Long Live the Pope

I have been thinking a lot about the Pope lately. More specifically, I have been thinking about his death.

I find it odd to be thinking about the Pope. After all, I am not Catholic. Nor have I ever given the reigning Pope much thought before. In my lifetime there was Pope John, then Pope John Paul, then Pope John Paul George (Sorry. A blatant theft of an Eddie Izzard joke I couldn’t resist). Basically, they all blended together, and seemed to have little to say about the world I lived in or the issues confronting that world.

But Pope Francis has been different. He has thrown himself in where angels have previously feared to tread. Most recently, he went to Dubai for an international conference on climate change despite a mild flu and lung inflammation. He didn’t need to go. He’s 87. He could have just issued a supportive statement, and no one would have thought less of him. But he sees climate issues as within his purview, and serious enough that the extra weight of his physical presence was necessary.

Of course, this is not the first time that Pope Francis has waded into waters that many consider treacherous. While the Pope has not overturned the Church’s stance on marriage within the Church, he has endorsed civil unions for same sex couples. He also continues to emphasize that homosexuality is not a sin in and of itself, different than any other sex outside of marriage. He has also made clear that to the extent homosexual sex outside of marriage is a sin, it is no worse than any other sin. In fact, it’s clear that he views other sins, such as lack of charity to others, as much, much worse.

He has also significantly expanded the permissible role of women in the Church. Women still cannot be ordained as priests, but they can administer communion and serve at the altar. He also appointed women to Vatican posts previously held only by men, including a high position in the bishop’s synod, which helps decide Catholic rules.   

Obviously, I would like to see Pope Francis go even farther on these and other issues, but his willingness to address such matters with compassion and in a spirit of inclusion is refreshing. He has stretched the Catholic Church in ways I never thought possible. In doing so he has largely rewritten and broadened the discussion around the role of the Church. At last the Church seems like it is engaging with the world as it is, not as it may wish it were.

This refocus has not been without controversy. Traditionalist elements within the Catholic Church hierarchy bristle at these changes, as do many of the lay people. Critics have been vocal, including Bishops and Cardinals. Many do not want to see the Church back down from what they see as the moral high ground. Others see issues such as climate change as outside of the appropriate Papal scope.

There is irony here. Presidential candidate John F. Kennedy was attacked for being a Catholic on grounds that he would be beholden to put the pronouncements of the Pope over his constitutional oath. It was a silly argument, but it did reflect a view of Papal authority that saw a Pope’s positions as more than more than mere suggestions.

You also hear very little these days about Papal infallibility. Frankly, that has always been a fraught topic. It was not a tenet of the Church until the mid-1800’s. Even then it only applied in very limited circumstances. Yet, it had a cache beyond its actual application, and seemed to permeate everything a Pope did. My sense is that this cache has disappeared as more people got nervous about this Pope’s predilections. Now it seems like many view the Pope’s authority as to be heeded only if they agree with it.

And that is why I have been thinking about the Pope’s death. He is 87, and not in great health. His successor will be chosen by the College of Cardinals (Go Big Red!!!). It is impossible for me to gauge the temperature of that group, but I have no doubt that many of its members would like to pull back on the social activism of Francis, and are inclined to elect a more priggish, supercilious Church representative.

World trends suggest that this is a real possibility. Netherlands, of all places, looks like it will have a far-right Prime Minister. Argentina just elected a self-styled anarcho-capitalist to shape its government. Closer to home, it’s far from certain that the United States won’t head in that same direction in 2024.

Many Catholics have embraced the worldwide culture wars. Others have welcomed aggressive stances around immigration. They would no doubt applaud a Pope that reminds them less often about the need for love in dealing with homosexuals, refugees and migrants. It would be much more convenient if the Pope limited his outreach to more traditional evangelism.

My sense is that the Pope’s stance on homosexuality is especially troubling to much of his flock. This issue remains a touchstone for many, though heaven knows why. These people would like a Pope that reinforces their view that homosexuals belong in the seventh level of Dante’s hell. His willingness to elevate their own sins above the supposed abomination of homosexuality does not sit well.

The conclave of Cardinals will have to decide the future of the Church amid this general worldwide turmoil, and the matching turmoil within the Church itself. Some candidates will undoubtedly present themselves as a tonic to the relatively activist Church of Francis. They will claim that they, and not the progressives, are in keeping with the mood of the faithful. I have no doubt that the internal debates will be brutal.

At the end of the day, I won’t have much of a stake in the inevitable white smoke of a new Papal coronation. Still, the loss of a strong moral voice when we need such voices would be disheartening. Maybe Francis isn’t my Pope, or the Pope I would choose, but at least he is a visible and vocal advocate for inclusion, benevolence, and love, and we can use all that type of advocacy we can get. So, Francis, as another moral paragon once said, “Live Long and Prosper”.