Pope Francis and the Ignatian Presupposition

The surprising death of Pope Francis naturally led to a surge in articles, stories, and analysis of his papacy. From the secular mainstream media to the trusted Catholic media, and the small and sometimes dark corners of the blogosphere; summaries, interpretations, and judgement of Pope Francis was everywhere. While there was much praise, there was also criticism.

While no Pope is perfect and there is always room for valid criticism; many of the attacks on Francis after his death were meanspirited and vengeful. In some cases, critics appeared to show joy or glee for the end of his papacy. Some are refusing to even say his name or derisively calling him simply Bergoglio.

I have no issue describing Pope Francis as a radical. Jesus was a radical. Padre Pio, Joan of Arc and many of our greatest saints were radicals. Sometimes we need a radical and that is what God gives us. Radicals are often misunderstood, appearing harsh to some, and often focused on specific themes. They can sometimes serve as a counterbalance to some prevailing idea, in order to keep it in perspective or not lose sight of other important ideas. Jesus was an extremely harsh critic to the scribes, pharisees and Jewish leaders of the day.

The Criticism

The critics of Pope Francis go farther than calling him a radical. The harshest accusations include heresy, idolatry, and leading the faithful astray. The idolatry claim stems from the Vatican allowing an outside group to host “an indigenous performance at a tree planting ceremony in the Vatican gardens” witnessed by Pope Francis. It’s unclear what the statues used were and what they meant. Regardless, after witnessing the ceremony, Pope Francis departed from his prepared remarks and simply recited the “Our Father” as if to exercise anything bad that happened there. Confusing and misguided, yes; but idolatry, not by the Pope.

As far as heresy and leading the faithful astray, most critics point to comments Pope Francis would make during informal in-flight press conferences. Firstly, these types of comments are the Pope’s opinions, casual conversations and friendly engagement with reporters. These were not official teachings on doctrine or dogma. Moreover, none of these comments contradicted Church teaching. These comments emphasized pastoral approaches to dealing with real people rather than the broad moral teaching of the Church. He didn’t contradict the Church’s moral teaching, but simply focused on how to help the sinner.

The criticism of Pope Francis’s encyclicals and more formal statements follow a similar theme. Every critic I have read admits that nothing Pope Francis published was technically wrong or contrary to Church teaching, but rather it was unclear and vague enough for those pushing false agendas to claim an opening. All these critics could have been appeased if after every informal comment or official declaration Francis added a disclaimer such as “nothing stated or written should be construed as changing or affecting official Church teaching or doctrine.” However, that was not Pope Francis’s style. Moreover, it would be clunky and redundant. In Mathew 23:13 when Jesus says, “woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites,” he did not add a disclaimer like, “except for Nicodemus and the other good ones.”

Strong Defense of Church Teaching

On many occasions, Pope Francis restated and emphatically emphasized a defense of Church Teaching. On Abortion, he was steadfast. Catholic News Agency lists his strongest statements against abortion including, Sept. 15, 2021, “Abortion is murder.” June 16, 2018, Abortion of disabled is like “what the Nazis were doing.” Oct. 10, 2018, Abortion is like “hiring a hitman.” Feb. 18, 2016, “Abortion is ‘against the Hippocratic oath… Abortion is not the lesser of two evils. It is a crime. It is to throw someone out in order to save another. That’s what the Mafia does. It is a crime, an absolute evil.”

Other examples on gender ideology include 2024 when Pope Francis described gender ideology as the “ugliest danger” of our time. He went on to say, “today the worst danger is gender ideology, which erases differences,” and calling it “this ugly ideology of our time.” The Associated Press described the shock to those pushing the ideology that, the Vatican “declared gender-affirming surgery and surrogacy as grave violations of human dignity, putting them on par with abortion and euthanasia as practices that it said reject God’s plan for human life”.

On the possibility of women as priests, Francis said, “why can a woman not enter ordained ministry? It is because the Petrine principle has no place for that”. On the idea of women as deacons, Francis was very blunt when answering CBS News’s Norah O’Donnell saying, “If it is deacons with Holy Orders, no”.

On the German Synodal Way which has called for changes to Church teachings on homosexuality, celibacy, lay-preaching at Mass, and Women Deacons; Pope Francis criticized the German agenda as “Neither Helpful Nor Serious.” When the Germans tried to set-up a decision-making body against the direction of the Vatican, Francis wrote that “its formation was forbidden by the Holy See.” In a bit of blunt humor, during an in-flight press conference, Francis said, “I say to German Catholics: Germany has a great Protestant Church, but I don’t want another one”.

The Need for Clarity

So, at the end of his Papacy, it’s clear Francis strongly supported Church doctrine when it mattered most, but his emphasis on mercy, pastoral care of sinners, and ambiguity in his speech and statements alarmed critics. It’s the lack of clarity and ambiguity that critics cite most often. Yet, this criticism applies a modern-western style of thinking to a 2,000+ year-old Church led by internationally diverse clergy. In fact, Jesus was questioned for speaking in parables rather than clearly stating his points.
In Mark 4:10-12 we read, “When He was alone, the Twelve and the others around him asked him about the parables. He told them,

The secret of the kingdom of God has been given to you. But to those on the outside everything is said in parables so that, “they may be ever seeing but never perceiving, and ever hearing but never understanding; otherwise, they might turn and be forgiven!

Most commentators propose Christ used Parables to let his listeners think through their meaning and gain a deeper understanding of the message and how it applies to them. Simple declarative statements do not encourage self-examination of conscience. Jesus was also blunt to make a point as in Mathew 5:30, “if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away.” He does not then explain what this means.

Is it fair to expect perfectly clear statements from the Vicar of Christ? I think you can make a case either way so it’s a good that we are blessed with many different Popes with very different personalities and styles. Just as we should take scripture as a whole and not cling to one verse in isolation, we should also look at the Papacy as the whole of all 266 successors of Saint Peter rather than pitting one against another. They complement one another and together are more complete.

Ignatian Presupposition

Even if one expects more clarity out of the Pope in our modern age, many critics forget our obligation to assume the best about people and what they say. The Ignatian Presupposition states,

it is necessary to suppose that every good Christian is more ready to put a good interpretation on another’s statement than to condemn it as false. If an orthodox construction cannot be put on a proposition, the one who made it should be asked how he understands it.

Furthermore, the Catechism of the Catholic Church 2477-2478 states,

Respect for the reputation of persons forbids every attitude and word likely to cause them unjust injury. He becomes guilty: of rash judgment who, even tacitly, assumes as true, without sufficient foundation, the moral fault of a neighbor… To avoid rash judgment, everyone should be careful to interpret insofar as possible his neighbor’s thoughts, words, and deeds in a favorable way: Every good Christian ought to be more ready to give a favorable interpretation to another’s statement than to condemn it.

Every Pope is due some criticism, but there is a particular vitriol toward Francis by some. Ephesians 4:15 says, “Instead, speaking the truth in love, we will in all things grow up into Christ Himself.” Of course, it would be nice to have every Pope speak with measured clarity. But since Popes are human, they are never going to be perfect. Sometimes the gift of rabble rousing is needed for a moment in time, even if it temporarily sows some confusion and resentment.

The Church is over 2,000 years-old, and the gates of hell will not prevail against it. The 12 years of Francis will certainly not bring it down. It may be hundreds of years before we fully understand how the benefits outweighed the short-term pain at times. However, one could also say; we would not have Pope Leo XIV without Francis. Perhaps for some, that is enough.