Reactions to Pope Francis

David Gibson has an interesting discussion of the reactions of some Catholics to Pope Francis. His humility, simplicity, vibrancy, compassion, and focus on social justice have been sweet music to my ears. One need only look at the reactions of the massive crowds during his recent trip to Brazil to see something glorious happening. How could anyone that professes love for Christ not be ecstatic? It boggles the mind.

Yet not everyone is pleased.  One cardinal sin of the new pope is that he does not praise the godly "free market" and demands actions for those at the bottom of the economic ladder.

Since Francis’ election, the anxiety on the right has only mounted as he has continued to model a radically different pontificate — preaching about the evils of the globalized economy while repeatedly reminding his followers to care for the poor and marginalized.

The very fact that the followers of Christ need to be reminded to care for the poor and disenfranchised is unsettling. With its clarion call for compassion, the entire gospel of Matthew is a blueprint for Christian praxis. How could someone that accepts scripture as the foundation of faith wring their hands over Francis' focus on social justice?

There are some remarkable and revealing quotes in this article.

Here is audacity:

Catholics on “the right wing of the church,” Philadelphia Archbishop Charles Chaput said on the eve of the Brazil trip, “have not been really happy about (Francis’) election.” Chaput, a vocal conservative in the U.S. hierarchy, told the National Catholic Reporter that Francis “will have to care for them, too, so it will be interesting to see how all this works out in the long run.”

In most organizations, vocal criticism of the boss will get you in serious trouble. You would think that someone so far up the hierarchy would never go public with discontent about the boss of bosses. Of course, the archbishop betrays his true concerns. He views the pope as catering to a particular wing of the church hierarchy and feeling slighted, demands more attention for the "right wing." So he thinks that the pope is focusing on social justice to bless the pet causes of his supporters instead of genuine concern for the most vulnerable. I am sure Jesus would laugh heartily at the idea that the feelings of church leaders matter more than his flock.

Here is entitlement:

“They have loyally supported the church with donations and activism and can be expected to oppose any change in direction of the sort Francis has signaled,” Michael D’Antonio, author of a book on the clergy abuse scandals, wrote in a Foreign Policy magazine essay that asked, “Is Francis too radical for his flock?”

That seems like stockholders mentality. If you have contributed the most time and money, your wishes need take precedence. To paraphrase Orwell, all parishioners are equal, but some are more equal than others. Those without money and time to donate are less important. Huzzah.

Here is pure, unadulterated cynicism:

Some even think, as writer Elizabeth Scalia explained in the conservative journal First Things, that Francis may be manipulating journalists in order to insinuate traditional Catholic teaching into mainstream press reports.

If by some sick and twisted chance Pope Francis is engaged in deceit and subterfuge, Scalia will stand and cheer. By the same token, she will be deeply disappointed if the pope is actually speaking truth from his heart. Someone should cast out her demon.

And finally, here is an expert on religious heretics:

“To the extent that conservative Catholics in the United States find themselves actively disagreeing with Pope Francis’s emphases … it might help cure them/us of the recurring Catholic temptation toward papolatry,” wrote New York Times columnist Ross Douthat. 

 All of this begs the obvious question. With "friends" like these, who needs enemies?