#405: New Pope Promotes “Global Warming”

A profile of the impact Pope Francis is having in the land once called “the Oldest Daughter of the Church.”

Six months after the election of Pope Francis, I was curious to explore the reaction of non-American Catholics.  And since my best access to church people outside the U.S. is in France, French Catholics (and even non-Catholics) where my best option.

During two weeks in mid October, I interviewed roughly 20 people.  They included one bishop, six priests, four practicing Catholics, five non-practicing Catholics, a Protestant, a few non-observant Muslims (one of whom is a product of Catholic schools), and even a self-professed atheist.

What emerged was a rather complex but remarkably consistent image of a pope who has quite suddenly raised hopes (and also questions) among a wide range of French people.  And the periodicals I consulted confirmed the sense that Francis has ushered in a sudden climate change in the Catholic world that is already touching the world at large.

The very first person I interviewed spoke for all that followed by declaring herself perfectly satisfied to see a non-European elected pope.  “The only good European choice was another Jesuit, Carlo Maria Martini [former Archbishop of Milan], but it was too late for him [he died in August 2012].  This man seems to have the same kind of open spirit.” She said this even though Martini was famously progressive, not a word usually applied so far to Francis.

The bishop I spoke with declared that, despite the world’s reaction, Francis’ election was no surprise.  “After all,” he reminded me, “he finished second in the balloting in 2005.” He also took time, as did many I spoke with, to comment on Pope Benedict XVI’s resignation.

“He had the courage necessary to resign,” said the bishop, who had spent several hours with Benedict in Rome only a year ago.  He told me that Benedict had seen the effect of John-Paul II’s staying on too long, had watched the ailing pope lose control of church governance to a curia in bad need of reform.  He knew he himself was not a governor by nature, and that the job required too much for him.

The bishop was convinced, moreover, the Benedict’s resignation will become a precedent, so that future popes will routinely retire, thus opening the door to younger candidates.

Francis, the bishop thinks, is returning the Church to the renewal-and-reform agenda of Pope Paul VI, and doing it in the style of John XXIII.  As for the future, he said: “We will see if the body follows the head”-- observing that many Bishops do not share the general public’s enthusiasm for Francis.  (Just this week, of course, one German bishop was removed due to his lavish lifestyle.  No doubt many other Bishops are feeling nervous about their own excesses.)

Many others echoed these views.  A non-practicing couple said that Benedict had been “too austere,” and they found Francis “warmer” and especially liked his distaste for ornate institutional formalities.  But they wondered if he can do the job needed.

The young Arab I interviewed (Muslim by heritage but Catholic in schooling) was convinced that Benedict could not deal with the multiple crises facing him: scandal, leaks, the Vatican bank, corruption, and rampant careerism at virtually all levels.  He thought that Francis’ election came “just in time” since much needs changing.  Francis strike him as a “peoples’ pope” with the advantage of third world roots.  He noted the symbolic power of the pope washing the feet of prisoners and women, and expressed some confidence that, if Francis alters the tone of Catholic leadership and makes reforms, that will mean real progress even without any doctrinal changes.  “The Catholic church moves through history very slowly,” he noted, “step by step.”

One non-practicing woman told me that she has already noticed how popular Francis is among French people.  “He has definitely changed the PR image of the Church, for the better.”

Next I interviewed a very devout older woman who began by saying how much she had liked Benedict, and how much she admired a resignation that was “wise, courageous, and well-time--especially compared to John-Paul II.” But she also detected an “immediate shift in tone” when the newly-elected Francis asked the crowd to bless him, when he refused some ceremonial garb, and when he refused to live in the papal apartments.  She found his words, such as his comment on homosexuals, to offer a fresh take on Catholic tradition that she considered “a good thing for the Church”--especially beyond Europe.

A group of parish priests just outside Paris had less to say.  The consensus was that French people generally saw Francis’ election and performance as “good news”, but they also knew of some “extremists” (mostly traditionalist Catholics) worried about possible changes in liturgy.

An older, practicing couple observed that there had not been a lot of news coverage of Francis in the French media, at least not compared to the coverage that John-Paul II had received.  But, they added, “all the news has been good news”--unlike the bad press Benedict had received.

A priest I have known for more than 15 years confirmed that Francis has received consistently good press, even in the non-Christian media.  “And they never give us any gifts!” he observed--suggesting that Francis has made a genuinely good impression on secular journalists who are otherwise prone to skepticism in their coverage of the Church.

Right from the start, this priest said, Francis “broke through the screen” like a movie character bursting into the audience, so that people were approaching my priest friend with favorable comments right from day one.

     This priest agreed that Benedict's resignation was a reaction to John-Paul II’s long demise.  “The last time I saw John-Paul II in Rome,” he told me, “he was long gone.” He regarded the resignation a mark of Benedict’s “honesty and integrity.” He hoped it would become the precedent for future popes but, unlike the bishop I spoke with, he was not sure--and insisted that no one was.

Like some others, he personally agreed that Francis’ manner and priorities echoed the papacy of John XXIII more than anyone else, and for him this was reason to hope that the legacy of Vatican II could be recovered and preserved.

Two evenings later, at a large social gathering, a man approached me to ask what Americans thought of the new pope, and then offered his own view: “I think he’s going to be the bishop of all the poor--and I think that is a good thing!”

On my last day, I spoke with a self-proclaimed “atheist” (later he re-labeled himself “agnostic”) who offered his opinion of the new pope without being asked.  Francis, he said, was creating a fresh impression of openness and reform--just like John XXIII had done at Vatican II.  Given that this man was not a Christian, and also not old enough to remember John XXIII personally, I took his opinion to reflect a historical awareness rare among most Catholics--and a broad sense of what this new papacy promises.

All in all, The French seem happy and impressed with Francis and relieved to get beyond John-Paul II and Benedict. For them, it feels like a new season of warmth after a long chill. But they are holding their breath—and their judgment—to see what Francis can actually accomplish. Even so, some of them realize that what he has already accomplished—to show the world, by his character and manner and words, the Church’s warm, human, humble face—is a historical achievement all by itself.

Next: what French journalists are saying.

  © Bernard   F. Swain PhD 2013

#404: An Epochal Change?

Pope Francis’ latest interview, with the founder and editor of La Repubblica, provides the clearest and bluntest signals yet about this pope’s vision and agenda. 

Just when I began to fear I had wasted 40 years working in the trenches of a church unwilling to renew itself despite the historic impetus of Vatican Council II (1962-1965), along comes the miraculous election of a pope who begins to proclaim, in a loud global voice, the very things that have gotten me blacklisted and even fired over many years.

A recent example: after a Catholic layperson proposed by visit to his parish to discuss adopting my Fidelis leadership formation program, the pastor checked out my blog.  There he found that I had written this:

After nearly 35 years of Catholic officials obscuring the vision of Vatican Council II, the new pope may already be rescuing its legacy

In reaction, the pastor wrote:

I went to his blog and saw this line. That's all I needed to see. I didn't need to read anything else.…To imply that JPII and Benedict have "obscured" Vatican II makes my blood boil!!!!!!

Of course, I never referenced those two popes.  I referred only to one “Catholic official” by name: Bernard F. Law, who resigned in disgrace as Archbishop of Boston after his role in the sex abuse scandal became public.  For this the pastor accused me of being “heterodox”--something less than an authentic Catholic.

But here is what Francis said when asked about the place of Catholicism in global culture:

Our goal is not to proselytize but to listen to needs, desires and disappointments, despair, hope. We must restore hope to young people, help the old, be open to the future, spread love. Be poor among the poor. We need to include the excluded and preach peace. Vatican II, inspired by Pope Paul VI and John, decided to look to the future with a modern spirit and to be open to modern culture. The Council Fathers knew that being open to modern culture meant religious ecumenism and dialogue with non-believers. But afterwards very little was done in that direction. I have the humility and ambition to want to do something.

Note these words: “But afterwards very little was done in that direction.” In short, Vatican II has not been implemented.

When the interviewer suggested, as I had, that Catholic officialdom was to blame, saying “I think that the institution [of the church] dominates the poor, missionary church that you would like,” Francis replied this way: “In fact, that is the way it is, and in this area you cannot perform miracles.”

Perhaps the pastor I quoted considers this pope heterodox as well? 

That same pastor also decided he could judge me without ever meeting me, saying:

This Swain beaut is NOT to be invited to speak at a group associated with St._____[parish]...Studying heterodoxy as if it were orthodox Catholicism will NOT happen at St._____[parish]under my watch!

I’ve encountered this sort of unprofessional, disrespectful, judgmental, even un-Christian tone time and again over the years—usually but not always from members of the clergy.  To me, such behavior simply does not compute with the role of pastor, which ought to be marked by humility and service.  Instead, in this case we got a name-calling watchdog.  Sadly, I was not shocked.  I have seen it too many times before.

Pope Francis is not shocked either.  When the subject of “narcissism” comes out in the interview, Francis is quick to note the link between narcissism and power:

I don't like the word narcissism…it indicates an excessive love for oneself and this is not good, it can produce serious damage not only to the soul of those affected but also in relationship with others, with the society in which one lives. The real trouble is that those most affected by this  -  which is actually a kind of mental disorder  -  are people who have a lot of power. Often bosses are narcissists.

With the interviewer suggest that “many church leaders have been” narcissists, Francis does not shrink from the truth:

You know what I think about this? Heads of the Church have often been narcissists, flattered and thrilled by their courtiers. The court is the leprosy of the papacy.

No doubt Francis has seen in his own work as archbishop that narcissism also shows up among the lower-level heads of parishes and dioceses.

Of course, whenever I, a life-long layperson, have criticized pastors, priests, or deacons for such behavior, some people have labeled “anti-clerical.”  They mean it as a negative judgment, even a condemnation of my character and good faith.

But Pope Francis makes it seem like a badge of honor.

When he notes that the interviewer is “a non-believer but not anti-clerical,” the interviewer replies: “True, I am not anti-clerical, but I become so when I meet a clericalist.”

Francis then smiles and says:

It also happens to me that when I meet a clericalist, I suddenly become anti-clerical.  Clericalism should not have anything to do with Christianity.

This is not, of course, a case of the pope attacking clergy.  In decrying “clericalism,” he is decrying certain attitudes and behaviors: privilege, arrogance, presumption, paternalism--things that pertain to power, position, and rank, but not to the ministry of a Good Shepherd.  Such things are not conveyed by Holy Orders, but they are nevertheless sometimes adopted by the ordained.

In effect, Pope Francis is calling out the emperor’s new clothes--or, rather, the old trappings of the imperial Church that Catholicism adapted from the Roman Empire.  When he calls Vatican courtiers the “leprosy of the papacy,” he is bluntly naming the rot that has infested too much of Catholic life - - and not just at the Vatican itself.

I would not be human if I did not feel some vindication and even validation in this.  As a child of the 1960s, I chose the Church (rather than politics) as a vehicle for social justice and peace; I brought up my kids in an inner-city “ghetto” so they would live with the poor in a neighborhood more like the rest of the real world than an American suburb; I devoted my work to parish at great sacrifice, and I suffered the petty resentments and punishments of officials too weak to deal with someone like me, who could exert influence without the benefit of rank, office, or Roman collar.

For the last 20 of my 40 years in ministry, it has seemed like the bright promise that the Church held when I started out was being worn away by the inertia of the institution’s power structure.  And as I saw the number of “lapsed” Catholics grow, I knew they had not fallen away--they had been pushed.  This was a discouraging realization, which called into question the years I had invested in Catholic renewal.

Finally, however, we have a leader who speaks the truth: that the institution not only is not always right, but sometimes does active harm to the Church’s own mission.

But the very fact that the “man at the top” sees the problem and claims “the humility and the ambition” to do something about it gives me great hope, both for my own work and for the mission of the Church.

So I find great kinship with the Italian editor who interviewed Francis, a non-believer who nonetheless concluded by saying:

This is Pope Francis.  If the church becomes like him and becomes what he wants it to be, it will be an epochal change.

  © Bernard   F. Swain PhD 2013