Steven Greydanus, a deacon of the Archdiocese of Newark and former film critic for the National Catholic Register, has penned a “longread” Substack article against Bishop Robert Barron. Here’s the short version: Bishop Barron leans right. This pains Catholics like Greydanus, who lean left.
To which I can only say: So what?
I don’t know if Bishop Barron, or his many fans, would agree with Greydanus’ claim that Barron criticizes the left more than he does the right. But I agree with Greydanus. The difference is that Greydanus thinks it’s a bad thing and I think it’s a good thing.
The political left and political right in the United States in 2026 are not morally equivalent. The left is worse. Far worse. That is what I believe. I suspect it is what Bishop Barron believes too, though I don’t expect him to ever say it as explicitly as I just did.
But that it is implicit in Barron’s recent public statements — what Barron does and does not comment on — is too much for Greydanus. He believes the right is worse, and should be called out more, or at least as much. Greydanus, a man of impeccable Catholic orthodoxy, is well within his rights to believe this.
But here’s the thing. Bishop Barron, also a man of impeccable Catholic orthodoxy, is well within his rights to believe the opposite. So are those of us who agree with Bishop Barron’s judgments — and who have been heartened to see at least one outspoken bishop in the U.S. hierarchy giving voice to what so many of us are experiencing.
That is the part I don’t get about Greydanus’ complaint. Most of the Catholic hierarchy does the opposite of Barron. Their public policy statements this past year have been overwhelmingly critical of the right, not the left. In fact, Greydanus mentions statements by several bishops criticizing Trump Administration policy, some of which were co-signed by Barron.
But this is not good enough for Greydanus. Because one guy out of the 268 Catholic bishops active in the United States is giving Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Zohran Mamdani the business. Seriously. Just one guy. I don’t know of any other member of the hierarchy who would post a video or commentary on X rightly calling out AOC and Mamdani for their, yes, dangerously Marxist statements. But for the Catholic New Left, even one guy is one guy too many.
And look, I get that Bishop Barron has a higher profile than most priests or bishops. But so does Fr. James Martin. So does the USCCB when it speaks as a whole, as it did when it criticized Trump immigration policy in its first “special statement” in over a decade. So does Pope Leo, for goodness sakes.
Barron is the only one calling out wokeness and for that he gets a two-part “longread” rap on the knuckles from Greydanus. I am reminded of a joke attributed to Greg Gutfeld, who said Obama’s complaints about Fox News reminded him of the star quarterback complaining about the one cheerleader who wouldn’t sleep with him. Almost the whole of the hierarchy sees the world as Greydanus sees it. Only Bishop Barron is calling out what the rest of us see….
By Peter Wolfgang on Catholic Culture
I don’t think Bishop Barron leans right. I think he “leans Catholic.” Every pope from Pius IX (when socialism and communism began) through Benedict XVI publicly condemned socialism and communism, which oppose the dignity of the human person. Mayor Mamdani follows a false prophet and false religion, but AOC calls herself a Catholic, which is even more problematic. Our shepherds should shepherd us. Socialism and communism are not good for the flourishing of human persons, regardless of religion.
Reply to Deacon Craig Anderson: Bishop Robert Barron is both to the right and right in almost every case and issue. That’s what makes him so effective. It’s refreshing to listen to Bishop Barron on almost every issue. He’s a rare one because he’s not afraid to speak the Gospel truth which has stood the test of time.
The left is wrong and a threat to freedom, prosperity and goodness, and it needs to be defeated. That’s not at all a matter of Catholic faith but rather one of rational deduction and prudent judgment. I don’t have any Democrat friends, and I won’t go to social events where I might have to make politec small talk with Democrats. They can’t help but bring up their leftist politics, and rather than have to shout them down in a way that would risk making a scene, I prefer to avoid all interactions with them altogether. Peace and quiet in my life are one benefit of those decisions.
If a priest brings up leftist politics at Mass, I leave Mass. Oh, I give the priest a piece of my mind later in writing. I never go back though. Mass should be a politics free zone. If my bishop supports illegal immigration, I give him a piece of my mind too. And I never go to any of his ceremonies. I wouldn’t want a priest to bring up conservative politics either nor be pro-Trump. Clergy should stay out of politics.
I’d prefer that Bishop Barron not be political. Leave that to laymen. Just as I don’t care to hear what McElroy or Cupich have to say about politics, I don’t care to hear about that from Barron either. Priests should stick to Catholic topics.
Were popes and other Catholic bishops wrong to condemn socialism and communism? Was Pope Pius XI wrong to condemn Naziism?
Bishop Barron calls it as he sees it. He’s right to criticize the left more than the right. Look at where the left stands on abortion, same sex marriage, transgenderism and freedom of religion just to name some issues. As Deacon Craig Anderson says in his comment, “Bishop Barron leans Catholic.” The Church needs its religious to proclaim the truth of the Gospel more than ever today than at anytime in world history. It’s about the salvation of souls. As Pope John Paul II proclaimed, “Be not afraid.”
Read some of the articles on Bob from this site , his references to “its the laity’s job ” to jimmy martin as “winsome ” and his proposed “check system ” for the online Catholic influencers shows he is not to be trusted .
“Fr. Martin is a winsome guide to all those who want to deepen their friendship with the Lord.” Bishop Robert Barron’s controversial endorsement, in 2020, of the book, “Learning to Pray: A Guide for Everyone” by Jesuit Fr. James Martin. Bishop Barron is generally theologically orthodox. But he is not completely trustworthy, as he sometimes appeals to popular liberal religious trends. He also was previously criticized for preaching a theologically incorrect, liberal modern concept of “universal salvation”– which he later clarified. Many years ago, I wrote to object to a series on modern films for Catholic families, that Steven Greydanus used to write, for the “National Catholic Register.” Greydanus lacked an understanding and sensitivity to the harms of objectionable modern Hollywoid film content– which Catholic parents are concerned about– promiscuity, sex, gay sex, nudity, violence, obscene language, drugs, etc — totally unsuitable for Catholic families. He had no concept of Christian morality– he would endorse anything. This publication, overall, did not challenge the sinful, secular, anti-Christian, moderm liberal beliefs– and present a good Catholic and Christ-centered viewpoint, suitable for Catholic families. The publication was later acquired by EWTN.
Why is it that many Catholic young people– even those who attended Mass this Sunday morning– may poison their souls on Sunday afternoons, by reading immoral, filthy books, viewing immoral, filthy films, or listening to explicit sex/drugs/violence-filled rock “music?” Why? Why don’t Catholic clerics and prominent Catholic laymen warn Catholics and their families against such sinful Satanic trash– and urge them to join in a massive protest and boycott of all this Satanic material? Why must sinful Satanic trash be “mainstreamed” to the American public– filling the bank accounts of deviant, sinful trash-purveyors?? Most Catholic clergy and lay film reviewers (like Steven Greydanus) simply review all of this sinful, Satanic material, find a few good points, admit the flaws— and that’s it! So what? They have almost no moral conscience, and no faithfulness to Our Lord. They don’t care. So American culture continues to be poisoned by “mainstreamed” sinful, Satanic trash. And oh, yes, the tainted, tarnished reviewers will confidently state, that your 10-year-old can “handle” “such-and-such” material, or your 17-year-old can “handle” “such and such” material. No! And YOU– the parent– must not “handle” this sinful, Satanic trash, either! No!
You’re right. Bishop Barron was wrong to endorse James Martin’s book a half dozen years ago. And, Dr. Ralph Martin and others were in public conversation with the bishop when he seemed to drift or slip into a type of universalism, which, as you note, he later clarified. That said, none of us want a snapshot from a couple of bad moments in our life to be that for which we are remembered. I don’t. Do you? Ask the Apostle and Martyr Saint Thomas (“Doubting Thomas”). It seems Bishop Barron is growing in his realization of the battle that we’re in. Please pray for him and all of our bishops. And, pray for Deacon Greydanus. I can’t pinpoint it, but is there something else going on here with his criticism of Bishop Barron? Is this deacon critical of the political statements of Cardinals McElroy, Cupich and his own?
I read liberal Steven Greydanus’ immature, inferior article on Bishop Barron. I would just say, to ignore him, and all the other “noise” that immature liberals put out. I do not think Greydanus should have been ordained as a Deacon– worthless for Catholic parishioners and their families. I suppose he talks about the latest immoral Hollywood film trash, in his homilies– instead of preaching Catholic teachings on morality and how to live a good Christian life, especially to the young. I agree, Bishop Barron is a fine Bishop, despite his few blunders. He deserves Greydanus” respect.
Anonymous Clergyman, it’s his mindset , not some bad moments, as a bishop he is held to a higher standard, words mean things, that’s why we have a language that we use to communicate with . As a bishop of some years he should have the judgement and maturity that his office requires, given his communication ministry there is no excuse for his self inflicted errors that we the laity are left to deal with. We have had far too many in the hierarchy insult and betray us, you want to be a leader and example in the faith, then discernment is required.
The fact is Bishop Barron calls out the “civil war” within the Church that perceives the Roman Church is a political institute. Perception is not reality no matter how assertive the myth was promoted since the 90’s by corporate America. I might be interested if the argument were over theology, traditions of the Church, its Magistrate, and Sacred Scripture because Bishop Barron defends the pillars of the Church where political factions in the Church gnaw away at them like church mice or eat at its inners like termites. There are commentators whose welfare remains dependent upon division; in spiritual terms they are referred to as demons. I say “remains” because the “civil war” ended within the Church yet some men are compelled to “cold wars” rather than peace Christ depends upon Catholics to bring to the world. I agree, “so what?” to anyone’s opinion of Bishop Barron that he favors a political side. It has become a moot point.in terms of relevance. Jesus was clear on what side we are to fall. If we are not for Him, we are against Him. So the argument over Bishop Barron is irrelevant. He is on on the side of Christ, Church, and Faith. God Bless and have mercy on us in the name of Jesus.
“The fact is Bishop Barron calls out the “civil war” within the Church that perceives the Roman Church is a political institute.” I would need to see the context in which he depicts a civil war within the Church. Certainly in this country there are the culture wars in which we see democrats and republicans (more or less) aligning on opposite sides, and both use the political processes to advance their point of view. In light of this, anytime the Church argues any point in the culture wars she becomes part of that battle, and it matters no a wit how much she appeals to tradition and scripture–she has entered the fray. And not every cleris take the same side in these wars. But the battle goes beyond the culture wars. As you pointed out, there are political factions within the Church and we see for example Pope Leo condemning the bombing of Iran, joined by a number of bishops here. And we have the episcopal agitation on US border control policy. So political advocacy follows upon bishops’ take on social/political matters. So from the Church’s stand on cultural and political events, and that not all bishops line up as one voice, and in light of the opposition of many laity to certain episcopal pronouncements, I think it correct to say there is a civil war in the Church, however using the word “civil” in a derived sense. Michele, if you find fault in my resoning (and it may indeed not survive scrutiny) may I at least ask you when the civil war ended within the Church? My guess is that you would answer, at Pentecost. Please correct as needed.
I appreciate the discussion here regarding whether Bishop Barron should stick to “Catholic topics” versus social commentary. Given the debate in the comments about his past endorsements and the call for shepherds to guide us in all aspects of modern life, I’ve been wondering about the Church’s stance on the ethics of regulated global industries that are now entering local markets. For instance, when looking at the expansion of European-licensed platforms into South America, as detailed in this technical compliance review at https://guiadepinnaclecolumbia.com/ , do you think a “theologically orthodox” bishop should provide moral frameworks for how the laity engages with these highly regulated sectors, or is that exactly the kind of “political” involvement that some here feel the clergy should avoid?
Christian Morality is a “must” in all areas of life– especially in business practices– which are guided by the intention to compete, succeed, and make money. . It has nothing to do with excuses of “political views.” People are extremely harmed by immoral business practices. Is Planned Parenthood a good business– with moral business practices? Of course not. Abortion– the killing of innocent babies in their mother’s wombs– is a MORAL issue. Not a “political” issue. What about necessary medical care and prescriptions– in which prices are deliberately jacked-up and set extremely high? —– millions of innocent people are greatly harmed by this evil business practice. This is a MORAL issue, also– not a “political” issue. All business practices must be guided by Christian Morality. The Church must speak up to protect innocent people from being scammed and charmed.
Iin my reply to Shane on March 16 at 1:02pm — in my final sentence, I meant to say, “The Church must speak up to protect innocent people from being scammed and harmed.” I misspelled the word “harmed.”
Is your “Pinnacle” online site for gambling? The Catholic laity should be warned to never get involved with gambling in any way, shape or form. Very dangerous– especially for poor people. The Church has always warned against gambling– which can be both a sin and an illness, for those who become gambling addicts. A man with a wife and kids who gambles– puts his entire family at serious risk.
There are matters of intrinsic evil and matters of prudential judgment. Abortion, racism and communism are intrinsic evils and should always be rightly condemned. Oftentimes there’s a lack of clarity about the distinction between intrinsic evils and matters of prudential judgement. I hope that helps.
I love gambling. Craps is a fun game, and slots are enjoyable. Sometimes you win money too. I also play the lottery when the jackpot gets really high. The Church does not teach that gambling is a sin as a recreational activity.
“Most of the Catholic hierarchy does the opposite of Barron”…
Hello, we have a problem here….The Left is constantly pushing the evils of abortion, the gay agenda, etc. Not that the GOP is perfect but they are much more amenable to changing their viewpoints.
From the article: “Greydanus, a man of impeccable orthodoxy, …” Huh? I remember some years ago reading his movie reviews in the “National Catholic Register.” Some of his recommendations were for films that were quite objectionable for anyone. I was surprised that NCR continued to carry his reviews.