Learn more about Pope Francis rather than criticize

[JReducation]

I have to ask this question, because it’s been bugging me for weeks. Well, only since the election of Pope Francis. When I sit and listen to priests, brothers, sisters, theologians and apologists speak about this pope, the one thing that comes up in everyone’s mind is that he’s a consecrated religious. He is a Jesuit who is heavily influenced by the Franciscan school of ministry. We don’t speak of him as a Pope without speaking about his roots in the religious life. Because to do so is to take him out of context. When you take someone out of context, you’re not going to understand them and you’re going to miss a lot of the richness that’s there.

God gives to the Church many gifts and one of the greatest gifts that he has given to the Church is the religious life. In Vita Consecrata the Church states that even though the consecrated life is not part of the hierarchy of the Church, it is essential to the life of the Church. It is so essential that is is born in Christ’s life itself. Christ was the first consecrated religious. He lived in community with his Apostles. He lived according to the Evangelical Counsels. He was a servant to all. He was a contemplative. He was a mystic and he was a common laborer. The mission given to him by his Father was his Rule of Life. That’s really beautiful.

However, when people discuss Pope Francis on these forums and other forums on the Internet, they talk about him as if they were speaking about Pope Benedict, John Paul II, John XXIII and so forth. None of those popes were consecrated religious. In fact the popes whom we have had who came to us from the religious life were very revolutionary. Let’s take Clement V. The Benedictine who legalized abdication. Pius V, the Dominican who unified the Roman Rite. Clement XIV, the Franciscan who suppressed the Jesuits, because his order asked him to do so. Those are just some of the religious. The point is that these men brought rather interesting qualities, thoughts, behaviors, customs, changes and gifts to the papacy.

We look at Pope Francis and I don’t see many people on these forums

a. Remember that he’s a religious

b. Remember that he is a Jesuit trained in Ignatian thought and Ignatian pedegogy; therefore, when he speaks he’s going to use that system.

c. Remember the he is a follower of the Franciscan school of ministry, which is very emphatic that voluntary poverty is a means to salvation and necessary if one is to do pastoral care among the voiceless.

d. Remember that he is a consecrated religious who is disciplined in asceticism and trained to live without many things that most people take for granted. When presented with these extras, the immediate reaction of the religious is a question. “Do I really need this?”

e. Remember that every religious, even if he’s a pope, has a duty to his vows. They do not cease to exist.

Why do we take Pope Francis out of context? We do we not factor in that he’s a religious whenever we analyze what he does or say?

 

[po18guy]

Brother JR, you are much more attuned to the structure and functioning of the entire Church, whereas dimbulbs like me are still on the near side of the learning curve. This is why we look forward to your posts/threads. Yet, as you have correctly pointed out, a religious Pope can make a difference because he IS a difference. Rather than promise obedience to a Bishop, he lives down to his vows, which is the Rule for his life. And, being Franciscan influenced, he eschews the luxuries that many aspire to. This is one aspect that you are rightly brining up, and which will likely be delved into as the noise of his election subsides. In fact, it is occurring right here, right now.

 

[Rosella]

No, the Pope is not a religious, strictly speaking.

Priests who belong to religious orders are RELEASED from their order’s particular vows and strictures when/if they are consecrated bishop. They no longer are under obedience to the Superior of their order. As a bishop they report directly to the Holy Father.

You are of course correct that the training, the spiritual practices, or the “philosophy” as it were, of a religious order will be part of that man’s identity. For example, perhaps Pope Francis still practices the Ignatian exercises. However, he is no longer bound to.

 

[10thCrusader]

No, the Pope is not a religious, strictly speaking.

Priests who belong to religious orders are RELEASED from their order’s particular vows and strictures when/if they are consecrated bishop. They no longer are under obedience to the Superior of their order. As a bishop they report directly to the Holy Father.

You are of course correct that the training, the spiritual practices, or the “philosophy” as it were, of a religious order will be part of that man’s identity. For example, perhaps Pope Francis still practices the Ignatian exercises. However, he is no longer bound to.

I believe you are correct on this, and would have definitely been a consideration for Pope Francis when he agreed to accept election.

And I don’t think anyone is ignoring the fact that Pope Francis came from the Jesuit Order. It obviously would have an impact on his spiritual formation.

However, I think there might be a concern about how a few within the order might think that it would accord them undue influence over His Holiness. It might create bad feelings and infighting if he didn’t do their bidding.

I believe this may be why people are downplaying his religious background.

 

[JustaServant]

I believe you are correct on this, and would have definitely been a consideration for Pope Francis when he agreed to accept election.

And I don’t think anyone is ignoring the fact that Pope Francis came from the Jesuit Order. It obviously would have an impact on his spiritual formation.

**However, I think there might be a concern about how a few within the order might think that it would accord them undue influence over His Holiness. It might create bad feelings and infighting if he didn’t do their bidding. **

I believe this may be why people are downplaying his religious background.

Bold mine.
That seriously sounds like something written by a Protestant fundamentalist.
Letsee, the OP is a religious and knows far more than I about such things…
You’re a guy from Canada…
That’s a toughee…

 

[JReducation]

No, the Pope is not a religious, strictly speaking.

Priests who belong to religious orders are RELEASED from their order’s particular vows and strictures when/if they are consecrated bishop. They no longer are under obedience to the Superior of their order. As a bishop they report directly to the Holy Father.

You are of course correct that the training, the spiritual practices, or the “philosophy” as it were, of a religious order will be part of that man’s identity. For example, perhaps Pope Francis still practices the Ignatian exercises. However, he is no longer bound to.

**
Can. 705 A religious raised to the episcopate remains a member of his institute**

A bishop remains a religious. Therefore, the Bishop of Rome remains a Jesuit. He is released from obedience to his major superior. He is not released from his obligations to his vows and to the charism of his order. Pope Francis does not cease to be a Jesuit, he cannot lay aside Jesuit customs, spirituality, worldview, and other characteristics that make him a Jesuit without good reason.

We can get hung up on whether Pope Francis owes obedience to the Superior General of the Jesuits, which would be a waste of time. We know that a pope is the highest ranking major superior of every religious institute, including his own.

But the part that I’m referring to here is the part from which Canon Law does not dispense, probably because the Code of 1917 tried to do so and it did not work. The Code of 1917 said that a religious elevated to the episcopacy ceased to be a religious. In theory that was fine. He was no longer in vows. In reality, it never worked. You can’t take Ignatius out of the Jesuit, Francis out of the Franciscan, or Dominic out of the Dominican. For this reason, Pope Paul VI change the code to say that a bishop remains a member of his religious institute and Pope John Paul II promulgated it in 1983.

If we do not factor this into who he is, much of what he does, how he does it, what he says and how he teaches his going to leave us confused or annoyed. This is the usual result when you look at a person out of his context.

Pope Francis will never be any less of a Jesuit than I am a Franciscan. Even if I did not owe obedience to my community, legalities are the least important thing here. That dispensation is granted for practical reasons. It frees the bishop to govern without having to submit to a superior who may attempt to abuse his power over the bishop. We understand this and it makes sense.

Now, will Pope Francis remain obedient to Ignatius? Yes. Does he have a moral duty to obey Ignatius? Yes, because the law says that he remains a member of the order that Ignatius founded. Remaining a member is more than just the right to sign SJ after his name or wearing the order’s habit, if they had one. Remaining a member means that you remain a son of the founder, a follower of that school of thought, and maintain an ongoing fraternal relationship with the community. That’s the pope’s side of the equation.

Our side of the equation is that we must understand the Jesuit charism. For example, those who are alarmed because the Holy Father lives in a small suite in a hotel would not be so alarmed if they understood that for a Jesuit, the idea of having more space than he knows what to do with is not something that is common. His immediate reaction is, “What do I do with this much space?”

The folks who are upset because he does not wear the pontifical garments would probably feel more comfortable if they knew that from the time that they enter as aspirants until they make solemn vows 12 years later, Jesuits are trained to blend in with the common man. For this reason, they never had a habit. Instead, they wore whatever the diocesan clergy in the region wears.

People may be less upset over the feet washing, if they understood that the Jesuits are very used to having a dispensation from almost every canon that binds other religious. These dispensations are often granted to individual Jesuits, to houses, provinces or to the entire order, depending on the need. This was an arrangement that Ignatius made with the papacy when the order was erected as a pontifical institute. Also, the Jesuits are exempt religious as individuals and as a community. There are points in law that do not bind them or from which they can easily be excused. For example, the Jesuits are excused from praying the Divine Office in choir, even though the law says that all religious in solemn vows (only) must pray the office in community.

When such a man becomes a pope, the idea of dispensing the with a regulation for what he perceives to be a higher good is not out of the question, because he comes from a culture where they’re always asking for indults and dispensations or are granted them without asking. The Church understands that this is part of the Right of Exemption and when exemptions are requested, the Church easily grants them. A pope has no one to whom he can apply for an exemption. He grants it to himself. Again, the idea of an exemption is not new to him, because he comes from background where exemptions are the norm.

The same is true of his preaching. If one listens very carefully, Pope Francis’ homilies, those which he actually constructs, follow Jesuit pedagoy. We see this a lot when he speaks without a script.

Finally, I have to add that Jesuits, though very well educated, are also very simple men. They live very simply and they are very focused rather than attend to too many things at one time. Their formation is very military. And their daily life is guided by the exercises.

Again, if we take the man out of context, we’re going to be confused. Since most of us are not experts in the Jesuit charism, we’ll be learning by observation, unless we want to read about it.

 

[Mary_LA]

Perhaps because I have been involved with the lay Ignatian movement CLC, much of what Francis has said seems of a piece with his Jesuit and Ignatian formation, charism and past, a man steeped in the dynamics of the Spiritual Exercises, attuned to choice and discernment. It is a plus, a positive value, not something to be ‘transcended’ or distrusted.

The deep Franciscan orientation of the new Pope surprised me a little at first but I don’t really think anyone can be Catholic (or even Christian) and not respond to St Francis of Assisi. His impact and enduring influence is found right across religious orders and movements in Catholicism. St Francis for me is the most ‘Christlike’ of all our saints…

 

[Usige]

I think it is less that people ignore that the Holy Father is religious as it is not knowing what that truly means. The religious in my experience are so far removed from the majority of the laity that it is understandable that we don’t see his word and actions in light of his background. How are people to understand what they have never encountered? Its reminded me of a picture of a moth taken under UV light. Under UV it had these beautifully patterned wings, but under visible light it was a fairly uniform brown. Are we at fault for not noticing or even thinking about what something looks like in UV when it is not part of our living experience?

I attended a Jesuit university and interacted with exactly two priest the whole time. One was Russian Orthodox and the other a Jesuit. That limited exposure would never have told me anything about Jesuits being exempt from those areas you mention. So when Pope Francis includes 2 women in the washing of the feet, my first thought isn’t towards “hmm… I bet that is a Franciscan pastoral approach.” Instead my first thought like many others is “yep another tradition out the window; wonder what’s next.”

I fully understand what you are saying, but I don’t expect that people are just going to start thinking of things from a religious standpoint simply because a Jesuit now sits in the chair of St Peter.

 

[Cat]

I agree with several others who have posted so far.

The reason people ignore that Pope Francis comes from a religious tradition has to do with a lack of education about the difference between religious and secular priests, and a misunderstanding about whether or not a pope ceases to be a “religious” when he is ordained a bishop.

My parish and diocese provided me (and still does provide me) with excellent catechesis. Even though I am a convert from Evangelical Protestantism, I am pretty knowledgeable about Catholic history and theology. I’ve read and studied the Bible and the Catechism, and I continue to attend a Catholic study group to learn more. And I read, and if possible, I attend Catholic retreats, seminars, and conferences. Whenever I take those online “Catholic” quizzes, I usually score 100% or close to it. I know my faith and my Church.

But JR, until I started reading your posts, I knew NOTHING about “religious life,” even though for two years, I played piano for Masses at our local Italian parish in which Franciscan friars preside. It just isn’t a topic that ever comes up. Priests don’t do homilies explaining the fine points of religious life, and it’s not a “Bible study topic.” Perhaps some youth meetings discuss religious life, but I’m not a youth (at least in age).

It’s really too bad. We constantly pray for vocations to the priesthood and religious life, but Catholics in the U.S. know nothing about religious life other than what we learned on Oprah when she had that great show about the Dominican sisters in Michigan! (The Mother Superior is never without her Blackberry! )

That’s pretty pathetic, and it’s no wonder young men and young women are not hearing the calls to the religious life. If I knew nothing about something, then I probably wouldn’t recognize a call to that “nothing!” In the U.S., most of us stay far away from things that we know nothing about!

**So it seems to me that one of the best things that could happen under Pope Francis is a huge increase in catechesis among the laity about religious life in the Church. **

 

[triumphguy]

No, the Pope is not a religious, strictly speaking.

Priests who belong to religious orders are RELEASED from their order’s particular vows and strictures when/if they are consecrated bishop. They no longer are under obedience to the Superior of their order. As a bishop they report directly to the Holy Father.

You are of course correct that the training, the spiritual practices, or the “philosophy” as it were, of a religious order will be part of that man’s identity. For example, perhaps Pope Francis still practices the Ignatian exercises. However, he is no longer bound to.

What is the source for your information?
Cardinal O’Malley is a still a Capuchin is he not?

(edited… I should have read the whole thread.)

 

[JustaServant]

…

BTW, one more thing.
It’s your perogative to go on the Boil Forum and report mod actions, it ain’t here so you won’t get slammed. But at least show a grain of decency and not lie.
You said I and others here are:

doing the happy-dance about the demise of the EF

Please find the post where I am

doing the happy-dance about the demise of the EF

.
Back to the topic.

 

[JReducation]

What is the source for your information?
Cardinal O’Malley is a still a Capuchin is he not?

I think that some people, especially if they’re not directly affected by it, do not understand that canon. That’s why I took out the first sentence and just posted that. When you read the entire canon, it goes into legal matters concerning simple and solemn vows that the average layman and secular priest have no idea what it means. To that person, the first sentence, which is key, “A religious raised to the episcopate remains a member of his institute” is so tiny compared to all of the legal mumble jumble that it goes into regarding the different types of vows that we make and the difference between orders and congregations.

 

[FreciaMarie]

I, too, am mostly ignorant of those within religious communities, but feel as though I have an advantage in finding my comfort zone with our Holy Father- I mentioned to the sister who runs our adult faith formation that the way Pope Francis has presented himself reminds me so very much of my pastor, to which she replied, “That’s because his entire priestly formation was with the Jesuits, in El Salvador. They definitely have a similar outlook.” My pastor is the single most orthodox, reflective and deeply spiritual priest I’ve ever known, and he often has unusual perspectives on things…and he’s not Jesuit- he’s diocesan, but heavily influenced by Jesuits. I have to imagine that Pope Francis is like an amplified version of my own Fr. Guillermo and I am very happy with that thought.

 

[triumphguy]

I think that some people, especially if they’re not directly affected by it, do not understand that canon. That’s why I took out the first sentence and just posted that. When you read the entire canon, it goes into legal matters concerning simple and solemn vows that the average layman and secular priest have no idea what it means. To that person, the first sentence, which is key, “A religious raised to the episcopate remains a member of his institute” is so tiny compared to all of the legal mumble jumble that it goes into regarding the different types of vows that we make and the difference between orders and congregations.

Good point.

Bro JR do you think that Vatican II has made it “easier” to elect a religious as Pontiff?

And that with Pope Francis religious will be called back more radically to their roots (radex - radical and root coming from the same “root”)

 

[JReducation]

The key to understanding our new pope is going to be to keep him in context.

1. His theology and methodology is very grounded in the Exercises. His ministry is very Franciscan.
2. He’s not European. He’s South American. This is one of the problems that we in the USA and Canada have. Our assumption is that if you’re last name is Italian, because your parents or grandparents were Italian, then you’re Italian. But it does not work the same way in South America. Their focus is on their national culture. He could be the son of Italian immigrants whose only contact with European culture was his two languages: Spanish and Italian. It’s very interesting, because he does not refer to himself as Italian, but as Argentinian. That’s another piece of his context.
3. He’s the first pope ordained after Vatican II. He’s from a completely different generation, even though he and pope Benedict are only about 10 years apart, they are worlds apart. The comparison is not fair to either one.

Unless we keep him in context, we’re going to get the same impression that Usige so succinctly said, "“yep another tradition out the window; wonder what’s next.”

In reality, what I’ve seen so far is the Roman tradition being replaced by the Ignatian/Franciscan tradition here and there, not totally either. This may be a very good thing for the Church, even though it will take time for people to get comfortable. Since he does not come from the Roman tradition, he does not have the Vatican baggage either.

 

[JReducation]

Good point.

Bro JR do you think that Vatican II has made it “easier” to elect a religious as Pontiff?

I wouldn’t say Vatican II. I certainly will say that we’re going to see more. We’re not going to have to wait 200 years. Popes John Paul and Benedict stacked the deck of bishops with religious. I have been noticing in the Vatican Information Service, when they tell you that the pope named this one or that one a bishop, that the number of religious is very high compared to the past. Of course, bishops become cardinals and one will be pope. Right now there are more than 20 Franciscan bishops, two of them are cardinals. The Benedictines are coming in neck and neck, with Dominicans and Oblates right behind them. These are the orders that have more than 10 bishops. Then there is the single Salesian here, Holy Spirit Father there, Passionist over here and so forth.

And that with Pope Francis religious will be called back more radically to their roots (radex - radical and root coming from the same “root”)

I think that for male religious, the Pope is (if you’ll pardon the expression) an “In your face” kind of religious. In other words, he does not disguise the fact. He coat of arms says Jesuit all over it. His manner of dress and his style is Jesuit. His fidelity to St. Ignatius is very evident to those who know how to read the tea leaves as I like to call it. It’s hard to be a male religious and not notice how the pope is very clearly a religious and for the moment, it appears that he has no plans of being a very formal pope. I suspect that he will end of being like St. Bonaventure and St. Pius V.

St. Bonaventure was never a pope. He was the cardinal who hung the red hat on a tree branch and refused to wear it. When they did his portrait, they had to paint it in so as not to scandalize. He refused to wear anything other than his habit or be called anything other than Brother Bonaventure. He signed everything as Brother Bonaventure.

Then St. Pius was very much the Dominican Friar who gave the papacy the off-white cassock based on his off-white Dominican habit. He wouldn’t wear anything else. When he consolidated the liturgy for the Roman Rite, like a good Dominican, he left the Dominican Rite in place and even though the Franciscans did not have a rite, they had their own way of celebrating the mass. St. Pius did not impose the Tridentine form on them. It was up to the superiors to do that, if they so chose to do.

I can see Pope Francis being like these men, very faithful to his Jesuit culture as they were faithful to their Dominican and Franciscan cultures. This fidelity on his part, will convict the rest of us. I know that it has started working on me. :yup:

 

[Marie5890]

I can see Pope Francis being like these men, very faithful to his Jesuit culture as they were faithful to their Dominican and Franciscan cultures. This fidelity on his part, will convict the rest of us. I know that it has started working on me. :yup:

It’s interesting you put it this way. Clearly I am not a religious, but watching Pope Francis’ fidelity to his Jesuit culture has inspired me to be be more “convicted” (since that is the word you used) in the gifts God has given to me.

Sometime I hide them, fearful of others misunderstanding, or even ridicule me. Sometime I hold back because I am not sure “how” to share them, how to use them etc. Or even how to explain them.

But I know I have them. I know that they clearly gifts from God.
I know the Lord will Shepard me when it comes to them. But Pope Francis’s example of living “Do not be afraid” (in the case of being soo very different and even “counter-cultural” from the “norm” of what even the every day devout Catholic may expect) has me repeating “Do not be afraid of being different from the norm, different from what others are expecting of you”

Hope this makes sense.

 

[Marie5890]

It’s interesting you put it this way. Clearly I am not a religious, but watching Pope Francis’ fidelity to his Jesuit culture has inspired me to be be more “convicted” (since that is the word you used) in the gifts God has given to me.

Sometime I hide them, fearful of others misunderstanding, or even ridicule me. Sometime I hold back because I am not sure “how” to share them, how to use them etc. Or even how to explain them.

But I know I have them. I know that they clearly gifts from God.
I know the Lord will Shepard me when it comes to them. But Pope Francis’s example of living “Do not be afraid” (in the case of being soo very different and even “counter-cultural” from the “norm” of what even the every day devout Catholic may expect) has me repeating “Do not be afraid of being different from the norm, different from what others are expecting of you”

Hope this makes sense.

(adding)
Pope Francis’ example has freed me from this concern I have had that “I am a faithful Catholic, yet I don’t feel like I fit in with the norm.”~~~ Whatever “norm” is.

That is how his example as helped me

 

[Ohana]

Brother JR please try to tell us a bit about the particular points of view of Jesuit and Franciscan. Ignatian pedagogy sort of threw me. I have some idea of the spiritual exercises but have never done them as a retreat. What do you mean by “Charism” of their orders. I thought a charism was a gift of the Holy Spirit. I am not really asking for an in-depth analysis, more of a short form - here is the landscape sort of answer.

All I hear from my friends and family is that they really love Pope Francis already. They are so hopeful. Me too!

 

[Ohana]

OOPs. I see you already did that for the most part Brother. Mea culpa.