|
Cardinal Brogoglio in prayer with a
Jewish community in Buenos Aires
|
At dinner this evening a friend of mine, an Augustinian friar,
confessed that when he heard Pope Francis tell us why he chose the name, that
he, the normally machismo-driven Augustinian, was in tears hearing Pope Francis
say that after his election Cardinal Hummes’ words i poveri, i poveri, ricorda i poveri (the poor, the poor, remember the
poor) kept echoing in his thoughts motivating him to take the never-before-used
papal name of Francis. The new Pope went
on to say that he wants to see a “poor Church for the poor.” This is a tall order and its implications can
be drastic. It must be remembered that
Jorge Brogoglio not only is a Jesuit
with strong ties to his order—an order known for its social programmes—but that
he was appointed provincial (or regional superior) of the Jesuits in Argentina
by Father Pedro Arrupe, the General Superior of the Order who so radically changed
the course of direction for the Society of Jesus in the Vatican II years. Unlike some orders, the Jesuits do not elect
their provincial superiors—they are appointed by the General Superior in
Rome. Conservatives attribute the
radicalism of the Society to Arrupe’s tenure because of his determination to
put the resources of the Society at the service of the poor. Will Pope Francis
put the resources of the Church at the service of the poor—only time will
tell.
So far the new Pope has captured the imagination not only of the world’s
Catholics but of large numbers of the worlds’ peoples. The Dalai Lama congratulated him on his
election and commended the Pope for choosing the name Francis. The symbolism of this name is not being
lost.
Conservatives, or at least the more rabid among them, on the other hand, are in
a panic over the vision being set by the new papacy. There are all sorts of reservations being
expressed about the new pope and his vision for the Church. Perhaps it is Marielena Montesino de Stuart,
a conservative Catholic columnist who writes for the blog Renew America who best demonstrates the panic. Here is a
link to her posting.
Ms. Montesino de Stuart’s complaints can be summed up in the list
of arguments traditionally used by the integrists to denounce the Second
Vatican Council. She deplores Pope
Francis’ history of ecumenism and inter-religious dialogue, his favoring
liturgical development rather than returning to the pre-conciliar rites, and particularly his involvement
in social justice. She accuses him of
being unnecessarily crude in his language, weak on condemning same-sex
marriage, and not committed to the protection of life for the unborn. She
thinks he is a phony and his simplicity of life is an Public Relations act. Her blog links to a video showing a very
vibrant Mass for the Argentine youth presided over by the then Cardinal
Brogoglio and she is horrified how such liturgies corrupt the faith of the
young.
What is it that Ms. Montesino de Stuart and others on her bandwagon really
upset about?
Cardinal Avery Dulles, another Jesuit, wrote that the first
thousand years of the Church, the papacy stood for witness; the second
thousand, power; the third thousand will be service. In other words we are just at the point where
the fundamental ground on which we stand as a Church is shifting from power to
service. The Church’s tectonic plates
have slowly been shifting since the collapse of the ancien regime and beginning with such figures as John Henry Newman
and Leo XIII the Church has begun to adjust itself to a new model. It has been a long and slow shift but it
began to pick up some speed of sliding into the third millennium with the
Second Vatican Council, the reforms of Paul VI, and the social encyclicals of
Popes John XXIII, Paul VI, and John Paul II.
Nevertheless, like in typical earthquakes, the ground slides both
forward and backward. There was some
backsliding during the last two papacies giving hope to the triumphalist party
(represented in the American Church by such figures as Cardinal Burke, Cardinal
Law, Archbishop Cordileone, Bishop Olmstead, Bishop Dewane, Bishop Slattery et
al) that the scales were tipping back in favor of the power model. The election and style of the new pope marks
a significant—very significant—shift now towards the service model. We will see if Pope Francis lives up to his
past and to the expectations it has created (he won’t be taking the 287 over to
St Mary Major’s even if he wants to) but it is frightening, nonetheless, to those who want to restore the
magnificence of previous eras. Nothing, however, will give more credibility
to the Church than a pope for the poor except, perhaps, that his example be
embraced by the clergy beneath him and the people they serve. So Ms Montesino de Stuart, we expect you and
others who miss the world of monarchy and privilege to keep up your whining
while the rest of us get on with a revived enthusiasm for the Gospel.
No comments:
Post a Comment