Christopher Johnson, a non-Catholic who has taken up the cudgels so frequently in defense of the Church that I have named him Defender of the Faith, over at his Midwest Conservative Journal takes a look at the cold call imbroglio:
A new Roman Catholic Doctrinal FirestormTM has recently erupted:
Did Pope Francis tell a divorced and remarried woman that it was okay to take Communion even though her parish priest denied her the host?
That’s the latest kerfuffle created by the “cold-call” pope who on Monday, the day after Easter, called an Argentine woman who had written to him about whether she should receive communion at Mass even though she was divorced and remarried.
“There are priests who are more papist than the pope,” the pope himself reportedly told Jacquelina Lisbona.
Kudos to CNN, which UPDATES the story with reporting from three continents (literally): CNN has a Vatican spokesman confirming that the call did indeed take place, but the Rev. Thomas Rosica provided no details.
“It’s between the Pope and the woman,” said Rosica, a consultant for the Vatican press office.
“To draw any conclusions about this particular situation, that the Pope may be setting an agenda, is incorrect,” Rosica told the network. “The Pope is first and foremost an esteemed pastor, and dealing with a human situation is always complex.”
That’s good to keep in mind, though if the contents of the pope’s conversation with Lisbona are true, then this is a big deal, at least in terms of the example Francis is setting rather than the doctrine that he is not changing.
Here’s the woman’s account of the phone call.
“The phone rang and my husband answered. It was Fr. Bergoglio calling. The father asked to speak to me and my husband asked: ‘Who’s calling?’, to which the voice replied ‘Fr. Bergoglio.’ I asked him if it was really him, the pope, and he said it was and that he was calling in response to my letter dated September.
“Then he told me there are some priests who are more papist that the pope. He was completely normal with me on the phone and I tried to speak to him with the utmost respect. Now I am overwhelmed by the enormous effect this story has had and I feel moved by the fact that I spoke to Francis. I told him I would write to him again when I take Communion again.”
Was this call actually made? It seems to have been.
Yes, the pope called Jacquelina Lisbona. The real question regards the content of the conversation. If indeed he said those things this would be a big deal because she is still in what the church would call an “irregular” marriage. Her husband is divorced, and they have not been married in the church.
In any case, Francis once again has set an example for the rest of the hierarchy even without changing church law, and it’s in keeping with the pope’s character — Francis has frequently shown little patience with priests who are “little monsters” (his words) who cite “small-minded” rules rather than ministering mercy to people.
Damian Thompson has posts on this story up here and here. This site’s Catholic readership can hash this out in the comments (in fact, I hope you guys do) but I am, for the most part, going to adhere to MCJ policy about controversial Roman Catholic news stories, hold off for a few days and wait to see how this thing plays out.
But somebody is going to have to remind Francis of the difference between a parish priest and the leader of a great Christian church as well as the reigning sovereign of the world’s oldest, continuous monarchy. Parish priests have a certain rhetorical latitude that popes do not, indeed cannot, have.
Hate to burst your rose-colored illusions there, Johnson, but divorced people and non-Catholics take Communion in Catholic parishes all the time. Maybe so but it’s one thing when some parish priest, who’s either not that versed in Catholic doctrine or who doesn’t care, allows this sort of thing to go on.
It’s quite another thing when the Pope hints that it’s really not that big of a deal.
As we Anglicans know all too well, your church can kill one of its doctrines without actually having to kill it. Ask any given Episcopal squishop whether the Episcopal Organization has changed the definition of marriage and he/she will angrily deny it.
Never mind the fact that
homosexual marriages the “blessing of same-sex unions” go on in that squishop’s diocese all the time and that he/she is perfectly happy with the idea; hell, he/she’s even performed a few him/herself.
In the Episcopal Organization, that squishop will remind you, the sacrament of Holy Matrimony is strictly reserved for a man and a woman. So we obviously haven’t changed Christian teaching on marriage at all and it’s libelous to suggest that we have.
And that’s how it’s done. You don’t need to get popes to speak ex cathedra or to force through legislation in non-Catholic churches; all you really need to do is to apply the English language in new and creative ways.
Go here to read the comments. The most important job for any Pope is to preserve intact the teachings of the Church handed down generation after generation from the time of the Crucifixion. Pope Francis, or Father Bergoglio as he sometimes refers to himself, seems to prefer a pastoral role where he can soothe souls without upholding the teachings of the Church, the upholding of teachings often requiring very tough love indeed. If he is unwilling or unable to uphold the teachings of the Church out of a preference for being pastoral, he might wish to talk to the Pope Emeritus about how sweet life in retirement can be for a Pope.