Pope Francis at the Crossroads

I have intentionally not posted anything for a few days because I wanted to take some time to think and pray. My thoughts on the new pontiff are mixed, but overall he has my confidence and I believe (hope?) the Church will be in a better place at the end of his pontificate.

Much of the concern and discussion is due to the fact that we simply don't know anything about this man, save for a few anecdotes and some Youtube videos from Argentina. He could be a pope the Lord has blessed us with, or he could be a pope the Lord is inflicting upon us; either really is possible. His pontificate could go good or bad.

Thus, in as objective a manner as possible, I have here reflected on seven ways the pontificate of Francis could really go wrong, and seven ways it could really be successful. Because I want to save the hopeful stuff for last, let's start with what I perceive are seven ways the pontificate of Francis can really get derailed.

Seven Ways the Pontificate of Pope Francis I Could Go Bad

1. Initial reports of Pope Francis' management style when he was Archbishop of Buenos Aires are not good. Regardless of his personal piety, it appears that his archdiocese is in disarray and his priests are out of control; this comes from anecdotal stories of Catholics in the federal city of Buenos Aires. He may be sincerely humble, but if his humility gets in the way of effective management, the problems in the Curia, the homoheresy, etc. could only get worse under this pontificate, especially if he appoints the wrong people in the wrong places.

2. At his first appearance on the loggia, Pope Francis deliberately dispensed with two symbols of the papal office, the red ermine mozzetta and the papal stole (although to be fair, he did wear it during his blessing, but took it off immediately afterward, unlike Benedict XVI, John Paul II, John Paul I and earlier popes who have retained the mozzetta and stole throughout their entire appearance on the loggia. Presumably, the pope dispensed with these symbols in favor of a more simplistic approach, perhaps out of a disdain for 'pomp'; there is nothing wrong with this prima facie - many saints and popes have disdained 'pomp' and sometimes shocked their contemporaries by their simplicity. I don't want to make too much of this; a pope can do what he wants. This one issue is not a real problem; the only problem would be if Pope Francis universally and consistently associates beautiful or elaborate things with pomp and ends up unwittingly (or wittingly) dispensing with some of the last symbols of the papal authority in acts of misguided humility.

3. Decay of the liturgy is a big concern. Though there is much debate still going on about the true implementation of Summorum Pontificum in the federal city of Buenos Aires (and Rorate Caeli has demonstrated pretty persuasively that it was not only not implemented but positively obstructed), it is undeniable that precision in the liturgy is not one of the overriding concerns of Pope Francis. Liturgies he has presided over as Cardinal represent the Novus Ordo at its worst, and it looks as if we might be in for a throwback to the papal Masses of John Paul II. While most are in agreement that Summorum Pontificum itself is in no danger, a pope who does not care about precision in the liturgy denies with his actions that there is an intimate link between the lex orandi and the lex credendi. Given that, as Pope Benedict XVI pointed out so poignantly, papal masses are liturgical paradigms of how the Church should worship, the dumbed-down liturgies of a "low church" pope could thus spread throughout the Church, effectively undoing the intimate connection between the lex orandi and the lex credendi that Benedict tried so hard to emphasize and which was truly the center message of his papacy. In effect, the practical liturgical gains made during Benedict's papacy could be completely undone.

4. Reform is a tricky word. We all want reform, but what reform looks like comes down to semantics. While we all want 'reform of the Curia', there is the chance that Pope Francis might believe that reform means weakening the Curia at the expense of strengthening regional episcopal conferences; in other words, decentralization. His words on the night of his election omitting any reference to the office of Universal Pastor, Supreme Pontiff or Vicar of Christ, choosing instead only to refer to himself as Bishop of Rome and to speak only about the Diocese of Rome, could mean that he intends to be viewed as a first among equals, just another one of the guys who takes the bus to work. This may be just his style, but if his style translates into policy and governance, then we can expect to see a great strengthening of episcopal conferences at the expense of a weakened Curia, which is absolutely not the kind of reform we need.

5. Judging from his time as Archbishop, and from videos going around the Internet, our present pope supports interreligious activities of the most vulgar sort. Should this tendency carry over into his papacy, we could see an Assisi IV, or perhaps something worse, as from the above video, it seemed that the then-Cardinal made no effort to even attempt to maintain the fictional distinction between prayer in common and commonly praying separately that John Paul 2 did, which was hogwash anyway. Bergoglio clearly prayed in common with Jews and pagans, and there is unfortunately the real possibility that this sort of thing will become more common.

6. The pope has personally "distanced" himself from liberation theology, whatever that means - I would prefer that he absolutely and unequivocally repudiated it altogether - but there is the possibility that the election of Pope Francis could not only mean that a Latin American Cardinal has taken the throne of Peter, but that this represents the beginning of an entire Latin American surge within the Church and emergence of Latin American prelates to other positions of power in Francis' pontificate. Since liberation theology is so rife in Latin America, there is an equal danger that an emerging interest in the Latin American Church might mean a renaissance in interest in liberation theology. The pope would not be personally responsible for this, but it is possible that his background and the growing power of Latin American prelates might lead to this.

7. Finally, and most terrifyingly, since Benedict XVI decided not to make the dossier known to the College but instead opted to hand it over to the new pope after the Conclave, there is always the possibility that Cardinal Bergoglio himself was one of the names mentioned in the dossier, in which case, the worldwide episcopal homoheresy will never be rooted out and can in fact be expected to deepen. If so, God help us.

Seven Ways the Pontificate of Pope Francis I Could Become Very Successful

1. Having previously been the Ordinary for Eastern Rite Catholics in Argentina, Pope Francis is familiar with the liturgical diversity of the eastern churches and may be the right man to pursue genuine ecumenical talks with the Orthodox. It has also been noted that the Pope has only one lung, and that John Paul II has famously referred to the Eastern Orthodox as the other "lung" of Christendom. Thus, it would be particularly appropriate if steps towards reconciliation were taken during this pontificate, and Francis would have the right background to facilitate such a reconciliation.

2. Whatever else we want to say about Pope Francis' background, he is clearly vehemently opposed to homosexuality. His opposition seems to be very straightforward and even borders on revulsion, which is a positive thing. We will certainly not get any sort of gaffes out of him akin to Benedict's condom statements. His strong opposition to homosexuality could hopefully translate into an incentive to root out the homoheresy from the Curia and truly crush the Lavender Mafia. Even now he has met with ex-pope Joseph Ratzinger and presumably has the dossier in hand and, Lord willing, will act on it.

3. It is a fact that in Buenos Aires Cardinal Bergoglio did not have the best reputation as an administrator. But it is also acknowledged by all sides that he has a profound, almost monastic humility. If Benedict "taught" us that it is humble to know when you can't do your job, then hopefully the humility and meekness of Francis will lead him to understand that he needs to appoint very strong and faithful men to the Curial dicasteries and commissions. It is indeed a mark of humility to know when you need someone else to do a task, and his appointments will be critical. If what I am saying is true, look for more promotions of men like Burke. Hopefully the pope will follow this path and promote men who compliment his strengths.

4.Pope Francis seems to be the sort of man given to dramatic gestures. This could be a very positive thing for the Church, which is in dire need of dramatic, radically commitments to the faith. When in his first homily he stated that "He who does not worship Christ worships the devil," it became evident to me that here we have a pope who will not communicate in 95 page encyclicals full of philosophical jargon, but who is capable of truly speaking plainly and directly, which is something the Church sorely needs. If the pope can employ this candor in the defense of truth, he will quickly become the scourge of the progressives and will teach the truths of the faith very clearly. He only needs to open his mouth and speak.

5. The pope is clearly no friend of laissez-faire capitalism and has made some very strong statements against it. If he keeps this message up, we may see a broader interest in the Church's social teaching and Magisterial critiques of capitalism, which would be very welcome.

6. I know this is a real long shot, but many are chattering about this pope's intense Marian devotion and the possibility that he could consecrate Russia if he firmly believed it was God's will. He has also apparently maintained a cordial relationship with Father Gruner over the years and has some parishes in his diocese dedicated to Our Lady of Fatima. I agree that a consecration is unlikely, but I see that he is more likely to do this than, say, Benedict or John Paul II.

7. Finally, and most importantly, it is possible that God has chosen someone with nothing too promising about them according to the world so that He might do mighty works through him and receive all the glory, even as Moses did, who was "very meek, more than all people who were on the face of the earth" (Num. 12:3). God often chooses the meek, the unpromising, the clumsy or the simple to put to shame the proud, the gifted, the skilled or the sophisticated. The grace of the office may work upon him, and we may stand with our jaws aghast as the pope does mighty works in the name of God, things we would have never expected out of him or seen it coming, things that we will look upon and say, "Surely, the hand of God was behind this." His extraordinarily decisive banning of Cardinal Law from his presence was one such move of boldness that I would have never expected from such a man but which I welcome with joy. I eagerly await what else the grace of the office might work through him; if he treats the Curia and the bishops of the world with the same candor he treated Law, he will work out just fine.


So, the pontificate can certainly go either way. No doubt there will be joys and sorrows, victories and defeats. I am committed to supporting and praying for him one way or another and I do not think a sincere Catholic could take any other position. I admit he is not what I wanted - not even close - but it is Christ's Church, and I probably would not have chosen Peter either had the decision been left up to me.

A few general points to sign off on: People keep praising the pope's humility and his Marian devotion as if these are strong points in his favor. I agree that they are points in his favor, but not in any extraordinary way. Praising a pope because he is humble and Marian is like praising a pope because he believes in God and goes to Mass on Sunday. Every pope is humble and Marian. Benedict XVI was an extraordinarily humble man, as was John Paul II, who was also very Marian. John XXIII was an extremely Marian pope, and Pius XII was humble, too. Every pope is supposed to be humble and Marian, so pointing these general characteristics out about Francis is really saying nothing at all other than saying something because we don't know what else to say.

Second, many today are reacting with indignation against the way certain Traditionalists, specifically those affiliated with Rorate Caeli, have reacted to the new pontiff's election. I admit that I found some of the comments in the Rorate Caeli comboxes to be over the top and distasteful. I must, however, note that there are very substantial reasons why Trads are concerned, reasons that go beyond protocol on the loggia on election night. The former Cardinal's Masses were some of the worst I've ever laid eyes on; he has openly prayed in common with Jews and pagans, emulating and even going beyond John Paul II; he has stated that he did not think the Anglican Ordinariate was necessary because the Church "needs" them more "as Anglicans"; he has intentionally obstructed the implementation of Summorum Pontificum in his diocese save for a single NO-EF hybrid.

I want to remind everyone that it is right to be upset about these things. It was because the scandalous Masses of John Paul II and the same pope's gestures towards other religions so disgusted me that I would become a Traditionalist. And while I agree that as pope, Francis has done none of these things yet, it is true that he as a man has in fact done these things, which I and many other Traditionalists consider to be gravely wrong. I certainly do not believe his conduct as a bishop will determine his conduct as pope, and I am as willing as the next person to give him the benefit of the doubt, but we do not need to go back retroactively and con ourselves into believing that everything this guy has every done has been awesome. It has not. By his own actions (not by the malice of Trads), he has earned a reputation as an enemy of Tradition, and I am flabbergasted as to why all of the focus is on the alleged anger of Traditionalists and not on the scandalous activities of then Cardinal Bergoglio that have justly merited the concern. It's just like when people say we have the problem because we can't get on board with John Paul II encouraging pagans to pray to their false gods in Catholic shrines. This may be John Paul II all over again.

Having faith in the Holy Spirit, I trust that things will be better than that, though. Francis' priorities may not be my priorities, but God knows what is needed. God bless Pope Francis and may his pontificate be truly blessed.