Pope Francis: A transition to a new Pope

 

Pope Francis

 

The death today of Pope Francis will no doubt cause many to write of him and his legacy. As a Christian not of the Roman Catholic expression I contribute my thoughts as one of many.

 

Upon the papal election of Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio, a Jesuit, he gave himself the name Francis, a name which I have always associated with Saint Francis of Assisi. Of the two orders, the Society of Jesus and the Franciscans, their missions or ministries could not be further apart. So, when the Jesuit Bergoglio donned his pontifical nom, perhaps there was an intentional misdirection in play to the public.

 

One interpretation of the chosen “Francis” is that Bergoglio wanted the public to believe that he was not of the traditional Jesuit ilk. Another interpretation could be that the public would think the ministry of Assisi, but that his papacy would continue in historically Jesuit pursuits. Given his performance in the Chair of Peter I believe it to be the latter.

 

The sequence of popes over the past several decades, it must be said, gave Pope Francis some level of difficulty, the difficulty of following Saint Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI. Both of those popes kept to the Gospel in a world ever secularizing with its nihilist attitude. Many people responded enthusiastically to those two popes. John Paul II always drew a crowd of young people as he traveled the world. Then there were those Catholics who were disappointed when Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger was elected.

 

On the evening of Ratzinger’s election, April 19, 2005, the ABC Television Network evening show Nightline interviewed reporter Cokie Roberts, a Roman Catholic. One might say that Roberts had a meltdown about the winner of the conclave. She, for the most part, wanted a softer, more liberal pontiff to replace the traditional JPII.

 

Then many faithful and traditional Catholics became incensed, frustrated, and confused - not to mention being more than mildly disappointed – when Benedict resigned his office. Some even refused to forgive him, even if that were necessary. Their world collapsed upon his announcement.

 

Then Francis of Loyola was elected and the church had two popes simultaneously. Well, resignation seemed an impossible if not unlikely occurrence in these times. But it happened. The early controversy then – before Francis really had time to do anything – revolved around Benedict assuming the title “Pope Emeritus” instead of “Bishop Emeritus of Rome.” That rancor died out fairly quickly.

 

Attention to the upcoming conclave will dominate the news. The Roman Catholic factions will be loud and non-stop until the white smoke appears. Father Gerald Murray, a regular contributor to EWTN, was a guest on Fox News this morning explaining what he thinks will happen in the weeks to come. But he also talked about the factions within his church. From an outsider’s perspective it was refreshing to see Father Murray speak frankly about the problems with Francis’s pontificate. Roman Catholics in the past have seemingly refused to talk about or to acknowledge any sort of problem within their faith community. The EWTN group led by Raymond Arroyo’s The World Over has been somewhat forthright through the years of this Jesuit pontificate. The comments were measured but otherwise unrestrained and they spoke respectfully of their pontiff.

 

Back to the upcoming conclave: what will happen, no one knows. The majority of the College of Cardinals received their red biretta from Pope Francis and one would think that would tip the balance of power in favor of another Jesuit or at least a left-leaning prince of the church.

 

One can speculate, and I will do so here, about papal prospects. This past December Pope Francis elevated a young Australian bishop to the cardinalate: Ukrainian-born Melbourne Bishop Mykola Bychok. If this cardinal is chosen to be the next pope, there appear to be many opportunities for Christian re-unification. This “Eastern Rite Pope” could be the lever that resolves the 1054 split which in itself could generate other processes of unity. Just as Pope Benedict XVI created the Anglican Ordinariate, such movements could engender a larger Christian unification movement. Who knows?

 

Why should the non-Roman Catholic faithful have any interest in this conclave? Just given the size – meaning the number of communicants worldwide – of the Roman Catholic Church, the person in the Chair of Peter affects worldwide events, people, and hearts. One cannot ignore the one who sits in Peter’s chair.

 

What all of Christendom wants is the faithful presentation of the Gospel worldwide, and by sheer size if nothing else the leadership represented by the Roman Catholic Pope is impactful, for good or not. A fractured church is scandalous to the world. It weakens the Gospel message.

 

Whether we are Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, Anglican, or Protestant, we need to pray for Divine Guidance  of the election of the next pope.