News Flash: Pope Francis Makes News for Doing the Ordinary, First in a Series

Pope Francis made news this weekend by doing what thousands of priests around the world do all the time; he regularized the marriages of 20 couples at the Vatican. Some of the couples were in traditional situations, meaning that they were attempting marriage for the first time and weren't cohabitating ahead of the ceremony. Others were married civilly, had had annulments or were living with their partner before approaching the altar. This may come as a shock to many none Catholics, and to even a few of the baptized, but normalizing these types of irregular arrangements is what the Church does. We do it on the parish level all the time. I would say that a healthy percentage of the weddings that I've done fall into these categories. This is yet another case of the Pope making news for doing the routine.

I will not deny the symbolic nature of the Holy Father's actions. The pope, in his day to day duties, doesn't do things like weddings and baptisms. He is not a "super" parish priest. His roles are primarily those of teaching and governance. So when he does go out of his way to perform these "mundane" tasks they become a teaching opportunity for the Church and the world. Are there still local pastors who would turn away such irregular cases, especially those couples who are living with each other out of wedlock? Sure: so a clear message is being sent that the pastoral approach, not the legal approach, should be the default. 

But it doesn't change the fact that what Pope Francis did over the weekend is very much in line with the standard practice of the Church, especially in Latin America where he comes from; a region in which many countries demand that a separate civil ceremony take place before the religious one. There can be a lag time of weeks, months and quite often years between civil and Church weddings, for various reasons. So, these are not new waters for our Argentine pontiff.

I'm not sure how the Holy Father approached the situation, but I can tell you how many priests handle cohabitating couples. Some priests might refuse to do the wedding unless they separate, most encourage them to move apart but don't make it a prerequisite for getting married. We encourage abstinence before the wedding. When they go to confession before the wedding, as all couples should no matter their situation, I always make abstinence a part of the penance. I understand; telling people that they shouldn't sin isn't really a proper penance, but by incorporating into the Sacrament of Reconciliation it stresses the importance of what they are entering into. I've never had anyone object, and I'm often thanked. Are there priests who ask no questions and give tacit approval to people living in sin (let's not be afraid to call it what it is): again, sure. But they're really not helping the couple reconcile properly with he community or grow in their personal relationship with Christ.

As for the couples who were divorced, either after a sacramental or civil marriage, I'm sure the proper canonical processes were observed to make sure that they were free to marry in the Church.

In spite of the fact that what the Pope did was so ordinary, there were still reactions from secular news sources proclaiming the novelty of it all, exemplified by this snippet from a Reuters report:


"Francis, who is the first non-European pope in 1,300 years, has expressed tolerance regarding other topics that are traditionally taboo in the Church, asking 'who am I to judge?' a gay person 'who seeks God and has good will'.

His approach contrasts with that of his predecessor, the German Pope Benedict, who said that threats to the traditional family undermined the future of humanity itself."

The now famous line, "Who am I to judge," really deserves it's own post because it's been so misinterpreted, in part because it's been removed from the context of the question Francis was asked and the relatively lengthy answer he gave, and the willful ignorance of the media in reporting it. But following the line, yet again trying to contrast Francis with the Pope Emeritus, is particularly shameful, and I will address it here now.

To suggest that the actions of Pope Francis over the weekend, or in his papacy up to now, are some sort of repudiation of his predecessor is absurd. Can we see a change of style or of emphasis?; without a doubt. But before we get too ahead of ourselves let's remember that in June it was reported that the Holy Father, while addressing a charismatic convention, said that:

"'Married couples are sinners just like everyone else, but they want to continue with love, in all its fecundity. They continue in the faith, bearing children.' ... 'Let us pray to the Lord and ask him to protect the family in the crisis with which the devil wants to destroy it,” the Pope said. 'Families are the domestic church where Jesus grows in the love of a married couple, in the lives of their children. This is why the devil attacks the family so much,' Francis explained. 'The devil doesn’t want it and tries to destroy it. The devil tries to make love disappear from there.”'

Wow, the Devil is trying to destroy the family? Bearing children is central to married love? Doesn't sound like someone trying to redefine marriage, or who believes that recent social changes effecting the family represent an unqualified good.

There has been much debate in recent months about Francis' position on gay marriage, with some suggesting that he supports or could tolerate gay civil unions. But as Archbishop of Buenos Aires his opposition to gay marriage was called "medieval" by that county's president, and he's been quoted as saying that the idea of gay marriage represents an "anthropological regression." Again, a far cry from the feel good message disseminated by the main stream press.

In all this mangling of the Pope's words and actions we lose the fact that he really is doing something new. But it has nothing to do with changing doctrines or disciplines. It has to do with getting back to the heart of the Gospel, and understanding that policies and disciplines are there to help us live as more faithful disciples of Jesus; they are not to be simply followed for their own sake. He has said that we can't be afraid of change, and that we should have the courage to change structures, policies, and even disciplines if they no longer help us in following Christ faithfully, and in spreading the Gospel to the nations.

This last part is the key. If there is a change the Pope is trying to effect it is to move the Church from maintenance mode to mission mode. The Church doesn't exist to be a self sustaining institution but to be the herald of the Good News. What that means I'll get into in the next post.

Francis represents a change of tone from his predecessors, to be sure, but not a change of doctrine. If we look at the words of both Benedict and Francis we will see convergence in mind while a difference in tone. One is a theologian, the other is a pastor. One teaches what we believe the other shows us how it's lived in practice. Unfortunately there are many reporting the news who can't, or refuse, to see the difference.

Part two of this post will cover the famous "Who am I to judge?" quote, and the mission of the Church to reach out to the peripheries.