Hi, Folks. Disclaimer: I am not Catholic. I am a liberal Baptist Christian (married to a female Baptist minister) (Yes, we exist) who, as a former soldier turned pacifist, has been deeply influenced by Friends/Quakers and Mennonites. I am a philosopher and peace activist. But several times I have taught on the campuses of Catholic institutions and, because of this, I have become fairly familiar with Catholic Moral Theology and, in particular, Catholic Social Teaching. With this background, I want to say that, while I find Pope Francis' words and deeds usually inspiring, they are NOT radical departures from Catholic tradition. Both liberals and conservatives (Catholic and otherwise) have not been paying close attention when they think the pope's message is startling or new--whether they welcome or hate it. More below the Kos Imprimatur.
On the subjects of abortion (and artificial birth control) and LGBT rights (including marriage equality), Pope Francis is a solid traditionalist. And this is not surprising. He was NOT one of the (few) liberal Cardinals in the running for the papacy. Before his ascension to the seat of St. Peter, his most recent high profile fight in his native Argentina was his failed attempt to prevent Argentina from adopting marriage equality.
The (surprising) difference Francis has made in these areas has been in TONE and EMPHASIS. The two previous popes, John Paul II and, especially, Benedict XVI had given support to conservative Catholic clergy and politicians who pretended that these were the ONLY moral/political issues that mattered. Now, John Paul II and even Benedict had concerns on a far wider list of issues--many of which would please centrists and liberals far more than conservatives. But, they, especially Benedict, allowed these to be eclipsed by the traditional Catholic opposition to abortion (and women's control over their own fertility at all with artificial birth control) and opposition to all same-sex activity, especially the legal recognition of (even secular) same-sex marriages. Francis' approach has not been legalistic, but pastoral. Emphasizing forgiveness, inclusion, and (within limits) tolerance.
Now, as a Christian feminist (and the spouse of a FIERCE feminist), I take strong issue with Catholic teaching in all these areas. I understand the objections pro-choice women have to pronouncements that they can be (implying that they need to be) forgiven for abortions, for instance. And, as the father of a bi-sexual daughter and uncle of a gay nephew, Francis' approach to LGBT matters ("Welcoming, but NOT Affirming") falls short. It's a definite improvement over the "God Hates Fags" rhetoric, but limited acceptance is not enough. Yet, no liberal Cardinal who wanted to change doctrine on these matters could have been elected pope. Even when Catholic teaching evolves it does so organically. One pope will quote another ("As our brother of bless memory said,") before taking those words in a new direction. By changing the Church's tone in these areas, Francis does lay out hope that, eventually, the Church may revise its teaching in these areas.
Notice that the only areas that Conservative Catholic politicians and their allies could find encouraging in Francis' address today was his reiteration of the need to defend human life "at every stage of development" (which surely reinforces the Church's traditional stand against abortion, but is lightyears away from cheering on efforts to defund Planned Parenthood) and his worry about "threats to marriage and family" (which probably includes marriage equality, but that WAS NOT MENTIONED SPECIFICALLY).
To their horror, conservatives heard the pope, in halting English and pastoral tones, condemn trickle down economics and defend fighting poverty, not giveaways to the rich. But that has been Catholic Social Teaching for at least 100 years. That conservative American Catholics don't know that the Church sounds far more democratically socialist than Bernie Sanders and has since the late 19th C., seems to say more about the quality of their catechetical instruction (or the homiletical emphases of their priests) than it does about any supposed radicality on Francis' part. Christian defense of the poor and opposition to hoarding wealth is at the very heart of the gospel and always has been--however much some Christians have departed from this in practice over the centuries. Even Pope Benedict sounded far more like a Social Democrat than any American politician--he just didn't give that much emphasis.
The same goes for Francis' defense of generous policies of immigration (even prior to Jesus, the Hebrew Bible demands "welcoming the stranger/alien," with God urging the Jewish people to "remember that you were strangers/aliens in the land of Egypt.") and his call to end the death penalty (John Paul II's encyclical, Evangelium Vitae, "The Gospel of Life" clearly condemned the death penalty). This liberal Protestant has noted that those U.S. states which, in recent years, have abolished the death penalty legislatively (NM, NJ, CT, MD, IL) have mostly been led by Catholic governors. Indeed, former MD. Gov. Martin O'Malley (D) CAMPAIGNED on abolishing the death penalty and managed to do so in his second term.
Now, the call to address climate change vigorously is a new emphasis with Francis, but environmentalism more broadly ("care of Creation") is a traditional Christian and Catholic teaching. Again, the fact that Conservative Catholics in the USA don't know this says something--but not about Francis.
Nor is the call to peacemaking new. The Catholic Church as a whole is not pacifist. But the Just War Theory developed by St. Augustine of Hippo and refined by St. Thomas Aquinas and others HAS NEVER BEEN GIVEN DOGMATIC STATUS in Catholicism. It has existed alongside the older pacifist tradition which has never gone away, although it has been a minority view since the 4th C. (By contrast, several 16th C. Protestant confessions of faith make rejection of pacifism and embrace of Just War Theory a part of the Creed.) Thomas Merton and Dorothy Day, the 2 American Catholics whom Pope Francis name checked today, were both part of the Catholic pacifist tradition. Francis has named himself after St. Francis of Assisi, the most famous soldier-turned-pacifist in Catholic tradition, but his priestly order, The Society of Jesus (Jesuits) was founded by another former soldier turned peacemaker, St. Ignatius of Loyola.
I don't think Pope Francis is a pacifist, but Just War Theory demands that military action be a LAST RESORT and that active peacemaking be a part of the calling of all Christians. Pope John Paul II wanted to come to the United Nations in 2002-3 and speak out against the invasion of Iraq, but was already dying and too sick to make the trip. But, from the Vatican, he sent the Papal Nuncio to George W. Bush in Feb. 2003 and URGED STRONGLY against the invasion, spelling out the many ways it would violate Just War Theory (which is not just Catholic moral teaching, but has been largely codified into International Law--and even into the U.S. Uniform Code of Military Justice.) His successor was far more conservative in many ways, but Benedict also condemned the Iraq War and lived to see and condemn the torture and human rights abuses that have haunted us since. (That is worth highlighting because Pope Benedict's Islamophobia, while mild compared to that of U.S. Conservatives, did set back over 50 years of Interfaith Dialogue by the Catholic Church and other Christians--and it played into the hands of the radicals intent on hijacking Islam for nefarious purposes.)
Will Pope Francis' courageous speech today have an effect for the good? If the Right succeeds at painting it as a radical departure from Catholic Moral Teaching and "just the pope's curious leftwing politics," then maybe not. But I don't think they will be successful. The laity will stick with the pope over rightwing Catholic politicians--and that has to make a difference in the days to come.
In this regard, the most radical thing about Francis is the way he tries to put his principles into practice: defending a young immigrant girl and her advocacy for her undocumented parents; having a "pope mobile" that is a small, fuel-efficient car; eating with the homeless at Catholic Charities; and, in the days to come, visiting a prison in Philadelphia.
The sad thing to me is that such actions are remarkable. They should be the normal actions of any Christians--indeed, any person of any faith (or no faith) who has a conscience. But these are actions that Christians should know are at the very heart of the Good News we proclaim (and claim to have heard and been changed by). That both the Church and the world find such actions A-typical for Christians is to our lasting shame. My prayer is that, despite my disagreements with him on birth control, abortion, the equality of the sexes, marriage equality, etc., that Francis' visit will wake up all persons of conscience in this country.
It has happened before. The pope reminded us, today, of a few of the moral leaders who have changed this nation: Abraham Lincoln, who was a member of no church and whose personal religious views changed during his time wrestling with slavery and war; Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., son of the Black Church, a liberal Baptist and a convert to Gandhian nonviolence; Thomas Merton, Trappist Monk, pacifist, pioneer in interfaith dialogue, radical critic of racial injustice; Dorothy Day, secular socialist and feminist who became an adult convert to (pre-Vatican II) Catholicism, co-founder of the Catholic Worker movement--radical defender of the poor, pacifist. More could be mentioned from many faith traditions and moral traditions without a faith component. These four were name checked by the pope--and they can stand for all those who have changed the moral landscape for the better.
It can happen again. My prayer, a prayer of a liberal Baptist and a philosopher, is that Pope Francis' visit will reawaken the moral strength of the people of this nation--speaking and acting from within mainstream Catholic Moral Theology and Catholic Social Teaching.
May new conversations begin.