Wednesday, March 13, 2013

Viva Il Papa: First Thoughts on Pope Francis



First Impressions:

We were in the middle of our afternoon session at the Provincial Chapter when the white smoke started billowing from the Sistine Chapel chimney (more of us were looking at our laptops and tablets than the presentations going on).  We continued with our meeting for about another twenty minutes before finally adjourning to watch the drama together on TV.  And it really was drama.  This entire interregnum has been strange owing to it coming on the heals of a retirement as opposed to a death.  In spite of the intrigue reported on in the press, there was more of an atmosphere of business men getting together for board meetings rather than a spiritual gathering to choose the next Vicar of Christ.  But once the white smoke started and our eyes were fixed on the loggia doors I felt real suspense for the first time. 

I guess my first thought was that Francis looked a bit overwhelmed.  He looked a bit stiff, a bit old, considering all the talk of the cardinals going for a younger, more physically vibrant figure.   I wondered if we were looking at a compromise candidate or a transitional pope (two in a row?), one who will keep the seat warm until the one they really want matures or else gains the proper support.  Upon a second look at the video I would say that the Holy Father looked a touch more natural than at first viewing. Beyond that, in the few hours since he has become pope I have learned more about the man, and have come to the conclusion that first impressions in this case may be deceiving. 

What's in a Name?

In the past popes often chose their name to honor a predecessor who had helped them along the way to the Chair of Peter, or to show a desire to follow in a particular pope's footsteps.  Since at least John XXIII and Paul VI new popes have tried to say something about the kind of pope they want to be, giving hints as to an agenda they might be trying to follow.  What could the choice of Francis mean?

Before I knew he was a Jesuit, the first thing that popped into my head upon hearing his chosen name was Francis of Assisi.  As Cardinal Archbishop of Buenas Aires he sold the episcopal residence, lived in a simple apartment, took the metro to work (he doesn't own a car) and cooked his own meals.  Someone reminded me of Francis Xavier, the Jesuit missionary saint who traveled to India and Japan, dying on the way to China.  This would show a commitment to the New Evangelization and the priority of spreading the Gospel in a secularized world.

But his action upon going out on the Loggia show a clear link to the founder of the Franciscans.  He wore the white cassock, but without the usual fur lined cape and stole that new pontiffs usually don for their first post election appearance.  He presented a simple figure. He spoke of himself as the Bishop of Rome, who presides in charity over the other churches.  This hearkens back to Ignatius of Antioch, bishop and martyr of the late first, early second century who thus described the Roman church in one of his letters.  Again, a more humble, simple discriptor that points to the roots of the Church.  Could he be pointing to a need for simplify?  A need to get back to the roots of the faith and evangelization?  St. Francis' mission was to rebuild a Church that was falling down because of corruption and scandal.  What is Pope Francis trying to tell us about his choice of name?

Liberal or Conservative?


As Cardinal Jorge Mario Borgoglio, Pope Francis was critical of economic policies in his native Argentina that advanced some in the society while leaving many more in poverty.  In general his has been outspoken criticizing the unjust distribution of wealth and the need for Third World debt forgiveness.  So, he's liberal, no?  Well, he's also called abortion the "death penalty" for the unborn and is a staunch supporter of marriage as a union between one man and one woman.  So, he's conservative, right? 

Pope Francis is the perfect example of why you can't use contemporary political categories to label popes.  In the teachings of any recent pontiff there will be things to both comfort and enrage people on all sides of the political spectrum.  The bottom line is, if you were hoping for sweeping changes on Catholic moral teachings, you are out of luck.  If you are hopping for someone more sympathetic with the cause of social justice and has a clear understanding of liberation theology from the inside, you should be pleased.

Watch Out Curia

As I wrote, Pope Francis stressed his position as Bishop of Rome, and mentioned the need to "evangelize the city."  This is an odd thing to say for the Universal Pastor whose concern is for all the churches.  Could be be making a veiled comment about the state of the Vatican itself?  There was much talk during the sede vacante about the Curia, the Church's Roman bureaucracy, and it's need for reform.  There was a perceived split inside the College of Cardinals between the Curial insiders (who want to maintain the status quo of secrecy, but who also tend to be more liberal doctrinally) and the outsiders from the U.S. and other parts of the world (who want a more transparent Church government, but who also tend to be more conservative on doctrinal issues).  My gut tells me His Holiness is a New World Pope with a desire to streamline the bureaucracy.  Again, in the spirit of Brother Sun, simplify, strip down, keep the Church simple, but agile and responsive to contemporary needs. 

These are my first impressions.  Only time will tell how much is right and how much misses the mark.  Let's pray for Pope Francis, that he may follow the will of God and have the stregnth to lead his flock. 

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

March 15, 2013
Odds are that Pope Francis was teaching heresy at the Jesuit theology classes in Argentine

Father Leonard Feeney was a Jesuit. He said that there is no baptism of desire which is an exception to the literal interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus.The Jesuits dismissed him from the community.Since that time they have been teaching that the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance are physically visible to us.They allege that we can personally know these cases.So for them these cases of the deceased-visible are bonafide exceptions to the dogma on salvation.They are known exceptions to Fr. Leonard Feeney and the Church Councils, popes and saints' interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus.This new version of the dogma with the irrational theory , is being taught at Jesuit universities and seminaries all over the world.

So it is likely that the new pope, a Jesuit professor of theology, was also using the dead man walking and visible theory in this 'development of doctrine'.

As a cardinal in Argentine he would also be known to the present Jesuit Secretary of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Vatican, Cardinal Luis Ladaria S.J. Cardinal Ladaria claims on the Vatican website of the International Theological Commission (ITC) that there are known exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the literal interpretation of Fr.Leonard Feeney.

This error of the Jesuit pope was not corrected by the Society of St.Pius X (SSPX). Since Bishop Richard Williamson as Rector of the SSPX seminary in Argentina also assumed that the baptism of desire was visible and there were known exceptions to the dogma. Neither was it corrected by any of the SSPX members participating in the Vatican-SSPX doctrinal talks.So at universities and seminaries in Argentine too, they could have accepted this 'development of doctrine' based on the irrationality of being able to see the dead alive on earth.

This is iimportant for the SSPX, since it means the new pope will now interpret Vatican Council II (AG 7) as a break with the past and contradicting itself.Ad Gentes 7 (all need faith and baptism for salvation) will contradict Lumen Gentium 16 ( physically visible cases saved in invincible ignorance or a good conscience).

LG 16 will also contradict extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the Syllabus of Errors since our pope believes that those saved in invincible ignorance or a good conscience are explicitly known to us, we can see them in the flesh. So they are known exceptions to Fr.Leonard Feeney's literal interpretation of the dogma and the rest of Tradition.

It would be a break with the past since the pope will be interpreting the Council with the visible-dead theory. A break with the past ? Does that sound familiar ?

Recently Archbishop Gerhard Muller, Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Vatican said those who interpret Vatican Council II as a break with the past are heretical. He was referring to progressives and traditionalists.He could well be referring to our new pope.


This is an error that the pope can correct. He can finally do justice to the Fr.Leonard Feeney case and correct the factual error made by the Jesuits in Boston.It is a fact that the pope nor any of us can physically see the dead on earth.-Lionel Andrades