By FR. KEVIN M. CUSICK
As with all things Catholic and all things in life, we must always put the most charitable interpretation on events that come to our attention. If they come to our knowledge through sinful curiosity, it is, of course, none of our business. In our voyeuristic culture, however, where the news cycle knows no sleep and many people record their entire existence on the Internet, it becomes increasingly heroically virtuous to observe private boundaries in our culture and to ask that others do the same. In this milieu almost every word and action of Pope Francis is recorded, analyzed, and spun.
To our Holy Father Pope Francis we owe a great deal in the way of respect for he is the Vicar of Christ: There is no office on Earth more important to Christ and His plan for our salvation in and through the Church. To the Pope, and his Successors, we owe obedience of intellect and will as he reaffirms Church moral teaching. We owe our assent likewise if he should, as has happened very rarely in history, declare a matter of faith and morals to be binding for all of the faithful.
We owe the Pope and his intentions our prayers and our love in his role as our “sweet Christ on Earth,” as Peter and all of his Successors are so beautifully described by St. Catherine of Siena.
In light of everything that is true about the office of the papacy, Pope Francis’ ability to surprise and delight some while causing chagrin to others is proving to be a stretch for many of the faithful. His wide-open pastoral approach, characterized by hugs and selfies for all, which throws accustomed papal caution to the wind, is not without its pitfalls.
There is a very important reason why Popes have customarily worked from a prepared text when speaking and have done background checks on people and causes whose actions or policies they may not want to appear to be supporting. The downside of this traditional approach, characterized by a superabundance of prudence, is that some Popes have seemed somewhat distant and therefore less pastoral.
Jesus Christ dined with tax collectors and prostitutes, He embraced sinners, and, though some came to Him repentant, we cannot be sure that in every case He told every sinner He encountered to “go and sin no more.” Beyond the famous case of the woman caught in adultery, who clearly responded to Jesus’ mercy with repentance, it is very difficult to say with assurance that the Lord’s conversation with every sinner in every case included words of reprimand. He taught the crowds very clearly about the need to repent and accept His forgiveness for sins but most likely took a very different approach with individual cases.
“Man sees appearances, but God looks into the heart”: Surely He offered mercy and words of support for a new life of holiness in every case where His forgiveness was prepared for by a heart moved to seek Him by sorrow for sin.
As we all know so well, Pope Francis errs on the side of having “the smell of the sheep” — of both those who consider themselves sheep, and those who don’t. He has made himself so available that sometimes he ends up redolent with the smell of public sin and rejection of mercy. This was certainly the case of a former student from the Pope’s days in Jesuit education, who was granted an individual, or “private,” audience with him in Washington, D.C. At the same time, we have come to hear, he did meet with county clerk Kim Davis and offered her words of encouragement, but, say Vatican sources, he did not do so privately and not in such wise that he was aware of all of the aspects of her case.
The most important thing Pope Francis said to aid Kim Davis and all who, like her, resist the redefinition of marriage as county clerks or public officials of any kind, was to speak out clearly on his flight back to Rome after the visit to the USA. He said then that people of faith have a right to freedom of conscience, as do all persons.
What caused consternation on the part of many Catholics and other Christians was the way that the Vatican distanced itself from the Davis meeting at the nunciature in Washington so quickly after news of it erupted in the American media. The vocal leftists were writhing and groaning in pain when they learned that Kim Davis came into friendly contact with Pope Francis. Many, no doubt, enjoyed the spectacle, which much resembled devils suffering the effects of an exorcism!
The Vatican reacted by not only distancing itself from Davis but also by stating she was part of a large group at the embassy and received brief generic words of greeting and well wishes from the Pope as well as the gift of rosaries. As if salting that wound, the Vatican then said that there was indeed a private audience with, surprise, a homosexual man and his partner, and not Kim Davis. No doubt many orthodox observers felt stunned as if receiving a virtual slap upon hearing this news.
[Wanderer Editor’s Note: Elsewhere in this issue: Please see statement from Liberty Counsel, whose chairman, Mat Staver, is Davis’ attorney, that disputes the Vatican’s claims about the meeting.]
Why did Pope Francis not only meet with a homosexual man who clearly rejects Church moral teaching by his manner of life as well as God Himself in his stance as an atheist? And why does it seem as though the “full truth” about whom the Pope met with was unnecessary? Why, people ask, does it seem as though he is now dismissing Kim Davis and like-minded freedom of conscience warriors with a shrug while embracing their putative cultural foes with a hug?
First, it is simply not possible to ask the Holy Father to embrace the cause of Kim Davis in all of its aspects. It is usually true that there are very few cases where it possible for the Pope to do that for anyone due to reasons of complexity alone. In his interview on the plane the Pope had already lent his important support to culture warriors through his remarks about the right to freedom of conscience.
In charity for the Holy Father in his pastoral mission to the peripheries, as he has described it in his own words, and in the light of Jesus Christ and the Gospel, we recall that Jesus embraced sinners and ate with them, so much so that He Himself was accused of being a drunkard. The benefit of the doubt would lead us to assume that Pope Francis is simply trying to do the same thing in order to further the love of Jesus Christ for every human person.
Pope Francis was asked by a friend from his own home in Argentina to meet with him. In human charity and pastoral solicitude, Pope Francis embraced him. In our faith we can surely understand that, even if the Pope did not explicitly mention sin in his private conversation the man, perhaps his example of holiness might have accomplished the same objective. We can only pray that it may always be true for us as for him.
Thank you for reading. Praised be Jesus Christ, now and forever.
Powered by WPtouch Mobile Suite for WordPress