“Making Room for the Papacy of our Day”
On Opening up to a Better Understanding of the Pastoral Guidance of the Pontiff of our Times - Our First-Ever ‘Jesuit’ - Pope Francis - In the Discerning Light of the Beatitudes of St. Matthew’s Gospel, and Supported by the Ever-Inspiring “Spiritual Childhood” of the Little Doctor, St. Thérèse of the Child Jesus and the Holy Face….
Fr. Sam Anthony Morello, OCD, STL
[This is an “INFORMAL CHAT WITH A FRIAR’ authored within the overall Christmastide of 2023-2024 at the Friary of the Basilica-Shrine of Saint Thérèse in San Antonio, TX. It is presented as an Open Letter by an elderly Carmelite Friar & Priest to Fellow Catholics and to all Conscientious Adults in this ‘Whirl-Wind’ of Contemporary Society, by Fr. Sam Anthony Morello, OCD., STL., in daily exchange with Fellow Friars of the Semi-Province of St Thérèse, in the Southwestern United States of America…]
This ‘Open Letter’ is a priestly and filial defense of His Holiness Pope Francis, our first-ever ‘Jesuit Pope’. Our times are super-complicated in almost everything ‘social’! But very helpful to myself in this social-moral whirlwind, and presently uppermost in my own restless mind is a focused emphasis on the New Testament’s Sermon on the Mount according to St. Matthew, Ch.5. Right off, let us begin by noting that this biblical text promises the prize of ‘peace of soul’, along with deep personal identity right here and now. It is a short cut to a type of “gospel-beatitude”. Its hallowed virtues are well-admired at some distance by all attentive Christians, but clearly with conscious hesitation. We have virtually abandoned their habitual practice to saints in their cloistered confinement. This evangelical ‘Charter Sermon on the Mount’ is the very foundation of the profoundly transforming spirituality of the Roman Catholic Church, our spiritual Mother. But thanks be to God who raised up the prophetic St. Thérèse who poignantly demonstrated this ‘New Way’ in a most convincing manner. Unwittingly, she sagaciously advocated the beatitudes by her widely read Story of a Soul. Scripture scholars admiringly recognize in this Little Way the basic traits of the ‘Anawim’ – the Lord’s own ‘poor and lowly ones’—namely the ‘powerless’ among us, those who put their ‘trust in God’ alone, rather than in the trifold vanities of the world, the flesh, and the devil! Clearly the beatitudes are the life blood of Thérèse’s Little Way! This young genius modelled her program on nothing less than the “kenosis” – the ‘self-emptying’ of the Eternal Word-made-Flesh. For here we have the exemplary Lord of redemptive ‘humility’ himself. Thérèse deliberately links ‘humility’ with the theological virtues of faith, hope, and charity, and thereby testifies to the goodness of the Beatitudes. And so, we have the Messiah’s New Decalogue placed ‘within his followers, and written upon their hearts’ (see Jer 31:33). What great Catholic-Christian Identity and utter sanctity of life!
Where else do we find such a roadmap to sensitive Christian discipleship, engendered by all four holy gospels? Now presently I will attempt to freely describe each one of the beatitudes, while also pinpointing the real intent of each one. But first, how can we think of anyone other than the Teacher himself, the Lord Jesus, when we hear the exclamations, “How Blessed” / “How Happy” / “How Fortunate” are the truly poor in spirit: - those who place all their hope in God’s love for them! And how blessed those who truly mourn their own sins, embedded in their own social network. And how blessed the meek and humble before God and their own kind. And those who hunger and thirst for what is upright in society in God’s hidden sight. And those who are open and merciful towards people who are discriminated against; and how beautiful is purity of heart in one’s deepest desires! And how blessed indeed are the peacemakers in the barrage and delirium of senseless wars! And how fortunate those who are unjustly blamed and persecuted for standing up for God’s kingdom! How “HAPPY” are all such as these because they are truly “children of God”. How can we listen to these blessings without feeling uplifted ourselves? And yet, in practice we abandon such liberating truths of real life to the meeker and mildest among us, the quiet martyrs, hidden away in the shadows of the clamorous and wild-minded mob….
The Catechism of the Catholic Church highlights these features of Jesus and his own kind when it states: “The Beatitudes are the heart of Jesus’ preaching. They take up [the complex of] promises made to the chosen people since Abraham…. And they see them fulfilled in the future revelation of the kingdom of heaven” (see CCC #1716). And yet again, the Lord Jesus promises nothing short of “happiness” NOW to these followers: peace of mind and heart from within the deepest core of the self, not to mention eternal bliss in the life yet to come. And again, “How Happy the merciful”. “How Happy the pure of heart”! And indeed, while we’re at it, let’s give full credit to the ever-great pagan Socrates who understood that “virtue is its own reward”, right here and now, for it contributes good order to human life! To the contrary, who does not know within one’s inner-self that vice is its own guilt-ridden punishment as soon as it is tried!
Now at this point again, allow me to base my defense of Pope Francis on something of my own pastoral practice of the priestly ministry. I thank God for seventy-two years as a professed religious and some sixty-two years-as a Catholic priest; and for as many such years as a sacramental confessor since ordination. Thus, I speak with some reflective confidence, though admittedly quite fallibly. On top of that, within myself, I am aware of a deepening appreciation of Pope Francis’ broadly misunderstood pastoral posture. In our day of super-liberal social confusion and restlessness, this pope’s pastoring style shows he does not run scared for sure. Rather he seems grounded in the Lord’s own gospel meekness and poverty of spirit, right alongside confidence in God who gives him discernment. I think Pope Francis views wavering souls on the fringes of the church as “not far from the kingdom”; he feels their desire to BELONG to something bigger than themselves- to Christ’s Ecclesial Body. He urges patience with wandering sheep to foster their hope and encouragement.
Now, it is this pope’s very close Roman collaborators themselves who have helped me the most in detecting his uniquely personal and compassionate charismatic style. And besides, allow me here to add, because of my advanced 90 years of age, some personal memories of much earlier papal impressions and observations. But before starting, let me defensively affirm that your writer here is not gullible by nature; I have had my own troubles with His Holiness’ style. For example: In the recent past when our U.S. Bishops were nervously deliberating on how to make a public statement on not giving Holy Communion to high-profile U.S. politicians who openly favor abortions, I was quite confused by the silence of Pope Francis at that time. President Biden and House-Speaker Pelosi privately boarded separate planes to visit the holy father. Their meetings took place and passed without any statement whatsoever from the Holy See! I felt the moment had been lost when our episcopal conference could have been greatly aided in its attempt to address a pressing pastoral concern. I for one, along with my colleagues, was surely opposed to giving Communion to any public figure promoting abortion rights upon demand. But I reserved judgment on this papal silence because in general I recognized this pope’s overall sincerity. Furthermore, I could clearly see how he was not running scared as a pope or two appeared in some modern times. For sure this pope is not a scrupulous man, but neither is he unscrupulous! Rather, he is in so many ways a most solicitous pastor of souls. And it was clear that from a strictly theological point of view, he is not threatening divine revelation! And besides, it is dogmatically guaranteed by Christ himself that the Rock of Peter shall enjoy impeccable Immunity in regard to revealed Truths and Morals for all times, and that for the integrity of Christ’s own Church and Bride. For it is written in the stone of revelation: “And I say that you are Peter and upon this Rock I shall build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give you the keys of the Kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven (See Mt.16:18ff!). And in addition, since the very first Easter Sunday Night, upon breathing the Holy Spirit on his apostles, Risen TRUTH himself uttered: “Whose sins you forgive, they are forgiven; and whose sins you retain, they are retained” (John 20: 22ff).
Now I will continue our pope’s defense by reviewing my own long memories of past papacies. And again, please be patient. I grew up during the regal and lengthy pontificate of Pope Pius XII. I clearly recall that while I was still in grade-school he solemnly defined, in my own hearing by radio, the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary. And many years later I came to hear of his memorable and historic discernment that protected the whole Italian-Jewish population of Rome from a massive ‘Nazi Round-Up and Deportation’ to the death camps of Auschwitz! And even now, so many years later, I am utterly amazed at such single-handed papal daring in the face of such personal and communal risk under Adolf Hitler’s cruel reign of terror.
Much later while still a young Roman theology student in my mid-20s, this same Pius XII died. I was very fortunate to have seen him alive only once, and that at the papal palace of Castel Gandolfo. And soon afterwards I was privileged beyond all compare to walk with my fellow student, Bro. Joseph Neilson from Manhattan, along with thousands of others, in the most memorable procession of my lifetime up to this very day. With countless Roman citizens wrapped in awesome silence within the Eternal City, we escorted Pius’ venerable body back to St. Peter’s Basilica. What a giant we paid tribute to, a hero of European-Post World War II History. (May God please grant that he be beatified in my own lifetime!)
Next, I recall when Pope St. John XXIII was elected to follow Pope Pius XII. How well I remember when this same “Good Pope John” surprisingly convoked the Second Vatican Council. I was ordained in the spring of that same year before the Council began. And soon after my ordination, with eyes wide open with awesome curiosity I watched all those 2000 bishops of the Roman Church march into the grandest of massive basilicas; it was October 11, 1962! And I was privileged again to be present, far down below the upper-papal apartment’s-lighted window, when this same Pope John breathed his last. And then how very happy indeed was I when, standing in the same Roman plaza, I heard my preferred choice of “Montini” for the next pope announced as Pope Paul VI. [As an aside, I confess that Pope St. Paul VI is still my favorite pope!] Soon afterwards, how surprised I was as a ‘North American citizen’, that Pope Paul via the press emphatically expressed his personal sensitivity in favor of the rights of the “Arab Palestinians(!)” right alongside those of the Jewish re-settlers returning to the Holy Land! And then again later, now once again back home in these United States of America, I recall Pope St. Paul’s very first encyclical on ‘Dialogue’. (And while now penning the word ‘dialogue’, why don’t we recognize honestly that the present pontificate under Pope Francis is particularly noted for “Dialogue”? Surely his contemporary papal style is now dubbed “Synodality”, but isn’t that basically ‘dialogue’ itself expanded to even more voices than ever before?)
And to continue . . . Next there followed the merely-month-long pontificate of the sympathetic figure of a most venerable Pope John Paul I. And this saintly figure was followed by one of the longest pontificates ever - that of Pope St. John Paul II, a strong philosopher, in which again a great deal of world history was made. Recall when the Berlin Wall came down; that was as much due to his giant presence on the grand world stage as well as Reagan’s and Gorbachev’s! Under Pope John Paul II a Revision of Canon Law took place; and he moreover published the celebrated New Catechism of the Catholic Church! What a bonanza that has been for all of us! And then at length came the gifted theologian, Pope Benedict XVI of more recent days. On a minor note, I recall Benedict’s delicate sensibilities at work when he cancelled the word “Limbo” from our Catholic dictionary; I suspect that was partly done in deference to the well-known emphasis on the “merciful love of God” of our little doctor again, St. Thérèse of the Child Jesus. Pope Benedict Emeritus’ retirement was lived out tranquilly right alongside good Pope Francis within the tranquility of the familiar old Vatican walls! Their differences in preference were quite notable, but little ruffled the peace of holy mother Church while these two popes of very different stamps were next-door neighbors.
Now within that lengthy review of papal memories, I have gradually come to appreciate the very different and utterly delicate sensibilities, as well as the uniquely sympathetic conscience, of the man now on the throne of St. Peter. Whether he presented himself earlier as an international weathervane chanting “Laudato Sí”, or later as a country parson “blessing” sons with ‘wayward tendencies’; let’s face it: à< We were just not prepared in any way, shape or form, for such a new style of papal ‘self-presentation’! Think of his early frank manner of sharing his feelings with newsmen on papal flights. I thereby registered more acutely our common neglect of mother Earth, and of our callused insensitivity to the plight of the poor. And he brought to the forefront the alienation of certain persons who don’t quite fit into our ecclesial society, but who ask some consideration or some sort of respectful consideration. This doesn’t settle well with us . . .
I am convinced we need at least to pause and consider these issues with patient mercy, simply out of respect for decent persons loosely identify with the church. St. Matthew’s beatitudes reach out humbly and talk to them, give them time and space for civil dialogue. We do not threaten our own values by listening. We do not have to agree with every cause. We can adhere to the Natural Law and remain gentle and open to even the least good will. Surely, we must attend to the delicate way the Lord Jesus himself treated sinners he met and conversed with in his day. In the loneliness of some of our hurting brothers and sisters, this holy Father recognizes that their marginality is often due to their own recognized sinful inclinations felt from within themselves. This pope feels their estrangement and is looking for some way of at least slightly assuaging their anxiety while they struggle with their irregular situations, whether it be by way of adverse sexual orientation or by exclusion from the Eucharist because of an irregular second Catholic marriage that cannot be rectified by our standard external canonical forum. Unfortunately, pluralistic, democratic societies generate Catholic citizens who no longer sense the role of the Church to form personal conscience! Religion is just another commodity on open shelves with countless other breakfast cereals!
By all means be assured that this holy father is in no way betraying our Catholic Tradition. Pope Francis is not retreating from the great Catholic legacy of the ‘Natural Law’ and the ‘Ten Commandments’, the law written upon the heart of every human being. And this pope is not ignorant of dogmatic or moral theology or of canon law! And he is naturally surrounded by multiple experts in all fields. Most obviously he holds to the fundamental significance of the personally self-defining two-distinct sexes and the institution of marriage with its sacrosanct role of parenting children. Nor is he threatening the ‘Deposit of Faith’ or the indissolubility of marriage when he sympathizes with those whose marriage may defy the possibility of the church’s canonical rectification (called ‘canonical sanatio)’. The holy father and his advisors are dedicated servants of holy church, and it is but ignorance and/or narrow-mindedness to judge him as aiming to shipwreck the ‘Barque of Peter’! He too wears the shoes of the fisherman, not red, just black, and well worn! We need to help him in his merciful outreach to those in trouble from within the self and from the complications of human relations.
Consider that not only did Moses of the Old Testament allow the dismissal of a wife by a husband, as Jesus referenced and gently corrected (see Mt. 19:8). Even St. Paul (see 1Cor 17:15!) made exceptions to the permanence of marriage for early Christians: such was the case of a Christian wife, rejected by her unbelieving husband who stringently objected to the new-found faith of his converted wife. And we need recall the ease with which Jesus dealt with outright public sinners. A case in point was the Samaritan woman whom Jesus met at the well: Jesus minced no words after she stated she could not call her husband to come because she was “not married”. “Rather” he remarked with ‘aplomb’, “You are right to say you are not married, for you have had as many as five husbands, and surely the man you are with now is not your husband!” And yet his dealing with her in the truth, changed her into something of an ‘evangelist’, for she subsequently introduced him to all her townsfolk! How could he have been gentler with her, while yet honest with himself? And then let’s not overlook that very rare ‘chance-and-trick incident’ in which Jesus dealt with a woman caught by others in the very act of adultery! Yet, that same story ends with the absolving words of the Lord: “Now go in peace, and avoid this sin in the future”. Surely none of us would dare accuse the Lord of condoning sin. Francis is no different from Jesus. (God grant that criticism of Pope Francis not reveal itself as more an ‘institutionalization’ than personal ‘evangelization’.)
And now I turn to a very intricate consideration in defense of Pope Francis. (I choose to think of the following pastoral solution as the pope’s “Argentine Concession”.) The Argentine National Conference of Bishops has followed through on Pope Francis’ encouraging the allowance (in the privacy of the confessional only, and apart from any formal canonical process) access to holy communion in spite of a marriage that cannot be remedied canonically. Using this concession, reception of the holy Eucharist would be allowed in public liturgy, again - subsequent to consultation in sacramental confession. Here we, with the pope himself, take for granted that such a person has truly regretted their failed marriage before God and repented of their own part in the collapse of their marriage(s). But let’s now attend to what is called in moral theology a state of “perplexed conscience”. The confessor looks to find a way for the penitent to privately solve his/her personally “perplexed conscience”. We speak of one’s facing no option but evil on either side of one’s choice! Perhaps they have children from their invalid second marriage, children now dependent on them; and perhaps some elderly members of this household heavily rely on them now. What harm for sure would accrue to those they might have to abandon now? And recall again that there is no known canonical recourse that can salvage their present married state. Presently Pope Francis is recognizing a second opportunity as penitents to serve God and others in the best possible way they can in this second set of heavy obligations. Yes, they can be absolved privately and can in good conscience receive holy Communion. The keys of the fisherman are being stretched and reset for them; Pope Francis is responding to authentic personal conversion by unofficial Petrine privilege. He is respecting verified renewed conversion and the settlement of “personal conscience” before God’s judgment, now sanctioned by that person’s own sacramental confessor! What a grace!
I have actually heard of such a person’s explaining to their surprised Catholic relatives that they took counsel with their bishop or priest in confession. And they explain their reception of Communion as a recognized exception granted by the church in a private confessional session allowed by the church. (We can hope that such privileged recipients be virtuous with their critics and mild in manner before others who are surprised. Let them speak of their new-found “peace of soul”, and their gratitude to the mercy of God and to his apostolic church. [Traditional catholic moral teaching has always quietly recognized that within a personal setting of inner conscientious contradictions a person is obliged to do as little social harm as possible. [Do see Heribert Jone’s Moral Theology/1956/#89/for “Perplexed Conscience”, p. 41]. Holy church simply asks of them but a reasonable sacrifice in the wake of an authentic second conversion to God. Pope Francis is a courageous pontiff who dared do what Pope St. Paul VI legitimately hesitated to approve within his own right. There is no time-table on pontifical powers, just prudent apostolic-pastoral mercy and love. Any such priestly confessor “stands in the breach before God” with holy Moses of Old on Mt. Sinai and with Jesus Christ the Lord on Calvary Hill! (see Psalm 106:23).
As a student in Rome many years ago, back in the 1960s, I was quite pleasantly surprised to learn of an exceptional doctoral dissertation that was successfully defended at one of the Roman pontifical universities; it argued the possibility of the supreme power of the Petrine Keys to dissolve even a sacramental marriage between two baptized persons! Now, it is not perfectly clear to me that that is precisely the intent of the Argentine Concession. But it faces squarely the impossible situation of certain Catholic penitents in Argentina (and applicable elsewhere) who are faced with such an impossible moral conscience in later life. Again, such Catholics are making the best of an enduring state of “perplexed conscience”. They are caught presently in a second marriage or other that cannot be accepted canonically by the church. But history shows that over the stretch of time the church recognized that it must make certain moral adjustments because of the acute complexity of human life itself. At this point it is extremely helpful to consider what scholars relate about the surprising reversal of the historic-multi-millennial Judeo-Christian blanket-condemnation of the so-called practice of ‘Usury’. The charging of interest on money loans was strictly forbidden by the Old Testament (see Exodus 22:25 & Deuteronomy 23:19f). In the Christian camp all throughout and far beyond the patristic age, the practice of usury was consistently forbidden by church councils. [[Rightly or wrongly, I personally take this to mean that the church considered it part of the natural law underlying the social justice of the last seven of the Ten Commandments.]] St. Thomas Aquinas reflects this traditional negative moral standard in his Summa Theologica II/2ae, art. 1. [Our source here is the altogether reliable Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church (3rd Edition/1997/p 1672f). This is extremely enlightening for the sake of sanity and Catholic prudence at this moment in our own day.) Our source here adds, “This persuasion predominated the Roman Catholic Church [even] through the 19C”.) The Oxford Dictionary adds that “since the 18th Century money is no longer thought of as in the Middle Ages as a barren means of exchange but as capitol productive of wealth like other property. Since the exaction of a reasonable interest for a loan has been tolerated by the Christian Church, the term ‘usuary’ has tended to be restricted to excessive rates” (p. 1672). Now at last, back to our interest in relation to Catholic marriage, the Roman Catholic tradition has always given some room to accommodate difficult marriages either by “Pauline” (for sure) or so-called ‘Petrine’ concessions! Even our actual-working canonical language tellingly associates the tendency with apostolic exceptions. Pope Francis might simply be expanding the ‘power of the keys’ and widening the fisherman’s nets by his Argentine Concession. If so, his apostolic office certainly gives him the right to do so. But expanding apostolic privilege is by no means abolishing apostolic privilege. The Petrine office has latitude according to its own privileged judgment. [Parenthetically let me add here: The Orthodox Byzantine Christians, who preserved Catholic union with Rome until early in the eleventh century, to this day I am informed, will sometimes accommodate a second [or even third] marriage in its pastoral approval for worthy perplexed members of their faithful. This naturally favors the Roman Church’s present-pastoral tendencies as well!]
Finally at last, I attempt to conclude this arduous labor of loving tribute to Pope Francis by attending to one last and rather simple pastoral situation which I suspect occurs but rarely. It does however merit our attention, because Pope Francis indirectly insinuates such a possibility. Over the course of many years of priesthood I have observed, together with another priest in confidence, only one middle-aged male couple who brought our attention to their living together chastely, adhering in faith to the actual negative teaching of the Catholic Church on homosexuality. I reference here the Catechism of the Catholic Church (see CCC nn. 2357ff). These two gentlemen regularly went to confession and received the Blessed Eucharist. They lived together in separate bedrooms and obviously pledged caring for one another within a celibate lifestyle. They were quite unassuming and unnoticeable in social behavior, and their friends vouched for them. They were noticeably attentive to the needs of their neighbors. We priest supported them as obviously good persons. Neither ever asked us for a special blessing, but they were worthy of whatever helpful pastoral care as anyone else was. God grant that more such couples find their home in mother church’s benevolent arms. This pope is perhaps the first to note this possibility. May they live in humble faith, hope, and charity alongside the rest of us poor creatures redeemed by sheer grace and kindly mercy.
A Prayer
O Christ of the Gospels, Lord of the Apostolic Church, and Ever-Wise Promotor & Bestower of the Beatitudes: Teach us to be meek and humble of heart. Make us non-judgmental, and truly patient with others, inviting all others to ecclesial communion of faith and love. God give our Holy Father Francis more support in his world-wide pastoring of souls. And with St. Thérèse of the Child Jesus, may we all simply reflect the Eight Beatitudes of Jesus the Poor Man by heroic faith and hope and charity, richly imbued with profound humility. And Lord Jesus, make each of us a wounded healer after your own heart! And Lord, mercifully turn our fragile “clay feet”, so prone to melting collapse, into pillars of steel for the consolidation of the children of God the whole world over, under the gentle guidance of Good Pope Francis of the Society of Jesus….
[Concluded on March 19, 2024/Solemnity of St. Joseph, Spouse of BVM & Protector of Holy Mother the Roman Church!]