Evaluating Pope Leo in light of our own sins

By Dr. Jeff Mirus ( bio - articles - email ) | Sep 19, 2025

Sometimes when I awaken in a complaining mood, I think of a remarkable Scriptural explanation of how God deals with those whom He has strongly called to know and serve him, as compared with those to whom He has not revealed Himself so fully. You will find this in the second book of Maccabees when the sacred writer reflects on the sufferings of the Jewish people under a succession of pagan kings in the period just before the birth of Christ:

Now I urge those who read this book not to be depressed by such calamities, but to recognize that those punishments were designed not to destroy but to discipline our people. In fact, not to let the impious alone for long, but to punish them immediately, is a sign of great kindness. For in the case of the other nations the Lord waits patiently to punish them until they have reached the full measure of their sins; but he does not deal in this way with us, in order that he may not take vengeance on us afterward when our sins have reached their height. Therefore he never withdraws his mercy from us. Though he disciplines us with calamities, he does not forsake his own people. Let what we have said serve as a reminder; we must go on briefly with the story. [2 Mac 6:2-17]

Now this passage struck me afresh in the aftermath of an email exchange with a particular reader who is thoroughly disgusted by my fairly positive treatment of Pope Leo in these early days of his pontificate. After all, there are still a great many persistent deficiencies within the Church which have not yet been addressed or corrected. So perhaps everyone will tolerate a reconsideration of this problem.

In the first place, it is very important to emphasize that the Church is always in very bad shape, humanly speaking. There has never been a time in her history when she was not plagued by infidelity, laxness, various forms of persecution, attitudes and assumptions drawn more from the worldly culture than from the Faith, and widespread mediocrity (or worse) among bishops, priests, deacons, religious and laity—forms of mediocrity characteristic of their respective states in life. Indeed, perhaps all of us are so bad compared with what we could be that a layman ought not to consider finding fault with his priest, bishop or pope before he has become thoroughly aware of, and humbled by, his own weaknesses as a member of the laity. So right away a bit of caution, at least, is in order.

Second, in reflecting on a pope, it is rather important to recall two things. On the one hand, nobody is in a position to correct a pope in the sense of compelling him to change his ideas or his policies. Not only do the rest of us lack the authority to do so, but we typically lack even the necessary perspective. On the other hand, even with respect to specific instances we frequently lack necessary context. For example, I have heard rants on the apparent fact that Pope Leo did nothing in response to the recent LGBTQ disrespect of St. Peter’s in Rome, but in truth few people know whether the Pope was aware of it in a timely way, or who, if anyone, already bore responsibility for disturbances in the great basilica, or what Pope Leo himself has said or done behind the scenes, or even what degree of importance that problem should have been accorded among all the responsibilities that the Pope was attempting to fulfill at that particular time.

The same is true in our assessment of any problem we may wish to see addressed. Moreover, we have no clear idea about what Pope Leo is thinking as he learns his job, or how competent an administrator he is in comparison, let us say, with his ability to teach or to provide perceptive encouragement. The fact is that we know very little about the nuts and bolts of being pope, very little about what the present Holy Father really knows or thinks about various problems afflicting the Church, very little about the patterns he is likely to display in dealing with those problems as he gains experience and sets priorities, and even less about what the Holy Spirit is prompting Pope Leo to emphasize as he acclimates to his new and humanly impossible role.

Providence

And then there is Providence. Very often we think that only the good things that happen to us are providential—a notion which is completely false. The author of 2 Maccabees wrote that God punished His faithful people more rapidly than he punished others. Or to put this in terms perhaps more Catholic than Jewish, God certainly challenges His faithful people more quickly, in most cases, than he does those who hate or ignore him. Whatever else we may think we know, we ought to know very well by now the lesson offered by the Letter to the Hebrews (12:6) when the author quotes Proverbs 3:12: For the Lord disciplines him whom he loves, and chastises every son whom he receives.

We must be very wary, then, of growing bitter and dismissive when it comes to the state of either the Church as a whole or of particular ecclesiastical leaders. This does not mean that we must suspend judgment, but it does mean that we must be both temperate and provisional in our judgments and we must emphasize the true and the good we mean to highlight rather than the condemnation of those whom we judge to have fallen short. Above all, there is never any room for bitterness.

I suspect we have all been guilty at one time or another of rash judgment, or at least criticism expressed intemperately, in the assurance that our own values are the only important values, our own perceptions the only accurate perceptions, our own judgments the only right judgments—and our own understanding of the situation the only complete understanding. We more or less continuously forget not only how little we really know but also our need for humility, the fallibility of our own judgments, and even the benefits we derive so Providentially from suffering.

Never be disappointed, never suggest alternatives, never complain out loud? Perhaps those are all bridges way too far. But in a universe ruled by God, the benefit of the doubt is not ours to claim. It is only ours to give. The Lord does indeed discipline those He loves, for no disciple is greater than his master, and we must never forget that Our Lord Himself was “made sin” by taking on the sins of us all (2 Cor 5:21). But if anyone acts as if the “righteousness of God” is expressed through his own self-righteousness, that person needs to “go and learn what this means, ‘I desire mercy, and not sacrifice.’ For I came not to call the righteous, but sinners” (Mt 9:13).

May we never speak or act as if we do not have what it takes to be called.