Pope Francis — a week after the dust settled from his decision not to create an Amazonian rite that would have allowed married men to serve as priests and women as deacons — continues to garner news coverage as Catholic progressives and traditionalists debate what it all means.
The mainstream press, often too concerned with propping up Francis’ progressive bona fides, has largely not reported on why the pope decided to go the way he did. The factors that resulted in the pope’s decision came from a variety of camps inside the church. And what about this question: Did conservatives in the Vatican hierarchy, led by Cardinal Robert Sarah (helped by the recent intervention of Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI), raise enough concerns to tip the decision in their favor?
The Amazonian rite, however, was never only just about South America. The pope’s decision could have had global ramifications. The tug-of-war mostly involves German bishops pushing the pope to allow all clergy to marry (along with other changes in discipline and doctrine), while on the other is conservative prelates warning against doing away with the 1,000-year church tradition.
Once again, much of the backstory behind Francis’ decision can be learned from reading the religious press, both Catholics on the doctrinal left and right.
The mainstream press largely missed these angles, meaning readers had to delve really deep into internet news sources (with help from social media) to get analysis of how Francis reached his decision and whether the issue of married clergy/women deacons will rage on.
In the end, much to the chagrin of the mainstream press, Francis decided in favor of Catholic orthodoxy and tradition. What the mainstream press saw, but failed to report, was the Francis defies typical contemporary political categories.
Unlike Benedict, Francis is also no theologian and that often leads to the type of doctrinal ambiguity that angers some Catholics. In the end, the pope’s decision was a tough one given how the people living in the Amazon region often go months without seeing a priest or receiving sacraments. Indeed, the scarcity of priestly vocations is hurting the church there and around the world. Francis’ ultimate decision was more prayer for vocations and sending more missionaries to that part of South America. Those ideas, form many in mainstream press newsrooms, were probably greeted with eye rolls.
The oft-maligned conservative Catholic press — the same folks accused of stoking doctrinal arguments — once again got to the heart of the story. Catholic press that leans left chose to focus on climate change, which was also featured prominently in the pope’s document.
The mainstream media covered it largely as a fight between right and left, but also focused on Francis, the progressive hero, disappointing his base. It was covered like a political story. The theology behind it all was ignored and the ramifications of allowing married priests and female deacons given little attention.
For broader context, reporters should have honed in on the pressure Francis felt from factions on both sides of the issue. Francis may be progressive, but he believes in celibacy for priests — and always has — despite a drop in vocations. A wonderful analysis piece by Ed Condon for Catholic News Agency noted the following:
The bishops of Germany, notably, were clear that these proposals – and the pope’s expected favorable reception of them – would be a crucial support for the “binding synodal process” unfolding in their own country.
Together with the Central Committee of German Catholics (ZdK), the bishops opened that process at the beginning of Advent last year. The aim of the participants, by their own admission, is to “reform” the Church in Germany by doing away with clerical celibacy, bringing in the ordination of women, and allowing the Church to recognize and bless same-sex unions.
After a back-and-forth with the Vatican last year, in which first Pope Francis, along with several senior curial officials, rejected the German synod’s plans and priorities, anticipation was high that the Amazonian exhortation would provide new cover for the German agenda.
In light of all that, the pope’s silence this week on the issue of celibacy, and his words on the importance and dignity of women’s ministry outside of the clerical state, were seen, at least by the ZdK, as a defeat for their progressive aims.
“This letter is of course the view of the situation in the Amazon region,” the committee said in a statement issued in response to Querida Amazonia, which apparently sought to limit the scope of an intervention they had initially intended to broaden.
The ZdK said that, before the pope issued his exhortation, “expectations regarding concrete steps towards reform, especially with regard to access to the priestly office and the role of women, were very high.”
“Unfortunately, he does not find the courage to implement real reforms on the issues of consecration of married men and the liturgical skills of women that have been discussed for 50 years.”
On his blog, Father Dwight Longenecker — a married Catholic priest — also focused on the Germans and Francis’ potential abandonment of his progressive views:
My own opinion about these two issues is to observe that the events of the Amazonian synod are not disconnected in Francis’ mind with the turmoil in the German church. He has seen how close to the precipice of schism the German church is (and by extension those liberals in the Western countries sympathetic to the liberal causes espoused by the German bishops) and I think he has seen how those bishops would pick up the possibilities of married priests and women deacons and run with the ball to push further for the whole progressive agenda. Seeing where this might lead, I sense that the Holy Father therefore decided to put on the brakes.
If this is the case, I wonder whether we are beginning to see a shift in the Pope’s attitude to progressive ideas and foment. We will see whether this action of reining in the progressives continues. I wouldn’t be surprised to see him also begin, therefore to drop some of the ambiguity and speak more clearly in the definition and defense of the historic Catholic faith.
There was one other positive aspect to the pope’s exhortation which was actually the best part. The final document from the Amazonian Synod was, in my opinion, a mess. It read like something written by a committee from the United Nations Action Group for Environmental Justice. There was scarcely a mention of the Christian faith, much less anything distinctively Catholic. There was little call for true evangelization, the cross and resurrection of the Lord and the need to share the saving good news of the Christian faith. Francis corrected this lack quite strongly in the final section of his exhortation.
On the left side of the doctrinal spectrum, Father Thomas Reese, writing for Religion News Service, noted that it “was disappointing but not a surprise” that the pope ultimately decided against an Amazonian Rite.
Who’s to blame? Reese says the media, without elaborating.
It is clear that Francis was upset with the media, who focused on the ordination of married men almost to the exclusion of the other topics of the synod, such as the devastation of the environment and exploitation of the indigenous peoples of the Amazon.
He lamented that the indigenous peoples “were considered more an obstacle needing to be eliminated than as human beings with the same dignity as others and possessed of their own acquired rights.” He also insisted that concern for the environment must be linked to concern for indigenous peoples.
While I sympathize with the pope’s desire to emphasize the issues facing the environment and indigenous peoples, I find it disappointing that he recycles the old recommendations of praying for vocations and enlarging the role of the laity.
Don’t get me wrong. I am all for these solutions, but we have been praying for vocations for more than a century and we have been increasing the role of the laity since the Second Vatican Council ended in 1965. True, more can be done, but are we going to be a Eucharistic community or not?
Clearly, Pope Francis does not want to be the pope who gets rid of mandatory celibacy, which he strongly values. He may also fear that vocal opponents to ordaining married men would further divide the church if he allowed it, even though they are a small minority.
Reese writes that Sarah’s retirement could help progressives get what they want in the future.
Francis especially notes the need for inculturation of the liturgy. This will require replacing Cardinal Robert Sarah as head of the Congregation for Divine Worship with someone sympathetic to inculturation. Sarah, who is a vocal opponent of any exceptions to the rule of celibacy, must submit his resignation in June when he turns 75.
Francis’ exhortation is itself a change to business as usual in the church. While previous popes have written their own long documents that superseded anything done by a synod, Francis encourages people to read the Amazon synod’s final document, which, he says, “profited from the participation of many people who know better than myself or the Roman Curia the problems and issues of the Amazon region, since they live there, they experience its suffering and they love it passionately.” He does not want to replace that text but rather calls on everyone in the Amazon region to “apply it.”
The pope has shown that in the synodal process he will listen, enthusiastically endorse most recommendations, say no to some and postpone others until more opportune times.
Not all will like this approach. For some it is too “popular” or “democratic.” For others, it is too slow and not democratic enough. But it is a long way from previous popes who said, “My way or the highway.”
In CatholicCulture.org, Philip Lawlor, the site’s news director and lead analyst, notes that the celibacy fight is far from over.
Thus the Pope sidestepped a debate that had continued through the October meeting and after, rising to a crescendo in January when Pope-emeritus Benedict XVI, breaking his silence on ecclesiastical issues, joined with Cardinal Robert Sarah in a book entitled From the Depths of Our Hearts, strongly supporting the tradition of celibacy. Many of the Pope’s most stalwart supporters had excoriated the book, saying that it was an effort to undermine Pope Francis—clearly implying that the Pontiff was sympathetic toward the Synod’s recommendation.
Now, since Querida Amazonia is the official document concluding the work of the Synod, is the discussion of celibacy over? Not necessarily. Since the papal document is silent on the issue, the Final Document approved by the bishops appears as the last word on the subject. Pope Francis made a point to “officially present” that document in his apostolic exhortation, adding: “I would encourage everyone to read it in full.”
At a Vatican press conference introducing Querida Amazonia, Cardinal Michael Czerny underlined the importance of this papal gesture, saying that “this official presentation and encouragement confer on the Final Document a certain moral authority.” He conceded that the Final Document is not a magisterial document, yet he argued: “To ignore it would be a lack of obedience to the Holy Father’s legitimate authority.”
For Catholics, ignoring Francis would be a lack of obedience. While the fear of a schism — prompted by traditionalists — was a very real fear, one has to wonder what progressives will do in order to change the church to their liking.