Posted by Pope Francis spoke to reporters on a wide range of topics as he returned from Kazakhstan, discussing the war in Ukraine, immigration to Europe, China and Nicaragua. While for some, the Pope may have contradicted himself (having earlier this week said that God does not guide religions towards war, the Pontiff said, in reference to arming Ukraine, that it “is a political decision, which can be moral – morally acceptable – if it is done according to the conditions of morality”), this “just war” logic was reconcilable with his earlier statement. Indeed, the Pontiff said arming Ukraine could “be immoral if it is done with the intention of provoking more war or selling weapons”. He added: “To defend oneself is not only lawful but also an expression of love of country.”
Will traditionalists ever be able to forgive Pope Francis? – Catholic Herald
The Holy Father risks alienating the remaining Catholics in the pews
Returning from his visit to Kazakhstan, Pope Francis spoke to reporters on a wide range of topics, including the war in Ukraine, immigration, China and Nicaragua. The Pope seemed to open early on with a possible contradiction: having said earlier that God does not guide religions towards war, the Pontiff said, in reference to arming Ukraine, that it “is a political decision, which can be moral – morally acceptable – if it is done according to the conditions of morality”, however “it can be immoral if it is done with the intention of provoking more war or selling weapons”. The Pope said: “To defend oneself is not only lawful but also an expression of love of country.”
This ‘just war’ justification was however reconcilable with his earlier statement. Where things got trickier, however, were in later questions. Asked, for instance, about a red line on talking to Russia, Francis said “we must extend the opportunity for dialogue to everyone”, since “there is always the possibility that in dialogue we can change things, and also offer another point of view, another point of consideration. I don’t exclude dialogue with any power, whether it’s at war, whether it’s the aggressor… sometimes dialogue has to be done in this manner, but it has to be done; it “stinks”, but it has to be done.”
Discussing demographics, immigration and Europe, the Pope then seemed to fly in the face of civilisational Christians: “What has the West lost in forgetting to welcome, when it needs people? When you think about the demographic winter that we have: it needs people”. He added: “why not make a policy of the West where immigrants are included with the principle that the migrant should be welcomed, accompanied, promoted, and integrated?”. He cited his home country, Argentina, with its “mixed blood” being an “experience” which “has helped us so much”. In a few sentences, the Pope risked alienating not only conservatives in central and eastern Europe (the only part of Europe where Catholicism is thriving) but indigenous peoples in Argentina.
He added, “migration I think at this time should be taken seriously, because it raises the intellectual and congenial value of the West a little bit. On the contrary, with this demographic winter, where are we going?”. Here, the Pope risks alienating Hungary and Poland – as well as US trads – with talk of “the danger of populism”, before extolling “the values of the founding fathers who founded the European Union, the great ones.” This, after Poland’s ruling Law and Justice Party Chairman, Jarosław Kaczyński, recently said “western Europe is culturally alien to us”, while describing the EU as a culturally alien project which it is “the sacred duty” of Polish politicians to oppose.
While briefly touching upon the wrongs of euthanasia – after prompting – the Pope continued expanding on his liberal ideas, stating “politics in the nations of Europe should take on the problem of the demographic winter, for example, problems related to industrial development, natural development, problems regarding migrants… Europe needs to receive experiences from other places, some will go better, some will not.” Again, such language risks alienating the last truly thriving Catholic part of Europe, in central and eastern Europe. But from alienating Europeans, the Pope risked alienating beleaguered Asian Christians, as the discussions turned to China.
The Pope has come in for criticism for his accommodation towards the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) over a 2018 deal, once renewed in 2020, and set to be renewed again. Just days ago, the Pope said he is willing to go to China. Pope Francis did not however get to meet CCP leader Xi Jinping, who was also in Kazakhstan at the same time as the Pontiff. The Pope – who recently said he hoped the deal with the CCP could be renewed – is likely to have disappointed those looking for a change in policy. Francis said: “The Chinese mentality is a rich mentality, and when it gets a little sick, it loses its richness; it is capable of making mistakes. In order to understand we have chosen the path of dialogue, open to dialogue. There is a bilateral Vatican-Chinese commission that is going well, slowly, because the Chinese pace is slow, they have an eternity to go forward.”
Aside from the lack of actual evidence for this assessment of China, the Pontiff added: “It is not easy to understand the Chinese mentality, but it should be respected”. Despite ongoing criticism of Cardinal Pietro Parolin – key to the deal – who Cardinal Joseph Zen (set to be put on trial shortly in Hong Kong) thinks is “manipulating” the Pope and may be acting out of “vainglory”, according to an interview with New Bloom Magazine, the Pope not only said “there is a dialogue commission that is going well”, but that Parolin “is the person right now who knows the most about China and dialogue with the Chinese.”
This could well be seen as a slap in the face to Zen, who many see as a bargaining chip in the renewal of the deal. The Pope even said he does “not identify with” designating China as undemocratic “because it’s such a complex country”. Touching on Zen’s trial, the Pope said “he says what he feels, and you can see that there are limitations there.” Turning to the situation in Nicaragua, meanwhile – where the Vatican’s response has also been disappointing given the repression of Catholics, especially Rolando Álvarez – the Pope said: “There is dialogue”, even though this “doesn’t mean you approve of everything the government does”. For many, the Pope again risks undermining the moral authority of the Church: where he sees dialogue, others will see submission.
Finally, the Pope was asked about the decline of the faith in Europe, especially among the young. Here, Francis could have touched upon the fact the Church is thriving in traditionalist Hungary and Poland, and young Catholics and new converts are attracted by the Traditional Latin Mass which he has arguably undermined. Instead, the Pope talked about consistency, and the greater focus on “money, development, pastoral plans and not pastoral care” which “doesn’t attract people”. This, despite the evidence that what does not attract people is a focus on social justice to the exclusion of moral values (something which has seen the Church decline in Latin America) or moral relativism.
In a few hours, the Pope seemed to set himself up against the very Catholics who are keeping the faith going: central and eastern Europeans and civilisational Christians, traditionalists who support the Latin Mass, and beleaguered Christian minorities up against repression. The words on China merely confirmed the fears of many that the Vatican will continue to pursue a policy during which clerics have been locked up. The words on Nicaragua confirmed fears about an ongoing underwhelming response. The seeming lack of recognition of what is actually attracting people to the Catholic Church, or indeed retaining them, was also striking. For many traditionalists, the Pope may have gone too far, with his words irreconcilable with their own values.
The post Did Pope Francis go too far? appeared first on Catholic Herald.