Pope Francis, Catholics, and Christians in the news worldwide
NYT: Pope Francis Is Beloved. His Papacy Might Be a Disaster.
Ross Douthat MARCH 16, 2018
What my friends and acquaintances respond to from this pope, rather, is the iconography of his papacy — the vivid images of humility and Christian love he has created, from the foot-washing of prisoners to the embrace of the disfigured to the children toddling up to him in public events. Like his namesake of Assisi, the present pope has a great gift for gestures that offer a public imitatio Christi, an imitation of Christ. And the response from so many otherwise jaded observers is a sign of how much appeal there might yet be in Catholic Christianity, if it found a way to slip the knots that the modern world has tied around its message.
To be a critic of such a pope, then, is to occupy something like the position of George Orwell, who opened an essay on Mohandas Gandhi with the aphorism, “Saints should always be judged guilty until they are proved innocent.” Except that the pope’s most serious critics are not skeptics like Orwell who don’t actually believe in saints: They are faithful Catholics, for whom criticism of a pontiff is somewhat like the criticism of a father by his son. Which means they — we — are always at risk of finding in the mirror the self-righteous elder brother in Jesus’ parable of the prodigal son, who resents his father’s liberality, the welcome given to the younger brother coming home at last.
But it’s still a risk that needs to be taken — because to avoid criticizing Francis is to slight this pope’s importance, to fail to do justice to the breadth of his ambitions and purposes, his real historical significance, his clear position as the most important religious figure of our age.
Those ambitions and purposes are not the ones for which he was elected. The cardinals who chose Jorge Bergoglio envisioned him as the austere outsider.
But that kind of revolution hasn’t really happened. Vatican life is more unsettled than under Benedict XVI, the threat of firings or purges ever present, the power of certain offices reduced, the likelihood of a papal tongue-lashing increased. But the blueprints for reorganization have been put off; many ecclesial princes have found more power under Francis; and even the pope’s admirers joke about the “next year, next year …” attitude that informs discussions of reform.
Meanwhile, the pope’s response to the sex abuse scandal, initially energetic, now seems compromised by his own partiality and by corruption among his intimates. The last few months have been particularly ugly: Francis just spent a recent visit to Chile vehemently defending a bishop accused of turning a blind eye to sex abuse, while one of his chief advisers, the Honduran Cardinal Óscar Maradiaga, is accused of protecting a bishop charged with abusing seminarians even as the cardinal himself faces accusations of financial chicanery.
So the idea of this pope as a “great reformer,” to borrow the title of the English journalist Austen Ivereigh’s fine 2014 biography, can’t really be justified by any kind of Roman housekeeping. Instead Francis’ reforming energies have been directed elsewhere, toward two dramatic truces that would radically reshape the church’s relationship with the great powers of the modern world.
The first truce this pope seeks is in the culture war that everyone in Western society knows well — the conflict between the church’s moral teachings and the way that we live now, the struggle over whether the sexual ethics of the New Testament need to be revised or abandoned in the face of post-sexual revolution realities.
The papal plan for a truce is either ingenious or deceptive, depending on your point of view. Instead of formally changing the church’s teaching on divorce and remarriage, same-sex marriage, euthanasia — changes that are officially impossible, beyond the powers of his office — the Vatican under Francis is making a twofold move. First a distinction is being drawn between doctrine and pastoral practice that claims that merely pastoral change can leave doctrinal truth untouched. So a remarried Catholic might take communion without having his first union declared null, a Catholic planning assisted suicide might still receive last rites beforehand, and perhaps eventually a gay Catholic can have her same-sex union blessed — and yet supposedly none of this changes the church’s teaching that marriage is indissoluble and suicide a mortal sin and same-sex wedlock an impossibility, so long as it’s always treated as an exception rather than a rule.
At the same time, Francis has allowed a tacit decentralization of doctrinal authority, in which different countries and dioceses can take different approaches to controversial questions. So in Germany, where the church is rich and sterile and half-secularized, the Francis era has offered a permission slip to proceed with various liberalizing moves, from communion for the remarried to intercommunion with Protestants — while across the Oder in Poland the bishops are proceeding as if John Paul II still sits upon the papal throne and his teaching is still fully in effect. The church’s approach to assisted suicide is traditional if you listen to the bishops of Western Canada; flexible and accommodating if you heed the bishops in Canada’s Maritime Provinces. In the United States Francis’ appointees in Chicago and San Diego are taking the lead in promoting a “new paradigm” on sex and marriage, while more conservative archbishops from Philadelphia to Portland, Ore., are sticking with the old one. And so on.
This experiment is the most important effort of his pontificate, but in the last year he has added a second one, seeking a truce not with a culture but with a regime: The Communist government in China. Francis wants a compromise with Beijing that would reconcile China’s underground Catholic Church, loyal to Rome, with the Communist-dominated “patriotic” Catholic Church. Such a reconciliation, if accomplished, would require the church to explicitly cede a share of its authority to appoint bishops to the Politburo — a concession familiar from medieval church-state tangles, but something the modern church has tried to leave behind.
A truce with Beijing would differ from the truce with the sexual revolution in that no specific doctrinal issue is at stake, and no one doubts that the pope has authority to conclude a concordat with a heretofore hostile and persecuting regime. Indeed he is building on diplomatic efforts by his predecessors, though both of them declined to take the fraught step to a formal deal.
But the two truces are similar in that both would accelerate Catholicism’s transformation into a confederation of national churches — liberal and semi-Protestantized in northern Europe, conservative in sub-Saharan Africa, Communist-supervised in China. They are similar in that both treat the concerns of many faithful Catholics — conservative believers in the West, underground churchgoers in China — as roadblocks to the pope’s grand strategy. They are similar in that both have raised the specter of schism by pitting cardinals against cardinals and sometimes against the pope himself.
Above all, the two truces are similar in that they both risk a great deal — in one case, the consistency of Catholic doctrine and its fidelity to Jesus; in another, the clarity of Catholic witness for human dignity — for the sake of reconciling the church with earthly powers. And they take this risk at a time when neither Chinese Communism nor Western liberalism seem exactly like confident, resilient models for the human future — the former sliding back toward totalitarianism, the latter anxious and decadent and beset by populist revolts.
Which means that if these two bets go badly the Francis legacy will be judged harshly — in spite of his charisma, his effect on secular observers, and all the other elements of the “Francis effect.”
The risks of the Chinese gamble are already apparent in the weirdly sycophantic language that Francis’ allies have used toward the Communist regime, and their eagerness to reassure Beijing that unlike, say, American evangelicals, Rome would never take the threatening step of mixing religion and politics.
If current trends continue, China could have one of the world’s largest Christian populations by this century’s end, and this population is already heavily evangelical; indeed the Vatican’s desire for a deal with Beijing is influenced by the fact that a divided Chinese Catholicism is being outcompeted for converts.
But if that deal permanently links the Roman church with a corrupt and fated regime, Francis will have ceded the moral authority earned by persecuted generations, and ceded the Chinese future to those Christian churches, evangelical especially, that are less eager to flatter and cajole their persecutors.
The gamble on an Anglican approach to faith and morals is even more high-risk — as Anglicanism’s own schisms well attest. The pope’s “new paradigm” has defused the immediate threat of schism by maintaining a studious ambiguity whenever challenged. But it will ensure that the church’s factions, already polarized and feuding, grow ever more apart. And it implies a rupture (or, if you favor it, a breakthrough) in the church’s understanding of how its teachings can and cannot change — one less dramatic in immediate effect than the reforms of the Second Vatican Council, but ultimately more far-reaching in its implications for Catholicism.
Francis’ inner circle is convinced that such a revolution is what the Holy Spirit wants — that the attempts by John Paul II and Benedict to maintain continuity between the church before and after Vatican II ended up choking off renewal.
They are right that the John Paul II paradigm was fraught with flaws and tensions; the ease with which Francis has reopened debates that conservatives considered closed has testified to that. But this pope has not just exposed tensions; he has heightened them, encouraging sweeping ambitions among his allies and pushing disillusioned conservatives toward traditionalism. Like certain imprudent medieval popes, Francis has pressed papal authority to its limits — theological this time, not temporal, but no less dangerous for that.
All of this makes for interesting copy for those of us who write about the church. Truces are unsatisfying and instability is exciting and theological civil wars can be worth waging. But there is no sign as yet that Francis’s liberalization is bringing his lapsed-Catholic admirers back to the pews; from Germany to Australia to his native Latin America, the church’s institutional decline continues. And sustaining a for-the-time-being Catholicism, as his immediate predecessors did, is not an achievement to be lightly dismissed. Whereas accelerating division when your office is charged with maintaining unity and continuity is a serious business — especially when the eventual resolution is so bafflingly difficult to envision or predict.
It is wise for Francis’ Catholic critics to temper our presumption, always, by acknowledging the possibility that we are misled or missing something, and that this story could end with this popular pope proven visionary and heroic.
Conservative Catholic wing nut doesn't like Pope Francis. How is this news?
It seems to me that these folks are past their expiration date and should do us all a favor and go quietly to the (metaphorical) grave. Its a bold new world.
Actually, Klinker, the article is a lot more subtle than that, suggesting that the Pope's decentralized approach to institutional controversies is not as effective as reformers would like. I believe that Douthat's forthcoming book will be significant and much discussed, which is why I posted the whole article. Just because the author may be a conservative Catholic doesn't mean that his arguments should be completely dismissed on that basis without considering what he has to say.
Klinker said:
Conservative Catholic wing nut doesn't like Pope Francis. How is this news?
It seems to me that these folks are past their expiration date and should do us all a favor and go quietly to the (metaphorical) grave. Its a bold new world.
Jasmo said:
Actually, Klinker, the article is a lot more subtle than that, suggesting that the Pope's decentralized approach to institutional controversies is not as effective as reformers would like. I believe that Douthat's forthcoming book will be significant and much discussed, which is why I posted the whole article. Just because the author may be a conservative Catholic doesn't mean that his arguments should be completely dismissed on that basis without considering what he has to say.
Klinker said:
Conservative Catholic wing nut doesn't like Pope Francis. How is this news?
It seems to me that these folks are past their expiration date and should do us all a favor and go quietly to the (metaphorical) grave. Its a bold new world.
I wouldn't know since I wouldn't touch his writing with a 10 foot pooper scooper but I sincerely doubt it. To my mind, the guy is just a troll. I have tuned him out because life is just too short.
Jasmo
Mar 16, 2018 at 9:32am Edited
“Actually, the article is a lot more subtle than that, suggesting that the Pope's decentralized approach to institutional controversies is not as effective as reformers would like. I believe that Douthat's forthcoming book will be significant and much discussed, which is why I posted the whole article. Just because the author may be a conservative Catholic doesn't mean that his arguments should be completely dismissed on that basis without considering what he has to say.”
Agree, Jasmo, big gains require bigger risks.
Jasmo said:
Actually, Klinker, the article is a lot more subtle than that, suggesting that the Pope's decentralized approach to institutional controversies is not as effective as reformers would like. I believe that Douthat's forthcoming book will be significant and much discussed, which is why I posted the whole article. Just because the author may be a conservative Catholic doesn't mean that his arguments should be completely dismissed on that basis without considering what he has to say.
Klinker said:
Conservative Catholic wing nut doesn't like Pope Francis. How is this news?
It seems to me that these folks are past their expiration date and should do us all a favor and go quietly to the (metaphorical) grave. Its a bold new world.
The article isn't that much more subtle, imho. The final line is, "But to choose a path that might have only two destinations — hero or heretic — is also an act of presumption, even for a pope." Douthat carelessly tosses off the word "heretic" as if he is ignorant of its true meaning in the context of this topic. He's conflating changes by Pope Francis from past practices, with departures from dogma or doctrine. He's acting a little too "sedevacantist-friendly".
(That's today's vocabulary word: "sedevacantism" - the claim that there's no legitimate Pope at this time)
Columnist Mark Silk of Religion News Service identifies the what Ross Douthat suffers from
It’s not easy to take issue with Pope Francis for advocating on behalf of poor folks and immigrants, for criticizing unfettered capitalism and urging protection of the planet. His predecessors have been doing those things for a while, if not always so urgently.
Hence the conservative obsession with his decision to allow divorced and remarried Catholics (under certain circumstances) to take Communion. This doctrinal shift has, for those suffering from Francis Derangement Syndrome, acquired the status of heresy
https://www.religionnews.com/2018/03/12/francis-derangement-syndrome-fds/
And (surprise!) Douthat has a new book on theme of which his column is just a taste. A review -
https://www.commonwealmagazine.org/precarious-unity
It is the church’s conservative wing, which ironically has long championed papal authority, that is now up in arms, loudly murmuring “heresy” about this pope’s pastoral program. Yet despite Douthat’s bill of indictment, the Synod on the Family and Francis’s subsequent exhortation, Amoris laetitia, did not change church teaching. Indeed, many of Francis’s critics judged the synod a “defeat” for the pope. But as Douthat himself admits, those outspoken critics are a tiny minority among the world’s bishops. This pope, by most measures, is popular and admired. A desire for the heavy hand of Rome to be lifted remains widespread. It is true that Francis has urged regional bishops’ conferences to experiment with pastoral solutions to local problems, including Communion for the divorced and remarried. But the devolution of authority from Rome to local churches was called for by Vatican II, and repeatedly stymied by both John Paul II and Benedict. Douthat believes regional diversity will threaten church unity. At the same time, however, he recognizes that the obsessive modern focus on the papacy has been an obstacle to the renewal the council hoped to bring about. He concedes that historically “the church in ages of crisis and torpor alike has again and again found renewal from below.” What he is unwilling to concede is that Francis’s effort to decentralize church authority, to give a real measure of decision-making to local churches, is an attempt to make space precisely for that “renewal.”
I am happy to read new posts on this thread that offer analysis, rather than disrespect. Thank you.
My husband is under hospice care now at home, so I am not able to keep up with the Vatican — or Washington news for that matter 
.
mtierney said:
My husband is under hospice care now at home,
I hope your husband finds comfort and solace.
There was an interesting article in the Times this week about (among other things) how Archconservative Timothy Dolan is trying to torpedo efforts in New York to extend the statute of limitations for sexual assault.
Leaving aside the question of whether institutions should be rewarded with immunity for conspiring to obstruct justice, you really have to wonder about the soul of a man who would put institutional finances ahead of Justice. Like a curry fart in a poorly ventilated elevator, the failed papacy of Cardinal Ratzinger continues to pollute the Archdiocese of New York. Perhaps Pope Francis should do something about that.
Timely survey, with much to ponder at Easter (whichever style of Christian one is)
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-03-26/one-in-four-churchgoers-domestic-abuse-research/9586582
mtierney said:
The Pope continues to fascinate....
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/24/opinion/sunday/francis-the-anti-strongman.html?rref=collection%2Fissuecollection%2Ftodays-new-york-times
I was glad to see the NY Times run that piece. It's a good counterpoint to that terrible Ross Douthat column they featured the week before (cited earlier in this thread).
The Pope's homily yesterday shows he is not a "hey you kids get off my lawn" kind of guy -
The temptation to silence young people has always existed. The Pharisees themselves rebuke Jesus and ask him to silence them.
There are many ways to silence young people and make them invisible. Many ways to anaesthetize them, to make them keep quiet, ask nothing, question nothing. “Keep quiet, you!” There are many ways to sedate them, to keep them from getting involved, to make their dreams flat and dreary, petty and plaintive.
On this Palm Sunday, as we celebrate World Youth Day, we do well to hear Jesus’ answer to all those Pharisees past and present, even the ones of today: “If these were silent, the very stones would cry out” (Lk 19:40).
Dear young people, you have it in you to shout. It is up to you to opt for Sunday’s “Hosanna!”, so as not to fall into Friday’s “Crucify him!”... It is up to you not to keep quiet. Even if others keep quiet, if we older people and leaders – so often corrupt – keep quiet, if the whole world keeps quiet and loses its joy, I ask you: Will you cry out?
Thanks for that link, Nohero
Sr. Jean v Father Rob — may the best prayer win. 
This promises to be such an interesting conference!
http://www.womensordination.org/2018/03/15/francis-after-five-a-feminist-review/
"When somebody has an answer for every question, it is a sign that they are not on the right road. They may well be false prophets, who use religion for their own purposes, to promote their own psychological or intellectual theories."
- Pope Francis, "Gaudete et Exsultate", his latest Apostolic Exhortation, released today.
Link for the whole thing: http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/apost_exhortations/documents/papa-francesco_esortazione-ap_20180319_gaudete-et-exsultate.html
Link to Fr. James Martin on "Top Five Takeaways from ‘Gaudete et Exsultate’": https://www.americamagazine.org/faith/2018/04/09/top-five-takeaways-gaudete-et-exsultate
Just announced hours ago: http://www.latercera.com/nacional/noticia/papa-francisco-anuncia-se-reunira-victimas-entrevistadas-la-mision-scicluna-chile/130473/ for those who read Spanish. Gotta run.
Here is the story in the BBC: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-43733572
There is an interesting review of the Douthat book in the Sunday Times. Paul Elie is polite but he concludes that Douthat is a hyperbolic mysogynist given to seeing dastardly plots in the most benign of conversations.
A Conservative Catholic Begs the Pope: Lead Us Not Into Temptation
I'm watching The keepers on netflix. I'm only haif way through it. It's a very disturbing documentary about years later, a private investigation of a nun who was murdered for confronting priests that were abusing young girls. Anyone else watching? It's unbelievable how naive we all were and to some extent still are.
One of the saddest things is the way the Church tried to blame the victims. The idea that altar boys were seducing priests was pushed very hard by the leadership and still persists today in some quarters.
There is an article in the Times today on the experience of the children in one town in Australia . The following passage stood out to me.
About 45 victims were estimated to have committed suicide, prompting an outpouring of grief from once devout Catholic parents who said the church robbed them of their sons.
Today, survivors speak of broken marriages, children being raised without fathers, lives spent in a haze of drugs and alcohol or in and out of institutional care.
The damage done to these children will continue to reverberate for decades, even if the Church can find some way to end the abuse.
Australian Mining Town Breaks Its Silence About Grim Past of Sexual Abuse
oneofthegirls said:
Yes klinker, the boys and girls.
Boys and girls. Absolutely.
Sponsored Business
Promote your business here - Businesses get highlighted throughout the site and you can add a deal.
Featured Events
Advertisement
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/12/theater/sistine-chapel-ultimate-judgment.html?rref=collection%2Fissuecollection%2Ftodays-new-york-times
Chapel was stunning even when we visited it during its restoration!