Misunderstanding Pope Francis: Context, Confusion, and Catholicism

on September 24, 2013

“A person once asked me, in a provocative manner, if I approved of homosexuality. I replied with another question: ‘Tell me: when God looks at a gay person, does he endorse the existence of this person with love, or reject and condemn this person?’ We must always consider the person. Here we enter into the mystery of the human being. In life, God accompanies persons, and we must accompany them, starting from their situation. It is necessary to accompany them with mercy. When that happens, the Holy Spirit inspires the priest to say the right thing.” – Pope Francis

One of the unexpected benefits of living in a hyper-connected world with 24/7 news coverage is that, whenever out-of-context or misinformed analyses cause people to misunderstand what someone says, there are numerous opportunities for people who do understand the given context of what was said to reach out and offer helpful clarification. When earlier societies lived with slower modes of communication, it was far more difficult to respond and correct misinformation, as the very process of doing so took far more time than it does today.

Bearing this in mind in the wake of seemingly endless headlines reacting to Pope Francis’ recently-published interview “A Big Heart Open to God” which appeared in the online journal America with Fr. Antonio Spadaro, S.J. (editor-in-chief of the Italian Jesuit publication La Civiltà Cattolica), this steady media coverage presents an unexpected opportunity for faithful Catholics. Now that major media outlets and both conservative and liberal bloggers alike are devoting so much attention to the Pope’s interview, traditional Catholics can use this moment to engage with the broader secular culture and discuss how their Church understands the human person, as well as human nature and the consequences of sin. Given how infrequently moments like these arise, this is an invaluable chance for Catholics to talk about their faith with many people listening.

Pope Francis smiling as he waves to onlookers.
Pope Francis smiling as he waves to onlookers.

A universal message of healing taken out of context

When examined in their actual context, it is clear that Pope Francis’ answers to fellow Jesuit Fr. Antonio Spadaro cover a vast array of subjects, with only a small part of the transcript touching on the particular sins of homosexual activity and abortion and how the Church discusses these in a broader cultural and societal lens. The real value of the Pope’s comments on these two particular areas lays in the crux of his message: a universal focus on all aspects of the human condition, including all sins, for which the Church is the great Hospital, led by the Master Physician.

While the Pope’s comments initially troubled me, once I read his interview in full, I came to believe that he is deliberately speaking about these doctrines in a way that causes ordinary people to think more about them. As an old metaphor goes, it is far easier for a child to swallow medicine if she is gently coaxed to take it, then if it is forced down her throat. Thus, when it comes to addressing the profoundly sensitive issues of abortion and homosexual activity, by the nature of  what these sins do to the soul, the Pope places a primacy of emphasis on “healing the wounds” that these particular sins carry. In emphasizing healing, this is nothing that the Church did not already teach. Thus, for me, the crux of his message rests in one of the paragraphs cited less frequently by commentators:

“I see clearly,” the pope continues, “that the thing the church needs most today is the ability to heal wounds and to warm the hearts of the faithful; it needs nearness, proximity. I see the church as a field hospital after battle. It is useless to ask a seriously injured person if he has high cholesterol and about the level of his blood sugars! You have to heal his wounds. Then we can talk about everything else. Heal the wounds, heal the wounds…. And you have to start from the ground up.

This passage speaks clearly to the extent to which Pope Francis sees the Church in ontological and mystical terms as a hospital in a confused world with many battles raging, a place for sinners to be counseled, treated, and restored to the path to eternal life in Christ. His words reflect a profoundly orthodox theology and highlight the core of what the Roman Catholic Church has taught for centuries, currently teaches,  and will always teach about the human condition. The Church reaches out to raise up all people, all sinners, struggling in the beauty, pain, light and darkness which animates life in all circumstances.

Pope Francis’ words here are not meant to excuse any sin, but rather, encourage people to seek healing in the Church by immersing themselves in the life of the Church, her sacraments (especially confession, which offers extraordinary catharsis, regeneration, healing and peace) and her divine services. As Pope Francis observed:

“This is also the great benefit of confession as a sacrament: evaluating case by case and discerning what is the best thing to do for a person who seeks God and grace. The confessional is not a torture chamber, but the place in which the Lord’s mercy motivates us to do better. I also consider the situation of a woman with a failed marriage in her past and who also had an abortion. Then this woman remarries, and she is now happy and has five children. That abortion in her past weighs heavily on her conscience and she sincerely regrets it. She would like to move forward in her Christian life. What is the confessor to do?

It is the following paragraph of the interview in which Pope Francis’ comments generated so much controversy. Yet, interpreted in their context, especially these words, “the teaching of the Church is clear and I am a son of the Church”, there should be no cause for concern among traditional Catholics:

“We cannot insist only on issues related to abortion, gay marriage and the use of contraceptive methods. This is not possible. I have not spoken much about these things, and I was reprimanded for that. But when we speak about these issues, we have to talk about them in a context. The teaching of the church, for that matter, is clear and I am a son of the church, but it is not necessary to talk about these issues all the time.

By expounding that Church bishops, parish priests, monastic clergy, and lay teachers should not focus their public statements and preaching only on these issues, Pope Francis says nothing that changes the Church’s doctrines. He is simply clarifying that, not only is “the teaching of the Church clear”, but that, on a pastoral level, “it is not necessary to talk about these issues all the time” in church, or, for bishops, at press conferences.

This picture released by the Vatican press office on March 15, 2013 shows Pope Francis delivering a speech during a meeting of the world's cardinals.The new Pontiff urged the Roman Catholic Church not to give in to "pessimism" and to find new ways of spreading the faith "to the ends of the earth".  EPA/Osservatore Romano
This picture released by the Vatican press office on March 15, 2013 shows Pope Francis delivering a speech during a meeting of the world’s cardinals.The new Pontiff urged the Roman Catholic Church not to give in to “pessimism” and to find new ways of spreading the faith “to the ends of the earth”. EPA/Osservatore Romano

Context is key to reaching people

The heart of Pope Francis’ message is that all discussions have their appropriate context. The Church teachings with regard to human life and sexuality are not a matter of policy which can be amended or artificial sentiment which can change with time, but divine guidelines with the view of man’s soul as a wounded entity requiring appropriate healing, restoration and transformation in Christ. This resonates with me as an Orthodox Christian, and I do not think that the Pope’s comments encourage people to view any particular sins as “okay”, as somehow not necessitating repentance and healing. After all, sins are not legal categories, but various mindsets or acts which cause harm to the soul by obscuring the ever-present love of God.

Many prominent conservative writers have expressed concern over Pope Francis’ remarks. The American Conservative (TAC)‘s senior editor Rod Dreher quips that he “about had a cow” in his article “Pope Francis: The Era of JP2 & Benedict Is Over”. Addressing the Pope’s comments, Dreher offers these reflections:

There is so, so much to love and to affirm here — and great wisdom too. His comparison of the Church in this time as like a field hospital is quite apt. It’s true for all times, but especially for today, it seems to me, with so many people lost and confused and hurting.

I know what the Pope means here, and he’s right: there is so very much more to Christianity than its teachings on sexuality and abortion. But this is where I think he goes badly wrong: his remarks will be received as the Pope saying that this stuff doesn’t matter all that much. Francis can’t claim he was misquoted or that the article gave the wrong emphasis, because he personally approved it before publication. He may not have intended it this way, but it will be taken as such by a people, especially in Europe and North America, who have closed their hearts and minds to the Church’s unchanging message on these topics, precisely because these are the hardest things for modern people to accept.

While I agree wholeheartedly with Dreher that, among some people, “his remarks will be received as the Pope saying that this stuff doesn’t matter all that much”, I would argue that this kind of disconnect or misunderstanding is essentially inevitable in today’s media environment and cultural context, irrespective of what the Pope said on this matter or how he chose to say it.

Among those millions of ex, lax, lapsed or non-Catholics  who, for any number of reasons, remain unwilling to hear or live the Church’s position on these issues, most are now choosing to hear what they want from Pope Francis, divorcing his words from their appropriate pastoral context and focus. What if the Pope had addressed these issues in the ways his predecessors did, offering a different emphasis? Then the question would become another kind of guessing game. Of those people who might now listen to the Pope with some frequency due to how he approached these issues, how many would never have begun listening to him had he not approached these topics as he did?

On Holy Thursday 2013, Pope Francis broke with centuries of tradition by washing the feet of the poor outside the walls of the Vatican, and by washing the feet of several juvenile inmates who were not Christian, one of whom was a Muslim girl. She appears visibly touched by the gesture in this photo.
On Holy Thursday 2013, Pope Francis broke with centuries of tradition by washing the feet of the poor outside the walls of the Vatican, and by washing the feet of several juvenile inmates who were not Christian, one of whom was a Muslim girl. She appears visibly touched by the gesture in this photo.

Subtle inception

I am not convinced that the Pope’s comments will mean that millions of people in Europe and North America “who have closed their hearts and minds to the Church’s unchanging message on these topics” will necessarily remain closed off to his approach. The genius of the Pope’s comments is that, by speaking in such a way that could be construed as sounding sympathetic to those who wish to actually change the Church’s message, he in fact performs a kind of inception. By talking about these issues in the context of the wounds of the soul and the sacramental life of the Church, Pope Francis connects these notions with the sins he describes. Thus, even if only incrementally, he brings to many unchurched people, and many lapsed Catholics, a subtle awareness of what the Church actually teaches and, in simple, direct language, why she teaches what she does.

It is precisely because “these are the hardest things for modern people to accept” that the Pope’s expressing them delicately (while all the while referencing the unchanging theology and praxis of the Church) will catch people’s interest. To me, this is both brilliant and invaluable, since now, many people who were previously misinformed as to what the Church taught, or disinclined to tune into her position, may find themselves listening to the Pope.

Connecting the Pope’s interview to his other public statements

I would offer that anyone who has even a passing degree of familiarity with anything that Pope Francis has said or written on the subject of Catholic teachings on sexuality and abortion cannot come to the conclusion that he is “saying that this stuff doesn’t matter all that much”. Among those who read or heard only out-of-context excerpts of the Pope’s interview, the danger is certainly present for some to misconstrue his meaning as they will, but I suppose I have slightly more faith in people’s common sense to realize that a Catholic pope is not condoning sinful actions.

By this, I don’t mean to suggest that Dreher doesn’t have faith in people, but that if anyone actually ponders Pope Francis’ words for more than a few seconds, he or she will start down the path to learning a little more about this charismatic Argentine Pope and what he has taught and believes. Sooner than later, anyone who has paid even a few seconds of attention to the Pope’s interview will stumble across his fiery 2010 comments on gay marriage in Argentina, or the public comments he made a mere day after his interview’s release, in which he offered a passionate condemnation of abortion.

Pope Francis beaming at onlookers
Pope Francis beaming at onlookers

The spirit behind his words

Have we read some appalling headlines over the past few days? That is, perhaps, an understatement. In his article aptly titled “The media’s mind-boggling failure to understand Pope Francis”, The Week’s Edward Morrissey offers this incisive criticism of media outlets’ imaginative reporting on the Pope’s interview, and the enormous chasm between his words as he expressed them, and how he was purported to have voiced them:

The media takeaway from this rather common-sense approach to evangelization — and the centrality of Jesus Christ and the message of salvation to Christianity — was that Pope Francis was going to change doctrine, or at least soften it up a lot. ABC News reported this as Francis scolding the Catholic Church over “divisive rules.” A few days later, the European wire service AFP reported that the “pope seeks easing of rigid Catholic doctrine,” with references to other reporting by media outlets of “revolutionary words” and that Francis was “pushing a shift” in the Catholic Church. The abortion-rights group NARAL even went as far as publishing a thank-you note to Francis, only to have him excoriate abortion a few days later and the “throwaway culture” that abortion promotes.

Even with all of the resources available to research the hardly secret doctrine of the mainstream Catholic Church, the media either fail at putting Francis in the proper context or can’t resist attempting to fit him into the narrative as the Pope Who Will Create Secular Catholicism. In this narrative, the retired Benedict XVI plays as some kind of moss-backed, benighted conservative for whom Francis is the cure.

The New York Timespiece continued in the above vein, setting up the all-too-common false dichotomy of portraying Pope Benedict as an arch-conservative reactionary in contrast to the supposedly progressive Pope Francis, while Slate triumphantly crowed that the Pope is a “profoundly anti-conservative liberal”. Then, The Huffington Post put out their creatively titled “Pope Bluntly Faults Church’s Focus on Gays and Abortion”. Suffice it to say, we have abundant evidence that most media outlets still do not “get” religion. Yet despite this, ultimately, I would echo R.R. Reno at First Things, who notes in his article “Pope Francis’ New Balance” that

Pope Francis encourages a more balanced view of our present circumstances. Yes, some bad, very bad dimensions. But also some good, very good dimensions. We’re to navigate judiciously, neither condemning broadly, nor naively affirming the status quo. This balance is needed. My motto at First Things: We know what we’re against, now tell me what we’re for. That seems to be the spirit of some of what the Pope is saying.

It is my hope that more traditional Christians will look to the spirit of what Pope Francis is saying, and ask “Why did he choose to say that the way he did? What effect did he want his words to have on people who might not think as I do, who might not believe as the Church teaches?” Speaking in reference to all traditional Christians who believe the words we recite or sing in the Nicene Creed on Sundays, I would follow Reno and ask: what is it we are “for”?

Pope Francis has made clear that he is “for” “healing the wounds” which afflict so many today. I expect that this might be why he chose the Italian Jesuit publication La Civiltà Cattolica to carry his first public interview as Pope. The profound significance of Pope Francis’ selection of this 163-year old publication to run this interview has been lost on most: the journal’s title, rendered into English, is “Catholic Civilization”, and the journal is unique among all Vatican-based publications in that all of its contents are revised under the direct supervision of the Secretariat of State for the Holy See. This means that every article which appears in this publication is repeatedly checked to ensure that it conveys ideas which conform to Catholic orthodoxy, and, where pastoral advice is offered, orthopraxy.

It is these two fundamental maxims – orthodoxy, translated from the Greek as ‘right belief’ or ‘true thinking’, and orthopraxy, rendered as ‘correct practice’ – which were undoubtedly on the minds of the Vatican secretaries who poured over the transcript of Pope Francis’ interview. That this journal should be the means of conveying the first Jesuit Pope’s thoughts to the world on the Church, sin and the human condition was certainly deliberate on his part. Let us look to the spirit in which they were spoken, and continue to watch and listen as others begin to watch and listen to a pope who continues to surprise the world with his uncanny ability to attract the attention of those who might not otherwise have noticed.

  1. Comment by The Thinker on September 25, 2013 at 1:09 pm

    “If someone is gay and he searches for the Lord and has good will, who am I to judge?”
    “They say there are some gay people here. I think that when we encounter a gay person, we must make the distinction between the fact of a person being gay and the fact of a lobby, because lobbies are not good.”

    – Pope Francis, interviewed on his return from Brazil, reported in NYT, July 29, 2013

    The underlying difficulty is that Pope Francis now uses language unwisely—in a way that assumes the validity of the identity claim that underlies the movement he rejects; that is, the claim that there is such a thing as “being gay” or being “a homosexual person,” “a gay person.” This form of language makes is easy to equate this identity with other identities that are uncontroversial, like “being male” or “being female” or “being black” or “being indigenous.” Once you regard homosexuality as an identity (rather than, per the Catechism, an objectively disordered inclination), then all the conclusions that follow from a valid identity claim must follow here, too. And once you accept the identity claim, it makes it is very difficult to simultaneously affirm the person without affirming the identity. It makes it very difficult to affirm what the Catechism says, in other words.

    Really, the fundamental controversy is this: does an inclination toward a sinful act constitute a naturally given category of being? Does an inclination to a sin constitute a valid identify that should be affirmed? The answer to this question is not evident to most people today, one way or the other. But you’d think it would be to a Pope. Why does the Pope speak as if the answer is yes?

    Of course the Pope is right that Catholics don’t have to talk about this subject constantly. But when they do, they should use sound language, not language that entails the rejection of the Church’s teaching.

    Moreover, maybe it’s time for Catholics to recognize that, per church doctrine, Popes are only infallible when speaking ex-cathedra. They are as fallible as others the rest of the time, and face unique pressures toward error that the rest of us do not face.

  2. Comment by Don Merrion on November 16, 2013 at 8:34 pm

    Ryan, thanks for the excellent article. I feel a bit more at ease about what I have heard around the water cooler regarding the Pope’s interview. What a shame, though, about the mass confusion there is now swirling around out there.

    I was also blown away by the insightful comments of “The Thinker.” What a tremendously important point he/she makes, especially in terms of how a priest might approach pastoral care and counseling of someone who has same-sex inclinations.

The work of IRD is made possible by your generous contributions.

Receive expert analysis in your inbox.