ROME — Boston Cardinal Sean O’Malley had strong words for the Eternal Word Television Network (EWTN) this weekend for its criticisms of Pope Francis.

Asked by Argentinean journalist Elisabetta Piqué about conservative/liberal polarization among the U.S. bishops, Cardinal O’Malley said that “the episcopal conference is polarized, but it is difficult to put a percentage on the opposing sides.”

“There are also some bishops who are tied to a more conservative policy and the Holy Father himself has commented on the situation of EWTN, where many times the commentators are very critical of the Holy Father, at least of his ideas,” the cardinal said.

“But I think the vast majority of Catholics are very much in favor. We have a young conservative clergy and sometimes they are very influenced by social media and that is a problem,” he added.

The cardinal was referring to comments Pope Francis made in September during his trip to Hungary and Slovakia, where he said that the network’s “attacks” on him are “the work of the devil.”

There is “a large Catholic television channel that has no hesitation in continually speaking ill of the pope,” Francis said during a meeting with Jesuits in Bratislava.

Pope Francis speaks as he gives audience to the Archbishop of Boston Cardinal Sean Patrick O’Malley on April 19, 2018 at the Vatican. (STR/AFP via Getty)

“I personally deserve attacks and insults because I am a sinner, but the Church does not deserve them. They are the work of the devil. I have also said this to some of them,” he added.

In its report on the meeting, America magazine, the Jesuit flagship journal in the U.S., said the pope was referring to EWTN when speaking of “a large television channel” that criticizes him.

“Yes, there are also clerics who make nasty comments about me,” the pope continued. “I sometimes lose patience, especially when they make judgments without entering into a real dialogue. I can’t do anything there.”

The EWTN Global Catholic Network was founded in 1981 by cloistered Franciscan nun Mother Angelica and is the largest religious network in the world, broadcasting in multiple languages and reaching an audience in more than 145 countries.

In October, Archbishop Charles Chaput slammed British papal biographer Austen Ivereigh for making “ugly and unjust” comments about EWTN.

Writing in First Things, the archbishop commented on an article Ivereigh wrote for America, in which he described EWTN as a devil (diabolos) inciting “schism” in the Church.

Over the last eight years, Ivereigh wrote, “a powerful U.S.-based media conglomerate has used its formidable wealth and power to turn a large portion of the people of God against Rome and its current occupant. And for good measure, against key reforms of the Second Vatican Council.”

Pope Francis greets Archbishop of Boston, Franciscan Cardinal Sean Patrick O’Malley during an Eucharist celebration at the St. Peter’s Basilica on December 12, 2014 in Vatican City. (Franco Origlia/Getty)

“Frightening stuff,” Chaput commented, “so where might this muscular wickedness spring from: Comcast? Facebook? George Soros’s Open Society Foundations? No.”

Today’s spirit of schism “is the work of those iniquitous devils at . . . EWTN,” Chaput observed wryly. “Yes, that’s the network founded by that arch-troublemaker and woman religious, Mother Angelica, and funded largely by tens of thousands of small donations from ordinary, faithful Catholic individuals and families.”

The archbishop went on to say that the enormously successful network “has managed to serve the gospel for decades now with skill and endurance where many others have failed.”

“Thus, it’s hard to read critics of the network without also sniffing their peculiar cologne of faux piety, jealousy, and resentment,” he added.

“And any suggestion that EWTN is unfaithful to the Church, the Second Vatican Council, or the Holy See is simply vindictive and false,” he declared.

In his essay, Chaput described Ivereigh as a sycophant, a flatterer, and a “courtier” of Pope Francis, suggesting that the pope would be better served by less servile flattery and more honesty.

“Ivereigh should, but likely won’t, be embarrassed by his America article,” Chaput wrote. “The role of courtier doesn’t suit him.”