Next up to Bat – Pius XIII?

Last updated on: September 22, 2017 at 12:17 pm by Fr. Dwight Longenecker

Next up to Bat – Pius XIII? 2017-09-22T12:17:23-05:00 Fr. Dwight Longenecker

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Jude Law as Pius XIII in "The Young Pope"

Jude Law as Pius XIII in “The Young Pope”

Richard Gaillardetz is a theology professor at Boston College, and he’s penned this insightful essay over at America Magazine.

He guides us through the development of various understandings of papal authority, and the historical overview is very interesting. He points out how Pope St John Paul II was the most prolific of papal authors, and how Pope Benedict XVI was clear that he could sometimes write as a personal theologian even while he was pope, and how Benedict was noted for participating in interviews with journalists–although questions were always submitted beforehand and answers usually prepared carefully.

Pope Francis, on the other hand, is happy to wing it. He takes part in interviews with atheist journalists and famously takes questions on his flight home from one of his apostolic visits.

Francis is fond of “making a mess” and encourages others to do the same. He is not afraid of ambiguity and a certain fuzziness in his teaching.

Gaillardetz observes this and ponders whether we are moving into a new method of papal teaching.

He summarizes his article:

With Pope Francis, gone are the days of Roma locuta, causa finita—“Rome has spoken; the matter is closed.” He recognizes that it may still be necessary on occasion to make binding doctrinal pronouncements. Yet Pope Francis appears to concur with St. John that the church may better meet the needs of the present day “by demonstrating the validity of her teaching, rather than by condemnations.” In the synodal, listening church of Pope Francis, we are witnessing the gradual emergence of a new exercise of papal teaching, one that is more patient, persuasive and dialogical. It is an exercise of papal teaching particularly attentive to the complexities and challenges of living the Gospel within the concrete conditions of daily life. It is teaching put directly to the service of discipleship.

That’s all well and good I suppose, and certainly Pope Francis has a different style than Popes John Paul and Benedict. It’s a warm, engaging and pastoral style of being pope. The problem, however is what it is doing to Francis’ ministry and–in the long run–what its doing to the papacy itself.

But before I go on to think about that I question Gaillardetz’ statement itself. He says Pope Francis’ style of teaching is one “more patient, persuasive and dialogical.” The problem with this is that many of his flock do not perceive his papacy that way at all. Pope Francis doesn’t seem patient with his critics. Witness the satirical collection of the pope’s insults that a conservative blogger has collected here. John Paul and Benedict would never have used such language and been so impatient with their critics. Does a pope who publicly insults his own flock come across as patient? Many can’t see it. Resorting to name calling and insults is “persuasive” and “dialogical”?

Theologian Gaillardetz claims Pope Francis’ style is “persuasive.” One of my friends in Rome said the pope’s management style is anything but “persuasive and patient” instead it is said this pope’s decisions are unpredictable and harsh. He demotes and dismisses his critics and does not feel obliged to give explanations. One Vatican journalist insists, “Pope Francis encourages criticism!” but fails to give examples. Pope Francis’ style is supposed to be “dialogical” but he does not seem willing to dialogue with the four cardinals who respectfully asked for clarification of his teaching, neither does he seem inclined to dialogue with those he regards as “rigid.” Apparently there was little dialogue when Cardinal Muller asked for an explanation for the dismissal of two of his colleagues.

But I may well be wrong and Pope Francis’ style is indeed “patient, persuasive and dialogical”. I am willing to be convinced.

Does this mean I am a Francis hater and an arch conservative critic of the pope? No. I think he’s a good man and a nice man. I think he loves the poor and loves the church and want to proclaim the faith to a needy world, and I like it that he has some fizz and pop in his language. I pray for the pope, but I am no ultramontanist and never have been.

However, if Gaillardetz is right that the pope’s teaching style tends toward the fuzzy wuzzy, then Pope Francis isn’t doing anybody any favors, not himself, not his papacy and not the papacy itself.

Here’s why: its really only intellectuals like Gaillardetz who care much about the pope being “listening, patient, persuasive and dialogical” Ordinary folks want something they can get their teeth into, and this has always been the strength of the Catholic Church. You know where you stood. Whether you liked it or not, whether you accepted it or not was beside the point. You might kick against it, but there was something to kick against. This is the value of clear and unambiguous moral and doctrinal teaching. If the theologians wanted to go all dialogical, then that was their job and more power to them, but ordinary pastors and people in the pew needed something solid. They want their church to be built on a rock, not on quicksand.

Does that mean that everyone who wants clear teaching is some kind of Jonathan Edwards Puritan going around condemning everyone for being naughty boys and girls, sniffing out heresy, dangling people over hell and being generally unpleasant? Of course not, clarity and charity are not mutually exclusive, and to say those who call for clarity are legalistic Pharisees is to resort to name calling and insults.

Saying “well modern times are different. Things are more complicated now” is hogwash. Read church history. Times have always been complicated and it has always been well nigh impossible to be a good and faithful Catholic.

The worst problem with the pope being fuzzy in his teaching is that people will simply stop listening to him.They don’t care much about ambiguous teaching which might mean this or might mean that depending on the circumstances and intentions.

The danger with the “new style of teaching” is that it isn’t really teaching at all, and Pope Francis may be on the way to being a lame duck pope–a smiling, genial old fellow who everyone thinks is rather nice when he hugs poor people and kisses babies, but they won’t take much notice of him otherwise.

If this is the way Francis’ papacy goes it will be a pity because he could have a great and good impact, but he may end up going out with a whimper not a bang.

Furthermore, his successor will find a papacy weakened and ineffectual, and the pendulum may well swing back. Who knows, next one up to bat on Peter’s team may be somebody like Jude Law’s Pius XIII.

Yikes!

Image Creative Commons via Bing

Uncategorized

Previous Post

September 16, 2017

The Mutilation Generation

Next Post

September 18, 2017 The Flying Monk?

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Anglican Matters Apologetics Architecture Blobble Study Book Reviews Brideshead Caitlin O'Rourke Catholic Art Catholic Culture Church Politics Chust for Nice Contemporary Culture Duane Mandible Ed Blanch Film Reviews Fr Harvey Nicolaitan Frank Viola Mantilla the Hon More Christianity Mrs Brady Catholic Old Lady Mystery of the Magi Norman Anderson Queen Hillary Saints and Supernatural Spirituality The Inklings The Vicar Theology Todd Unctuous Uncategorized

Select a Month October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz