Fr. Reese, S.J. and Pope Francis

There was an old joke that listed a few things the pope doesn’t know about the Church. As I recall (hard to do these days), one of those things was “what the Jesuits will do next.” Presumably this no longer applies since for the first time in history we have a Jesuit pope. Of course, even Pope Francis may not be able to predict what each of his fellow Jesuits decides to say or do or write. 

This week, for example, American Jesuit, Rev. Thomas Reese, S.J., wrote down a few of his thoughts on Pope Francis’ recent hospitalization. Fr. Reese, who writes a column for Religion News Service suggested that the 84-year-old pope’s illness, hospitalization, and surgery formed what might be a key event in Francis' papacy. According to Fr. Reese, “…even with the best prognosis, age is catching up with Francis. Barring a miracle, he will only be expected to continue as pope for five or six years. We may look back at his hospitalization as the moment that marked the beginning of the end of his papacy.”

As you might expect — after all, he is a Jesuit — Fr. Reese has a distinct point of view that does not always coincide with the Church’s teachings on a number of issues. A former editor-in-chief of America, the left-leaning Jesuit journal, and columnist for the National Catholic Reporter, Reese has espoused some interesting religious, political, and moral positions. For example, he really dislikes what he calls the “unreformed liturgy” — aka, the Latin or Tridentine Mass — and says that young people should not be permitted to attend such Masses. 

More troubling, however, were his comments during the 2020 presidential campaign when he declared approvingly that, “A Catholic Democrat might feel impelled to vote for Biden despite his position on abortion and gay marriage because of other morally grave reasons, for example, his positions on racism, immigration, global warming and COVID-19.” Since the Church considers abortion nothing less than murder, the slaughter of innocents, one wonders whether Fr. Reese would consider it okay to overlook a candidate's support for a new Holocaust or for Communist China's enslavement of Uyghurs and Kazakhs so long as his policies were correct when it came to issues like climate change. 

New York's Cardinal Dolan made this case in his public rebuke of Fr. Reese when he wrote that the priest's approach was nothing less than a "...capitulation to the abortion culture, and a grave weakening of the powerful pro-life witness...Thank God, those who believed that slavery was a moral horror, a cancer on our country, and contrary to the higher values of a lawful republic, could never accept this capitulation." 

Over the years Fr. Reese has been consistent in downplaying the Church's teaching on abortion. For example, he likes to quote the U.S. Bishops document, Faithful Citizenship, while avoiding its strong language regarding abortion. He also came out strongly against government defunding of Planned Parenthood, the nation’s largest abortion provider. In the same way he avoids mentioning Pope Francis' very public condemnation of abortion and abortionists, whom the pope compared to "Mafia hit-men." As the pope said, "Is it legitimate to take a human life to solve a problem? Is it permissible to hire a hitman to solve a problem?...human life is sacred and inviolable and the use of prenatal diagnosis for selective purposes should be discouraged with strength." One suspects Fr. Reese isn't very pleased to hear his fellow Jesuit speaking with such moral clarity.

In this latest column, Fr. Reese again avoids these life issues and seems more concerned that Pope Francis has perhaps not done enough to ensure his successor will follow in what Fr. Reese consider the correct ideological path: "If his papacy is reckoned a failure, it will be because Francis failed to replace or outlast the clerical establishment put in place by John Paul and Benedict. His papacy will only succeed if he is followed by popes who are in sync with his approach to Catholicism, and this is not guaranteed." No, indeed, Father, it is not guaranteed, thanks to the Holy Spirit. Fr. Reese also wrote that "Francis has rebranded the papacy for the 21st century with a pastoral, prophetic and inclusive voice." After the truly pastoral and prophetic papacies of Saint John Paul II and Benedict XVI, this seems a rather odd thing to say, and I expect Pope Francis would agree.

Finally, Fr. Reese's comments about the pontiff's illness might also be an indication of the real and perhaps serious nature of Pope Francis' health. The Vatican has rarely been very open about popes and their health issues. Too often a pope must die before the world learns he was seriously ill.

It's all very interesting, though. And Fr. Reese will likely get lots of airtime on those networks that despise the Church and its teachings. But that's just another reason I always tell my friends not to believe a word you hear or read about the Catholic Church in the secular media. 

We are left with an ailing pope for whom we pray daily. We pray for his full recovery and for his wisdom in these times of moral relativism and political and social chaos. We need him to speak clearly and loudly to the world on faith and morals.

Pray for Pope Francis...oh, yes, and pray, too, for Fr. Reese.

Pope Benedict XVI To Resign

Sad news for those of us who love Pope Benedict XVI. Today the Holy Father announced that he will resign the Petrine ministry as of February 28. While not unprecedented, papal resignations are certainly rare, with the last occurring in 1415 when Pope Gregory XII resigned in order to bring an end to the Great Schism. Below is a video of New York's Cardinal Timothy Dolan as he responds to the Pope's announcement.

I expect we'll encounter many interesting but erroneous reports in the secular media as it covers the resignation, its causes, and its consequences.We should not, of course, be surprised by the often wild inaccuracies found in stories about the Catholic Church. The secular media might get the main thrust of a story correct, but when it comes to the details -- the motivations, causes and consequences  -- they haven't a clue. I suppose that's to be expected since those who write the stories usually view the Church from the same worldview from which they view all human organizations. They parse the Vatican's statements on world events solely from a geopolitical perspective, seemingly unaware that the Church teaches from its unique perspective of faith, morality, and eschatology. They assume the Church can alter its magisterial teachings or add to and subtract from the deposit of faith much the way a worldly government can change its laws. They identify popes, cardinals, bishops and theologians using the same comfortable terms they use to label politicians. One who accepts established Church teaching is conservative rather than orthodox, while one who rejects magisterial teachings is viewed as progressive rather than heretical.

For example, one often hears Blessed Pope John XXIII referred to as a liberal and Pope John Paul II as a conservative. And yet, from the Church's perspective, both were Catholic, both were orthodox. Both held fast to the deposit of faith with which they were entrusted and both were completely dedicated to fulfilling the Lord's command to "...make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you," accepting, too, Jesus' promise that "I am with you always, until the end of the age” [Mt 28-19-20]. Each pope is called to his ministry at a specific time in the life of the Church, and each responds differently, guided by the Holy Spirit and his own understanding of what is needed to fulfill the Church's overriding mission of evangelization. Today, Pope Benedict believes he is no longer physically able to carry out the heavy responsibilities of his office and that the Holy Spirit desires someone else to carry on as his successor during this challenging time in the Church's life.

As you might expect, already some in the secular media have responded in typical fashion. I heard one "expert" on TV this morning stating that Pope Benedict's likely reason for resigning was to avoid responsibility for the scandal resulting from the abuse of children by priests. Another (the UK's Guardian) implied that he was, in effect, forced from office because of his "conservative"and "divisive" papacy: "A deeply conservative pontiff, whose tenure has been overshadowed by sexual abuse scandals, Pope Benedict, 85, leaves with a chequered reputation after a papacy that was at times both conservative and divisive." Between now and next month's conclave we will no doubt be subjected to far worse than this. Most of the errors repeated by the media will stem from ignorance, but sadly some will be driven by hatred.

I'm certain we can take Pope Benedict at his word as he makes what for this holy, humble and brilliant man must have been an extremely difficult decision. So you will know exactly what the Holy Father said, here is the full text of his announcement:

Dear Brothers,

I have convoked you to this Consistory, not only for the three canonizations, but also to communicate to you a decision of great importance for the life of the Church. After having repeatedly examined my conscience before God, I have come to the certainty that my strengths, due to an advanced age, are no longer suited to an adequate exercise of the Petrine ministry.  I am well aware that this ministry, due to its essential spiritual nature, must be carried out not only with words and deeds, but no less with prayer and suffering. However, in today’s world, subject to so many rapid changes and shaken by questions of deep relevance for the life of faith, in order to govern the barque of Saint Peter and proclaim the Gospel, both strength of mind and body are necessary, strength which in the last few months, has deteriorated in me to the extent that I have had to recognize my incapacity to adequately fulfill the ministry entrusted to me. For this reason, and well aware of the seriousness of this act, with full freedom I declare that I renounce the ministry of Bishop of Rome, Successor of Saint Peter, entrusted to me by the Cardinals on 19 April 2005, in such a way, that as from 28 February 2013, at 20:00 hours, the See of Rome, the See of Saint Peter, will be vacant and a Conclave to elect the new Supreme Pontiff will have to be convoked by those whose competence it is.

Dear Brothers, I thank you most sincerely for all the love and work with which you have supported me in my ministry and I ask pardon for all my defects.  And now, let us entrust the Holy Church to the care of Our Supreme Pastor, Our Lord Jesus Christ, and implore his holy Mother Mary, so that she may assist the Cardinal Fathers with her maternal solicitude, in electing a new Supreme Pontiff. With regard to myself, I wish to also devotedly serve the Holy Church of God in the future through a life dedicated to prayer.

From the Vatican, 10 February 2013

BENEDICTUS PP XVI

Now is the time for all Catholics, indeed, for all people of good will, to pray for the Church, for Pope Benedict XVI, and for the conclave that will elect his successor.

I've included below a video clip on what will happen after Pope Benedict's resignation takes effect on February 28.

One last photo...I couldn't resist. This is a photo of me and Pope Benedict XVI on the streets of Rome in February 2000. Okay, officially he wasn't pope yet, but that's just a technicality. His election took place about five years later. But it's still pretty cool. I simply ran into him on a street near the Vatican and accosted the poor man. But he was very gracious and let me talk and question him for five or ten minutes; then he posed for this photo in which I am, of course, giving instructions to the photographer, our Polish friend, Fr. Adam Domanski.

Religious Freedom

Here are a few words on religious freedom, or the lack thereof, by Cardinal Timothy M. Dolan, President of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB):

"Today our focus is on threats to international religious freedom, but, as you are well aware, there are serious challenges to religious freedom within our own nation, serious problems the Church faces in her life and mission in the United States — threats that could marginalize the Church and her educational, charitable and health care institutions. As grave as these challenges remain, they are of a different order than those faced by Christians and other people of faith in many countries. In the words of Archbishop Dominique Mamberti, Secretary for Relations with States of the Holy See, 'Of course, nobody would confuse or equate this marginalization of religion with the actual persecution and killing of Christians in other areas of the world.'"

The cardinal delivered the opening address at a conference on International Religious Freedom held earlier this month at the Catholic University of America. To read his complete address, click here.


- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad

Cardinal Dolan on Religious Freedom

Cardinal Timothy Dolan of New York is my latest hero. He's been leading the Church's charge against the Obama administration's attack on religious freedom in general and on the Catholic Church in particular. The president has been trying to present the controversy to the public as if it were solely a dispute over contraception, which of course it isn't. Although Church teaching is clear in its condemnation of artificial contraception, the bishops are not at all seeking to ban contraception. Indeed, the controversy isn't about banning anything. No, Cardinal Dolan and his brother bishops object to the administration's attempt to force the Catholic Church and its institutions to provide contraception, sterilization, and abortifacients in the health care plans it offers to its employees.

I can guarantee this issue will not go away, and I can't see the U.S. bishops caving on any aspect of it, not as long as Cardinal Dolan's in charge. The below video is of Cardinal Dolan's appearance on Bill O'Reilly's Factor show in late March. As you might expect, O'Reilly doesn't fully understand the basis of the controversy and apparently thinks the Church and its bishops want to ban contraception.