Reuters: Three years on, pope leaves Catholic conservatives feeling marginalized

[JPUSC]

Reuters: Three years on, pope leaves Catholic conservatives feeling marginalized

Three years after the election of Pope Francis, Roman Catholic conservatives are growing increasingly worried that he is quietly unraveling the legacy of his predecessors.

Francis’ popularity with most Catholics, and legions of non-Catholics, has given him the image of a grandfatherly parish priest who understands how difficult it sometimes is to follow Church teachings, particularly those on sexual morality.
…
Interviews with four Vatican officials, including two cardinals and an archbishop, as well as theologians and commentators, highlighted conservative fears that Francis’ words and deeds may eventually rupture the 1.2 billion member Church.

Chatter on conservative blogs regularly accuses the Argentine pontiff of spreading doctrinal confusion and isolating those who see themselves as guardians of the faith.

“Going to bed. Wake me up when this pontificate is over,” Damien Thompson, associate editor of the British weekly “The Spectator” and a conservative Catholic commentator tweeted last month. Thompson was among conservatives stung by a freewheeling news conference Francis gave on a flight home from Mexico.

In it, he stirred up the U.S. presidential debate by criticizing Republican candidate Donald Trump’s immigration stance and made comments that were interpreted as an opening to use contraceptives to stop the spread of the Zika virus.

They were the latest in a line of unscripted utterances that have left many conservatives feeling nostalgic for the days of Francis’s two predecessors, Benedict and John Paul, who regularly thundered against contraception, homosexuality and abortion.

“Every time this happens I wonder if he realizes how much confusion he is causing,” said a conservative Rome-based cardinal who took part in the conclave that elected Francis three years ago and spoke on the condition of anonymity. He would not say if he voted for Francis because participants in conclaves are sworn to secrecy.

THE POPE AND THE PEWS

Another senior official, an archbishop in an important Vatican ministry, said: “These comments alarm not only tradition-minded priests but even liberal priests who have complained to me that people are challenging them on issues that are very straight-forward, saying ‘the pope would let me do this’ why don’t you?’”
…
Conservatives say any change would undermine the principle of the indissolubility of marriage that Jesus established.

At the end of the synod last year, Francis excoriated immovable Church leaders who he said “bury their heads in the sand” and hide behind rigid doctrine while families suffer.

The gathering’s final document spoke of a so-called “internal forum” in which a priest or a bishop may work with a Catholic who has divorced and remarried to decide privately and on a case-by-case basis if he or she can be fully re-integrated.

That crack in the doctrinal door annoyed many conservatives, who fear Francis’ upcoming document may open the flood gates.
…
The conservative standard bearer in Rome is Cardinal Raymond Leo Burke, a 67-year-old American who in 2014 told an interviewer that the Church under Francis was like “a ship without a rudder”.

Francis was not pleased. That same year, he removed Burke as head of the Vatican’s highest court and demoted him to the largely ceremonial post of chaplain of a charity group.

Conservatives are also worried about Francis’ drive to devolve decision-making power on several issues from the Vatican to regional, national or diocesan levels, what the pope has called “a healthy decentralization”.

This is an anathema to conservatives, who say rules should be applied identically around the world. They warn that a devolution of power would leave the Vatican vulnerable to the splits seen in the Anglican and Orthodox Churches.

“If you look at these two big Churches, they are not in very good shape,” said Massimo Faggioli, a Church historian and associate professor of theology at the University of St. Thomas in Minnesota. “That’s why conservatives are nervous. They think Francis does not understand the danger.”

reuters.com/article/us-pope-anniversary-conservatives-idUSKCN0WD0TF

 

[pnewton]

Let’s see. Here we have Reuters commenting on feelings of Catholics.

This is news?

 

[StephieNorthCo]

Let’s see. Here we have Reuters commenting on feelings of Catholics.

This is news?

Agreed. We are free to have our own opinions, and that includes Bishops Cardinals and Reuters. We do, however, have this thing called the Spirit, and a guarantee from the founder.

Blessings,
Stephie

 

[edwest2]

More subtle fear-mongering by the secular media. This Pope has said exactly the same things I heard growing up in the late 1950s and early 1960s. Word for word, this Pope is maintaining a healthy balance between the secular claims and demands, and His own authority. Of course, worrying Catholics who have been raised correctly is the media’s job.

Again, to be Catholic is not about politics - at all. In fact, Pope Francis has, in his own way, created the circumstances for those in the Church to prevent causing even minor disturbances because of their incorrect views. He fully understands that the secular media’s only options are “conservative,” “moderate,” and “liberal,” or other terms not worth mentioning.

Ed

 

[ctb95]

I am a “conservative Catholic” and I do not at all feel marginalized by our Holy Father.

 

[jimcav]

I’m just not sure what to make of our Pope.

I don’t feel marginalized, but as a middle class person, I do feel that Pope Francis doesn’t exactly speak to my soul, or my worries and concerns. He just hasn’t resonated with me, and yes, I do worry about some of the things he seems to blurt out. I was much more comfortable with Pope Benedicts more scripted style.

He doesn’t seem to be a deep thinker nor as theologically steeped as our previous Popes have been either, and he appears to be far more open towards changes, although to be honest, for all of his off the cuff remarks, they haven’t led to any real changes, so I don’t know what to think.

I’m not even sure I’m making any sense, because I just cannot measure this Pope. I really should keep my mouth shut on this subject, but I guess he confuses and confounds me more than marginalizes me…

Holy Spirit, guide me!

 

[Padres1969]

I am a “conservative Catholic” and I do not at all feel marginalized by our Holy Father.

Bah! You’re just deluding yourself. Of course you feel marginalized deep down. Reuters can see into your soul and tell you what even you don’t understand about yourself…



Frankly though articles like this as an outsider are part of the story that’s been told since shortly after Pope Francis was elected. They’ve taken his more compassionate and merciful nature, particularly with relation to social justice, and ascribed a different reality to it that’s just not there. And to back it, they take any ambiguous statements Pope Francis makes and immediately try to bend them into that mold of being this “liberal” force. Reality is that Francis isn’t Benedict, but he’s not any overly liberalized reformer either if you look at it as no major theological or social changes toward liberalization have been applied. In fact he’s arguably continued the cause of more traditional Catholicism that his immediate predecessor focused on.

Yes he doesn’t speak to the middle class and rich as much and isn’t quite the deep thinking theologian that Benedict was, but frankly why would he? The poor and marginalized outnumber the well educated middle class and rich, particularly in the part of the world he’s from and the parts of the world the RCC is growing.

 

[jimcav]

Yes he doesn’t speak to the middle class and rich as much and isn’t quite the deep thinking theologian that Benedict was, but frankly why would he? The poor and marginalized outnumber the well educated middle class and rich, particularly in the part of the world he’s from and the parts of the world the RCC is growing.

But why doesn’t he speak to the middle class?

We are the ones that go to Mass, support the Church, pay the bills of the Church, support the Vatican and so on and so forth. So I know I would certainly like to hear some words of encouragement, but he is rather silent. When asked by a reporter why he doesn’t speak to the middle class, he hesitated and finally replied,

“You’re right. It’s an error of mine not to think about this,” he said.

“The world is polarized. The middle class becomes smaller. The polarization between the rich and poor is big. This is true. And, perhaps this has led me to not take account of this (the problems of the middle class),” he said.

Francis said he spoke about the poor often because they were so numerous but that ordinary working people had “great value.”

“I think you’re telling me about something I need to do. I need to do delve further into this …,” he said

Middle class people around the western world are under a lot of pressure these days. We are paying all the freight for the poor, with a huge chunk of our taxes and donations going to take care of them, but we see little progress if any. He actually makes me feel guilty, which might be his intention, but his message becomes tedious I’m sorry to say, and I turn it off.

I will keep trying to understand…

 

[edwest2]

As a middle-class person, certain government programs that were forced on the people have marginalized me. I have very little “discretionary income,” and Pope Francis has made it very clear to the rich about helping the poor. Under ten per cent of the people own or control most of the US and we’ve gone from millionaires to billionaires. As one comedian who I otherwise can’t stand put it: “And for those billionaires going for your second billion, what are you going to do with it? Start your own space program?”

After reviewing my life’s “want list,” I’ve gone back to what I was taught as a teenager: “If you can’t afford it, you just do without.” So, I do. I rarely by “extras.” And there’s “Live within your means.” I’m not going to bed at night with a lot of debt hanging over my head and without Plans A, B, C and D about how to bring it down or stop it from increasing.

In the 1990s, I don’t know what happened. I often heard people “complain” that their credit card was charged to the max. Did their credit card decide that even though they already had stuff, they needed even more stuff? I remember going shopping before Christmas at an (fake word) upscale part of town. The mall parking lots were filled as far as the eye could see. Once inside, I had to move sideways to get past people.

Meanwhile, Church parking lots were almost empty. I recall seeing a Church sign at the the time: “Ch_rch. The only thing missing is U.”

I don’t need a 4G (obsolete next week), phone/tablet/computer. I have a cell phone that I use only as a phone. I don’t care about any other features it has. I’m not going to pay an extra $10.00 a month for this or that either.

Ed

 

[1Lord1Faith]

The “conservatives” in the article are cited as being Vatican officials, theologians, commentators and bloggers.

 

[commenter]

This is the usual strategy of the secular media. They constantly try to show that the Catholic Church is divided; pope divided from bishops, bishops divided from people. Why do Catholics keep jumping and responding to the media’s manipulation? Do you really think Reuters is sincerely trying to report accurate information?

 

[JPUSC]

This is the usual strategy of the secular media. They constantly try to show that the Catholic Church is divided; pope divided from bishops, bishops divided from people. Why do Catholics keep jumping and responding to the media’s manipulation? Do you really think Reuters is sincerely trying to report accurate information?

EWTN’s news service suggests similar:
ncregister.com/blog/pat-archbold/the-schism-nobody-sees-coming
ncregister.com/daily-news/does-synods-way-of-accompaniment-put-the-church-at-risk-of-de-facto-schism
ncregister.com/daily-news/cardinal-dolan-12-others-reportedly-wrote-to-pope-concerned-about-the-synod/
ncregister.com/daily-news/do-the-popes-synod-picks-signal-support-for-controversial-agendas

 

[edwest2]

This is the usual strategy of the secular media. They constantly try to show that the Catholic Church is divided; pope divided from bishops, bishops divided from people. Why do Catholics keep jumping and responding to the media’s manipulation? Do you really think Reuters is sincerely trying to report accurate information?

Look at it from the Psychological Warfare point of view:

A) One hour in Church a week.

B) 24/7 access to secular visuals and words about the abnormal, the obscene and the irrational - mostly presented as cool, fun or pleasurable.

Just keep that in mind before you turn on the TV, the radio or the internet. The same applies to going out to catch a movie. The message is: "Live wrong, accept what we tell you to accept, and dysfunctional living and sexuality is fun, average or neutral. And what do you mean ‘You don’t like profanity?’ We do and so should you.

Get rid of your guilt, your shame and thoughts about sin.

Remember the above. Meditating on the bad/immoral is what it boils down to. The media is a propaganda machine, except for the sports (for now).

Ed

 

[abucs]

Just keep that in mind before you turn on the TV, the radio or the internet. The same applies to going out to catch a movie. The message is: "Live wrong, accept what we tell you to accept, and dysfunctional living and sexuality is fun, average or neutral. And what do you mean ‘You don’t like profanity?’ We do and so should you.

Get rid of your guilt, your shame and thoughts about sin.

Ed

There was a comment today about how the secular comedians are now preaching against standard morality, trying to tell us what to think rather than make us laugh.

It seems to me that the three comics mentioned do not preach in order to convince their audience to be good. They just abuse outsiders in order to convince their audience it is good,

blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/the_hatred_of_the_sanctimonious_funny_man/

 

[commenter]

Since 1958, and probably much earlier, there have been reports most years that whoever is pope that year is out of touch with most cardinals and bishops, and that this Catholic group or that one “feels marginalized”. The difference between now, and the 1950s is that the media is not just reporting fires, but pours gasoline on them.

I am not sure “feeling marginalized” is the worst state for Christians to be in. Would it be better for Christians to feel empowered, or to feel applauded most of the time? I mean in terms of our conversion?

 

[edwest2]

There was a comment today about how the secular comedians are now preaching against standard morality, trying to tell us what to think rather than make us laugh.

blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/the_hatred_of_the_sanctimonious_funny_man/

There are no comedians left. They have become the voice of propaganda for immorality. Before, comedy was mostly inoffensive jokes suitable for the whole family. Now, Whoopi Goldberg is explaining Leviticus to her audience as part of her “act.” Obviously, people don’t understand Leviticus as it relates to the secular interpretation. Other former comedians have indulged in lots of profanity, mocking God, promoting atheism and giving their audience graphic accounts of sex acts. As long as someone is laughing, they have a job. So, no more “comedy” for me. There are a few who mix what can be called funny with totally immoral promotional commentary.

George Carlin, poor man, told us: “There is no one – up there.” And goes on to mock his Catholic upbringing, during his act. May he rest in peace.

Ed

 

[Darryl1958]

The issue raised about devolution of power from pope to regional authorities initiated by the Pope.

As long as that power is all about pancake breakfasts, bingos and church decorations, that is not a problem.

If it comes down different Catholic teachings for different Catholic regions, that is yet another schism in the making, introducing differences where none existed before.

The devil is in the details on that one for sure.

 

[Darryl1958]

The gathering’s final document spoke of a so-called “internal forum” in which a priest or a bishop may work with a Catholic who has divorced and remarried to decide privately and on a case-by-case basis if he or she can be fully re-integrated.

Over the years, I have noticed that there are considerable differences between the outlooks of priests. There are many who have very different ideas as to what in doctrine is wheat and what is chafe.

The case being made is that the decision on divorce and full reintegration with the communion is in the hands of ecclesiastics who have shown themselves to have very different ideas of what is right and what is wrong in these regards.

Personally, I don’t have a problem with that, but, personally, I have never been much of a conservative when it comes to these kinds of doctrinal matters either

I would be the tail wagging the dog here too, and that is the kind of situation that is being set up in the above scenerio.

 

[commenter]

The so called “internal forum”, and its potential abuses; and - decentralization of doctrinal and moral teaching - have been discussed for almost 50 years now. I am not saying they are unimportant concerns, but they are scarcely* new* concerns. Some Bishops appointed or promoted by this pope appear more liberal than others, but that is true for some bishops appointed since, oh, 1958 or so.

I’m more interested in the headline, that pope leaves Catholic conservatives feeling marginalized. Would we prefer a pope that makes Catholics feel comfortable? Part of a pope’s job is to call us to change.

I am speaking as a Catholic who agreed with Pope Benedict also. He did the best he could. He succeeded in some areas, not in others, like all popes. Francis appears to be trying to bring Catholic ideas to people Benedict was unable to reach. Like all popes, he will make mistakes and successes.

 

[otjm]

Some of the feelings of conservatives being marginalized may be due to what they consider a Pope is supposed to be.

We have been blessed with the last two popes, both of whom were scholars: John Paul 2 had 2 PhDs, one in theology and one in philosophy; and Benedict has been considered by many to be the brightest theologian alive. And given the fact that combined, they reigned for 35 years, it is likely that this basically amounted to the adult lifetime of many of those conservatives; that is, they knew nothing different.

Given the background of these two popes, it is highly likely that the press had much less access to either of them. Additionally, coming from the intellectual backgrounds, it is easy to see that neither of them were likely to have a relaxed, casual approach to the press.

Both of them were also very different from at least three of the four prior popes - John Paul 1 being somewhat of an enigma to the world if for no other reason than his extremely short tenure.

Francis comes from a very different background; a Jesuit, with a Franciscan spirituality, and an active, hands-on bishop and archbishop/Cardinal in a country with some very difficult politics, and a bishop who was “among the sheep”, and particularly among the poor. Add to this his very strong antipathy for clericalism - a problem both among the clergy and the laity, and you have someone who shuns a bureaucratic mindset, and likewise shuns pomp and circumstance. Small details such as his shoes and living quarters indicate a pope who views his position as shepherd, not as theologian in residence, or philosopher in residence, or ruler of Christendom, or the source and seat of power.

I by no means want in any way to disparage John Paul or Benedict - I think they were both awesome. They delivered what was sorely needed at their time.

But if you open the New Testament and read the passages of what Christ said, according to the synoptics, He was not giving forth an esoteric elucidation of moral theology. He was a hands-on shepherd amidst the flock, and I see Francis in the same light. If Francis does not offer a dissertation on Mercy, and conservatives are upset about that, then I would have to presume that some of them would be upset with Christ too, as both of them are going to give short, direct and to-the-point comments.

I don’t find what Francis has to say disconcerting, in part because I don’t get my news about his comments from the secular press; I get it from sources true to the Magisterium and with no ax to grind.

IMHO, some are upset because this pope does not fit their image of what we need. I find him very challenging, because he is not drawing me into an intellectual discussion of conversion; he is drawing me into conversion itself. And calling me into conversion consists in part in pointing out to me how I need to change. Some people are not particularly comfortable in that space, and would much rather move to an intellectual world of theory. And that is not where Francis is.

Perhaps we all need to put aside our preconceived notions, and pay attention to the prophetic voice in our midst. And perhaps we need to criticize less how the message is delivered, and more to what the message actually is.