and she received extraordinary spiritual gifts including mystical visions. Catherine wrote a series of strong letters to Pope Gregory XI expressing serious concerns about his decision to remain in Avignon rather than return the papal seat to Rome. She addressed the Pope directly about what she saw as failures in his leadership, particularly his hesitation to move the papal residence back to the city where Saint Peter had died. Catherine’s letters were respectful in form but remarkably direct in content, which shows the balance she maintained between honor for the office and honesty about problems. She also criticized the Pope’s choice of certain cardinals and advisors who she believed were not serving the Church well. Her intervention actually helped convince Gregory XI to return to Rome, where the papacy had been absent for decades during what historians call the Avignon period. Catherine’s actions resulted in significant changes to the Church’s governance and location, showing the real impact of her courageous words. The Church later canonized her as a saint and declared her a Doctor of the Church, recognizing both her holiness and the wisdom of her counsel. Her example demonstrates that direct criticism of the Pope, when done from a place of true love and with proper respect, can actually serve the Church’s good.

Saint Bernard of Clairvaux and His Letters to Popes

Saint Bernard of Clairvaux was born in France in the late eleventh century and became one of the most influential figures of the medieval Church. He was an abbot of a major monastery and a Doctor of the Church whose writings shaped Catholic theology and spirituality for centuries. Bernard wrote letters to multiple popes, including Pope Eugenius III, offering frank opinions about how the Pope was managing Church affairs. He expressed concerns about certain papal decisions and the need for reform in how bishops and clergy were selected and disciplined. Bernard’s letters show that he believed the Pope needed counsel from wise and holy people around him to make good decisions for the Church. He did not hesitate to question papal appointments or policies that he thought failed to serve the faith properly. Bernard’s criticism came from his deep commitment to the Church’s health and his conviction that reformation was necessary at all levels of Church life. He used his position as a respected spiritual leader to speak with authority on matters affecting the whole Church. The Pope generally received Bernard’s letters with respect and consideration rather than anger or rejection. Bernard’s example shows that in the Catholic tradition, there has always been room for voices of honest counsel even when those voices questioned papal decisions.

The Theological Foundation for Respectful Correction

Catholic theology has long recognized that correction offered with the right motivation and manner is not disrespect but rather an act of charity and virtue. Saint Paul wrote in his Letter to the Galatians about how he confronted Saint Peter to his face regarding certain practices that Paul believed were wrong. This biblical precedent shows that even the first pope could be questioned when the matter involved important questions of faith and practice. The virtue of fortitude, also called courage, includes the strength to speak truth even when it would be easier to stay silent. A person acting with fortitude does not attack or disrespect authority, but rather speaks what is true in a way that seeks the good of everyone involved. The Catechism teaches that conscience must always be followed when one recognizes a serious problem or injustice. When saints saw situations they believed harmed the Church, their consciences compelled them to speak, while still maintaining proper respect for the papal office. This balance between truth-telling and respect for authority is a constant theme in Catholic moral teaching. The Church distinguishes between the Pope’s personal fallibility and the Church’s teaching authority on matters of doctrine. In areas where the Pope might make mistakes about policy, administration, or even personal conduct, correction from holy and wise people serves the Church well. This understanding allows Catholics to maintain deep respect for the Pope’s office while recognizing that even popes are human and can benefit from counsel and correction.

Saint Catherine’s Specific Criticisms and Their Context

To understand Saint Catherine’s criticism more fully, we must look at the specific historical situation in which she lived and wrote. During the period known as the Avignon Papacy, the popes had lived in France rather than in Rome for several decades, and many Catholics saw this as unnatural and problematic. The Pope’s presence in Rome was seen as essential to the Church’s proper functioning and to its connection with the legacy of Saint Peter. Catherine believed that Gregory’s remaining in Avignon showed weakness and lack of proper spiritual leadership for the universal Church. She also addressed what she saw as moral failings in the papal court and among the cardinals around the Pope. In her letters, Catherine used strong language to describe the corruption and luxury that she observed among Church leaders. She did not soften her words out of a desire to protect the Pope’s feelings, but she always framed her criticism in terms of love for the Pope’s own soul and the Church’s welfare. Catherine pointed out that the Pope had the responsibility to set an example of holy living for all Catholics to follow. Her criticism extended beyond Gregory himself to include his advisors and the systems that allowed corruption to continue unchecked. Catherine’s fearlessness in speaking to these issues earned her the love of many Catholics who felt that someone finally was naming problems everyone could see but few dared to address.

The Context of Medieval Church Authority and Reform

The medieval Church faced ongoing struggles with corruption, simony, and worldliness that affected even the highest levels of leadership. Saints and reformers throughout the medieval period worked to address these problems because they believed that the Church’s mission to bring people to God was harmed by scandals and immoral behavior among clergy. The existence of reformist saints who criticized both popes and bishops shows that the Church itself produced people who could not accept problems passively. Many of these reformers, rather than being punished for their honesty, were eventually recognized as saints because their criticism came from genuine holiness and love. The medieval understanding of authority allowed for a kind of dialogue between popes and their advisors, including the saints who were close to them spiritually. When a pope trusted the judgment of a particular saint or holy person, he might actually seek out their counsel, knowing that such people would speak the truth as they saw it. This does not mean that correction was always welcome or that it never created tension within the Church. However, the willingness of some popes to listen to criticism from saints showed that the Church recognized the importance of honest feedback. The Church’s eventual canonization of reformers and critics shows that she values and honors those who pushed for change when change was needed. This historical pattern provides a foundation for understanding how the Church can honor both papal authority and the prophetic voices of saints who sometimes challenged that authority.

Saint Bernard’s Influence on Church Reform

Saint Bernard’s role in the medieval Church extended far beyond his monastery, and his words carried weight with both popes and secular rulers. He was consulted on major decisions affecting the Church because he was recognized as one of the holiest and wisest men of his time. Bernard wrote extensively about the need for the pope to live simply and to focus on spiritual matters rather than political power. He believed that when popes became too involved in temporal affairs and too comfortable with luxury, they lost sight of their true mission. Bernard’s letters about Church reform were influential in shaping how later popes approached the question of what the Church should look like and how it should function. He spoke strongly about the need for genuine spiritual renewal throughout all levels of the Church’s hierarchy. Bernard did not separate his criticism of popes from his criticism of other church leaders because he saw the same problems affecting everyone in positions of authority. His comprehensive approach to reform showed that he understood how authority at the top sets the tone for the entire organization. Bernard’s willingness to address these issues with specific popes rather than speaking in generalities made his criticism more powerful and more difficult to ignore. His eventual canonization and recognition as a Doctor of the Church validated his approach and showed that the Church does treasure reformers even when they make leaders uncomfortable.

The Distinction Between Criticism and Disobedience

An important element of understanding how saints criticized popes is recognizing the clear line between honest criticism and actual disobedience or disloyalty. Saints like Catherine and Bernard never called for others to ignore papal authority or to create divisions in the Church. They worked within the system of Church authority rather than against it, always recognizing the Pope’s position as head of the Church. When these saints offered criticism, they did so as loyal members of the Church speaking to one of their own leaders about serious concerns. They accepted the Pope’s authority even when they disagreed with specific decisions or worried about his personal conduct. This crucial distinction shows that offering correction is not the same as rejecting authority or refusing to obey. A person can simultaneously honor someone’s position and authority while also being honest about problems they observe. The saints understood this balance instinctively because their holiness made them sensitive to issues of integrity and consistency in their own thinking. They would not make the mistake of thinking that silence equaled respect or that honesty equaled rebellion. Modern Catholics can learn from this example that one can maintain genuine respect for the Pope and the Church while also being willing to think critically about specific decisions or practices. The Church’s own teaching supports this understanding, making clear that faith in the Church does not require blind acceptance of everything everyone in the Church does.

Saint Catherine’s Canonization and Legacy

The fact that Saint Catherine of Siena was canonized as a saint and declared a Doctor of the Church sends a powerful message about how the Church views her life and work. The Church does not canonize people despite their willingness to criticize leaders; rather, she honors them partly because of their holiness, which included the courage to speak truth. Catherine’s canonization confirms that a person can be deeply loyal to the Pope and the Church while also being willing to offer frank criticism when circumstances seem to demand it. Her life shows that holiness and boldness are not opposites but can exist together in a person devoted to God and the Church. Catherine’s status as a Doctor of the Church means that her teachings and writings are considered valuable resources for all Catholics seeking to understand the faith more deeply. Her letters, preserved and studied by scholars for centuries, continue to teach about the nature of Christian courage and the proper exercise of authority. The Church’s recognition of Catherine encourages Catholics to see her example as a model rather than as something unusual or problematic. By canonizing and honoring Catherine despite her direct criticism of a pope, the Church demonstrates that she does not demand blind obedience but rather values truth and righteousness. Modern popes have continued to cite Catherine as an important figure in Church history, showing ongoing acceptance of her legacy. Her feast day is celebrated in the Church, and her writings are studied in seminaries and universities as part of the Church’s spiritual inheritance.

Saint Bernard’s Lasting Influence on Theology

Saint Bernard’s contributions to Catholic theology go far beyond his criticisms of popes, but his willingness to speak honestly was part of what made him such a valuable theological voice. His writings on mysticism, the nature of God’s love, and the spiritual life have been treasured by the Church for nearly a thousand years. Bernard’s approach to theology combined deep spiritual experience with careful thinking and intellectual rigor, which gave his work credibility and depth. He was not someone who criticized from a position of anger or personal resentment but from a genuine concern for the Church’s spiritual health. His example shows that one can be both deeply contemplative and actively involved in addressing problems in the Church and world. Bernard’s theological contributions mean that the Church continues to benefit from his insights long after his death, and this includes his insights about the relationship between authority and accountability. Students of Catholic theology encounter Bernard’s work whether they are studying spirituality, doctrine, or history because his influence is so widespread. The Church’s continued study and appreciation of Bernard shows that she recognizes value in voices that were willing to speak up about problems while maintaining deep love for the faith. Bernard’s canonization and recognition as a Doctor of the Church came gradually but consistently, showing the Church’s increasing appreciation for his life and work over time.

Other Examples of Saints Who Offered Correction

Beyond Catherine and Bernard, other saints in Church history also offered correction to popes when they felt circumstances required it. Saint Bridget of Sweden, a fourteenth-century mystic, wrote directly to popes about matters she believed needed attention based on her spiritual experiences. She addressed popes about their spiritual lives and their responsibilities as leaders of the Church with a directness that was remarkable even in that era. Saint John of the Cross, a great mystic and reformer of the sixteenth century, spoke out about corruption and abuses he witnessed in the Church. Though not primarily known for criticizing popes, John was willing to challenge authority when he believed the faith itself was at stake. Saint Joan of Arc, though a lay person and not part of the Church’s official structure, spoke with conviction about what she believed God wanted, even when this meant questioning Church officials. These examples show that criticism of Church leadership by holy people has been a recurring pattern throughout Catholic history. The Church’s treatment of these saints and their eventual recognition shows that she honors this pattern rather than condemning it. In each case, the saints spoke from genuine love and concern rather than from a desire for power or attention. Their examples collectively demonstrate that the Church has a long tradition of recognizing voices that speak truthfully about problems, even when those voices directed criticism toward the highest authorities.

The Role of Virtue in Offering Correction

The saints who criticized popes did so in ways that reflected the virtues they were trying to practice in their own lives. The virtue of prudence, which involves knowing the right thing to do in complex situations, guided them in deciding when and how to offer their criticism. They recognized that not every mistake or problem needed to be publicly addressed and that discretion was sometimes the wise choice. The virtue of humility meant that they approached correction with awareness that they too were fallible and might be wrong about what they were seeing. They did not assume that their criticism was certainly correct but offered it as their honest perspective while remaining open to other viewpoints. The virtue of fortitude gave them the courage to speak up despite the risks that might come from contradicting a pope. They understood that taking the easy path of silence would involve a failure of courage and a betrayal of their commitment to truth. The virtue of charity ensured that even their strongest criticism was motivated by love for the Pope’s spiritual welfare and the Church’s good. This combination of virtues allowed them to be both truthful and loving, both bold and humble, both strong and respectful. Modern Catholics can reflect on these virtues when thinking about their own situations where they might feel called to speak up about problems. The example of these saints shows that living virtuously sometimes means accepting the discomfort that comes with honesty and the risks that come with courage.

The Pope’s Personal Fallibility and Doctrinal Authority

Understanding the distinction between the Pope’s personal behavior and the Church’s teaching authority is key to making sense of how saints could criticize popes while remaining loyal to the Church. The Church teaches that the Pope is a human being subject to the same weaknesses and temptations as other people, and his personal conduct can certainly be mistaken or even sinful. The Pope’s fallibility extends to his decisions about Church administration, his choices regarding advisors, and his personal spiritual struggles. However, the Church teaches that when the Pope teaches officially on matters of faith and morals for the whole Church, God’s help ensures that the Pope does not lead the Church into error. This special protection applies specifically to the Pope’s formal doctrinal teaching, not to his personal opinions or administrative decisions. Saints who criticized popes were generally addressing the Pope’s personal conduct, administrative choices, or concerns about worldliness and corruption rather than attacking doctrinal teaching. This means their criticism did not constitute a rejection of the Church’s faith or the Pope’s authority to teach doctrine. The Church maintains that belief in the Pope’s special role in teaching the faith does not require belief that everything the Pope does is right. This understanding allows for a kind of loyalty to the Pope that is not naive about his human limitations. Catholics can love and respect the Pope while also thinking critically about particular policies or being concerned about particular actions. This balanced view of papal authority and human limitation provides a framework for understanding how saints could love the Church and the Pope while also offering honest criticism.

The Medieval and Modern Understanding of Authority

The way that medieval saints related to authority was influenced by the understanding of authority in their time, but the basic principles they applied remain relevant today. In the medieval period, there was generally a greater acceptance of formal hierarchical structures and obedience to authority, yet even in that context, saints found ways to speak truth to power. The relationships between saints and popes were often personal ones in which the pope might seek out a particular holy person for counsel and spiritual guidance. This personal dimension meant that criticism could be offered in a relationship of mutual respect and even affection. In the modern world, the relationship between the Pope and Catholics may be more formal and less personal, but the basic principle remains that truth-telling and honest evaluation should not be abandoned in the name of loyalty. The Church continues to benefit from people who are willing to observe carefully what is happening in the Church and to speak up when they see problems. This does not mean that modern Catholics should approach the Pope with the same directness that Catherine of Siena used, as context and manner matter significantly. Rather, it means that Catholics need not feel that loyalty to the Church requires pretending not to see problems or never expressing concerns about particular decisions or policies. The medieval saints’ example suggests that the Church has always been an institution in which people with conscience and courage have felt called to speak up about problems. This pattern has been part of the Church since the beginning and continues to be part of what keeps the Church alive and self-correcting.

The Question of Public Versus Private Correction

One important nuance in understanding how saints offered criticism is considering the difference between public and private correction. Much of Saint Catherine’s criticism came through letters that were not necessarily intended for public distribution but were aimed at the Pope himself and his closest advisors. Bernard’s criticisms similarly were often expressed in letters or in counsel offered privately to popes rather than in public speeches or writings meant for general distribution. This distinction matters because offering correction privately to the person involved respects their dignity in a way that public criticism might not. When a person genuinely wants to help someone address a problem, the respectful approach is usually to speak to that person privately first rather than announcing the problem to everyone. The Church teaches this principle through the biblical passage about addressing a brother’s fault between the two of you alone rather than telling it to others. Even the prophets in the Old Testament, though they sometimes addressed the people publicly, often first tried to reach the king or leader privately. The saints’ example suggests that offering criticism is most effective and most respectful when it is done privately when possible. In the modern age, with greater availability of public platforms and media, this distinction becomes even more important to consider carefully. A person motivated by genuine care for someone or for an institution will try to offer correction in a way that preserves dignity and respects the person’s authority even as it seeks to address a problem. The saints’ example thus teaches not only that correction is sometimes necessary but also that how one offers correction matters greatly.

The Church’s Response to Saints’ Criticisms

The response of popes and the Church to the criticisms offered by saints provides important evidence about how the Church understood these challenges. Pope Gregory XI was genuinely influenced by Saint Catherine’s letters and her encouragement to return to Rome; he made the significant decision to move the papal residence back to Italy during his papacy. This shows that the Pope took Catherine’s words seriously and allowed them to shape his decision-making about a major issue. The popes who received letters from Saint Bernard also seemed to respect his input even when they did not agree completely with his advice on every matter. The fact that these popes did not silence the saints or punish them for their criticism suggests that they understood the value of honest counsel from holy people. The Church’s eventual canonization of these critics shows that the broader Church community recognized the legitimacy and value of what they had done. Church historians have recorded these criticisms and discussed them as important parts of Church history rather than as embarrassing incidents to be downplayed. The Church’s overall response has been to integrate the criticism offered by these saints into the official story of the Church’s history and development. This integration suggests that the Church does not see these criticisms as a threat to the faith or as evidence of problems with papal authority. Rather, the Church sees them as part of the normal functioning of a living institution in which people care deeply about the faith and its proper practice. The way the Church has handled these historical criticisms provides a model for how she might approach honest expression of concern from Catholics today.

What These Examples Teach Us About Loyalty

The examples of saints who criticized popes teach important lessons about what genuine loyalty actually means and how it differs from blind obedience. True loyalty to a person or institution involves wanting that person or institution to be good and healthy. Someone who loves an institution might sometimes feel obligated to speak up about things that could harm it or prevent it from functioning well. Genuine loyalty does not mean pretending that everything is fine when one can see real problems. The saints show us that they were motivated by deep love for the Pope and the Church, which is why they were willing to risk tension by speaking honestly. This kind of love requires courage because it is always easier to stay silent and to avoid the possibility of conflict. The saints’ example suggests that Catholics might reflect on what their own loyalty to the Church should look like. Does loyalty mean accepting everything without question, or does it mean caring enough to think carefully about what is happening and to speak up when conscience seems to demand it. The Church herself, in her teachings and in her history, suggests that authentic loyalty includes elements of both obedience and honest evaluation. The saints show us that one can respect authority and submit to legitimate authority while also maintaining the freedom to think critically and to express genuine concerns. This balance might not always be easy to achieve, but the example of the saints shows that it is possible and that the Church values people who maintain it.

The Ongoing Relevance of This Teaching

The question of whether there have been saints who criticized the pope leads to a deeper question about what the Church expects of her members in relation to leadership and authority. The Church is not a static institution frozen in past practices, and she continues to work out in each era what it means to be loyal while also being honest. In the modern world, Catholics encounter Church leaders and policies with greater frequency and from more perspectives than medieval Catholics did. This means that more people have opportunities to observe what is happening in the Church and to form opinions about whether particular decisions are wise. The Church’s traditional teaching, as exemplified by saints like Catherine and Bernard, suggests that having these opinions and being willing to express them carefully is not a departure from Catholic faith. Rather, it is an expression of the kind of active love for the Church that has always been present in her best members. The fact that the Church canonized and honored critics suggests that she does not want Catholics to be passive observers of Church life but rather engaged participants who care about what happens. Of course, the manner and context in which someone expresses concerns matters greatly, and the example of the saints shows how to do this with both honesty and respect. In the modern Church, Catholics might find themselves in situations where they feel called to express concerns about decisions or practices. The example of the saints who criticized popes provides a model showing that such expression is within the tradition of the Church when done with proper motivation and respect.

Conclusion: Understanding Papal Authority and Sacred Accountability

The historical reality that saints have criticized popes reveals something important about how the Catholic faith understands authority and accountability. The Church teaches that authority itself is good and comes from God, and that respect for lawful authority is a basic virtue. At the same time, the Church recognizes that people in positions of authority are always fallible and subject to the same human weaknesses as everyone else. The presence of saints throughout history who felt called to offer correction shows that the Church distinguishes between respecting authority and accepting everything an authority figure does without question. This distinction allows the Church to maintain both firm respect for the papal office and realistic awareness of the Pope’s human limitations. The examples of Saint Catherine of Siena and Saint Bernard of Clairvaux demonstrate how one can love the Pope and the Church deeply while also being willing to speak about serious problems. These saints were not rebels or dissenters but rather faithful members of the Church who believed that genuine love sometimes requires honest conversation. Their canonization and recognition by the Church shows that she honors this approach rather than condemning it. The Church continues to benefit from people who care enough about her welfare to think carefully about what is happening and to speak truthfully when conscience seems to call them to do so. The tradition of saints criticizing popes teaches that being a good Catholic does not mean abandoning one’s conscience or refusing to see problems. Instead, it means loving the Church enough to want it to be its best self and being willing to work within the Church to support that goal. The Pope remains the head of the Church and deserves respect and obedience regarding his legitimate authority, and at the same time, Catholics can think critically about particular decisions and express concerns about particular practices when they believe this serves the Church’s true good.