John Samuel Tieman: On Pope Francis’ Visit to America

Pope Francis is coming to America. I’m Catholic. I unabashedly love this guy. Whether he makes any difference or not, that is another question.

Christianity in particular, religion in general, is on a decline in America. In a recent survey of people born Catholic, 52% have left the Church. Millennials are leaving in droves. One does not need to be an expert in organizational dynamics to see that, when the average age of a Jesuit is 71, this is a dying order. Indeed, the thought has not escaped me that I could be a member of a dying religion. Or at least a religion that is heading toward being the Zoroastrians of the West, colorful if irrelevant.

So what does the future hold for the Catholic Church? To me, it comes down to this. Do we become the First Church Of Dorthy Day, patron saint of social workers? Or do we become The First Church of Pope Benedict, patron saint of Grand Inquisitors?

Pope Francis is no radical. He is no revolutionary. This cannot be emphasized enough. He will never change priestly celibacy. He will never ordain women. His is anti-abortion. No Marxist ever became a Jesuit Provincial, an archbishop, a cardinal and finally a pope. This pope tends to be rather paternal in his leadership style. There is nothing he is saying that cannot be found in the pronouncements of Benedict XVI or John Paul II. There is, however, a vast difference in emphasis.

Francis may be no radical, but he is Jorge Bergoglio, an Argentine. He is the pope who wrote, “Whatever is fragile, like the environment, is defenseless before the interests of a deified market, a market that does not take into account the fundamental rights of the poor and underrepresented.”

Francis is speaking here of the “preferential option for the poor”. This is a term of art in modern theology, one that has special meaning for our Jesuit pope. In 1968, in a letter to the Jesuits of Central and South American, Pedro Arrupe, the Jesuit Superior, first used the term “option for the poor”. (Lest it be lost on anyone, the late Fr. Arrupe is widely regarded for his saintliness.) The concept has been reinforced since by several major conferences of bishops, and by several popes. Francis himself has said, “Without the preferential option for the poor, the proclamation of the Gospel … risks being misunderstood or submerged.” The term means that, in all aspects of one’s spirituality, in words, prayers and deeds, a Catholic must have a primary compassion for, and indeed love for, the poor. This has political implications. Public policy must also embody the “preferential option for the poor”. People, familiar with this concept, often speak of policies that first benefit those on the margins of society. Only after that should policy, in a sense, work its way in. This as opposed to what Americans do now, which is to pass laws that benefit the rich by making them richer. Put another way, a law can be judged by how it effects the poor. Indeed, an entire society can be judged by how it addresses the primary moral demand upon the conscience of a nation, the “preferential option for the poor”.

This is not new. It is biblical. Jesus has more to say about the poor than He has to say about the bedroom. But Francis’ emphasis on the social gospel is a shift. The emphasis now is on what can get done for the poor and the marginalized, and away from the culture wars. Thomas Frank recently asked, “What’s The Matter With Kansas?” Pope Frank is asking, “What’s the matter with the Archdiocese Of Kansas City?”

Again, and I must say it again, Pope Francis is no radical. That said, I love this guy. What can you say about a pope who drives to work in his Ford Focus? The guy who, as a cardinal, used to take the subway to work. He tends not to use the imperial “We”. He also no longer wears those stupid red shores. My point being that, while Francis will change no doctrine, this shift in emphasis is huge. Don’t expect the pope to marry any gays. But this is the Bishop Of Rome who said, “If someone is gay, and he searches for the Lord and has good will, who am I to judge?” This from a conservative prelate, one who will do nothing to change the teachings of The Church.

He can, however, change the focus away from culture wars that have rendered The Church unforgiving and inhospitable. He can make the “preferential option for the poor” not just a Latin American thought but an international concern. In doing so, he can restore The Church to a position of communion and grace. A Church that emphasizes its commitment to the poor, a Church that emphasizes the dignity of the marginalized. A Church that focuses on the simple words, “Come to me, all you who are weary and burdened”.

—

Copyright 2015 John Samuel Tieman