“Praise God for all his creatures”. This was the message that Saint Francis of Assisi proclaimed by his life, his canticles and all his actions. In this way, he accepted the invitation of the biblical Psalms and reflected the sensitivity of Jesus before the creatures of his Father.
It should come as no surprise that Pope Francis begins his newest apostolic exhortation, Laudate Deum, with the words, and a winsome portrait, of St. Francis. When he ascended the chair of St. Peter, Jorge Maria Bergoglio took the name of St. Francis of Assisi and since then he has regularly invoked his name-saint, most prominently in his first encyclical Laudato Si’ (2015) and in his third encyclical, Fratelli Tutti, published in 2020.
In both, he opens with the saint, setting him up as the model and guiding spirit of the reflections to follow. Laudato Si’ indeed begins with the saint’s own words:
“LAUDATO SI’, mi’ Signore” – “Praise be to you, my Lord”. In the words of this beautiful canticle, Saint Francis of Assisi reminds us that our common home is like a sister with whom we share our life and a beautiful mother who opens her arms to embrace us. “Praise be to you my Lord, through our Sister, Mother Earth, who sustains and governs us, and who produces various fruit with coloured flowers and herbs”.
Later (in section 87), he quotes “the hymn of Saint Francis of Assisi” at greater length:
When we can see God reflected in all that exists, our hearts are moved to praise the Lord for all his creatures and to worship him in union with them. This sentiment finds magnificent expression in the hymn of Saint Francis of Assisi:
“Praised be you, my Lord, with all your creatures,
especially Sir Brother Sun,
who is the day and through whom you give us light.
And he is beautiful and radiant with great splendour;
and bears a likeness of you, Most High.
Praised be you, my Lord, through Sister Moon and the stars,
in heaven you formed them clear and precious and beautiful.
Praised be you, my Lord, through Brother Wind,
and through the air, cloudy and serene, and every kind of weather
through whom you give sustenance to your creatures.
Praised be you, my Lord, through Sister Water,
who is very useful and humble and precious and chaste.
Praised be you, my Lord, through Brother Fire,
through whom you light the night,
and he is beautiful and playful and robust and strong.”
The opening words of Fratelli tutti are likewise “words [of] St. Francis of Assisi,” this time “addressed to his brothers and sisters”. In its third paragraph, the pontiff reports
an episode in the life of Saint Francis that shows his openness of heart, which knew no bounds and transcended differences of origin, nationality, colour or religion. It was his visit to Sultan Malik-el-Kamil, in Egypt, which entailed considerable hardship, given Francis’ poverty, his scarce resources, the great distances to be traveled and their differences of language, culture and religion. That journey, undertaken at the time of the Crusades, further demonstrated the breadth and grandeur of his love, which sought to embrace everyone. Francis’ fidelity to his Lord was commensurate with his love for his brothers and sisters. Unconcerned for the hardships and dangers involved, Francis went to meet the Sultan with the same attitude that he instilled in his disciples: if they found themselves “among the Saracens and other nonbelievers”, without renouncing their own identity they were not to “engage in arguments or disputes, but to be subject to every human creature for God’s sake”. In the context of the times, this was an extraordinary recommendation. We are impressed that some eight hundred years ago Saint Francis urged that all forms of hostility or conflict be avoided and that a humble and fraternal “subjection” be shown to those who did not share his faith.
Here is a man after Pope Francis’s own fraternal heart, a heart that knows no borders or boundaries. Or perhaps better put: here is its original exemplar.
Similarly in Laudato Si’, St. Francis is declared to be
that attractive and compelling figure, whose name I took as my guide and inspiration when I was elected Bishop of Rome. I believe that Saint Francis is the example par excellence of care for the vulnerable and of an integral ecology lived out joyfully and authentically. He is the patron saint of all who study and work in the area of ecology, and he is also much loved by non-Christians. He was particularly concerned for God’s creation and for the poor and outcast. He loved, and was deeply loved for his joy, his generous self-giving, his openheartedness. He was a mystic and a pilgrim who lived in simplicity and in wonderful harmony with God, with others, with nature and with himself. He shows us just how inseparable the bond is between concern for nature, justice for the poor, commitment to society, and interior peace (#10).
Altogether, these are winsome words – touching, moving, and inspiring – about one Francis by another. No doubt, they are intended to be just that.
I.
And yet, certain features of these glowing texts give pause, they prompt thought and reflection, and eventually set the reader on a path that leads in a quite different direction.
For instance, one notices that there is no mention of the most well-known Christian thing about Saint Francis, that he was gifted with the stigmata. There were open wounds in his cruciform flesh. In the words of the great Jesuit poet Gerard Manley Hopkins: discipleship “wins wounds.”
On the heel of this observation, another, more troubling, thought comes to mind: Where indeed is Christ in these passages?
In the Laudato si’ passages, there is not a word, in Fratelli tutti, there is one reference to “Francis’s fidelity to his Lord.” But in a remarkable turn of phrase, that fidelity is said to be measured by (“commensurate with”) “his love for his brothers and sisters” as defined by the author. St. Francis, however, is inconceivable apart from the incarnate Lord that he followed and emulated. Everything in his life flowed from that relation, from his devotion, his love-to-excess, of the Lord who loved him. To be true to the man, a portrait must put that relation front and center. This the pontiff does not do. His is a tailored-and-trimmed portrait.
II.
After these observations, prudence suggests a closer reading of the texts. In Laudato Si’, the praising words of the saint are highlighted, indeed cited at length. However, when one juxtaposes what is cited with the full canticle, a similar sort of omission comes to light and a pattern declares itself. Here is the Canticle of the Creatures in its entirety:
Most high, all powerful, all good Lord!
All praise is Yours, all glory, all honor, and all blessing.To You, alone, Most High, do they belong.
No mortal lips are worthy to pronounce Your name.Be praised, my Lord, through all Your creatures,
Especially through my lord Brother Sun,
Who brings the day; and You give light through him.
And he is beautiful and radiant in all his splendor!
Of You, Most High, he bears the likeness. Be praised, my Lord, through Sister Moon and the stars;
In the heavens You have made them bright, precious and beautiful.Be praised, my Lord, through Brothers Wind and Air,
And clouds and storms, and all the weather,
Through which You give Your creatures sustenance.Be praised, my Lord, through Sister Water;
She is very useful, and humble, and precious, and pure.Be praised, my Lord, through Brother Fire,
Through whom You brighten the night.
He is beautiful and cheerful, and powerful and strong.Be praised, my Lord, through our sister Mother Earth,
Who feeds us and rules us,
And produces various fruits with colored flowers and herbs.Be praised, my Lord, through those who forgive for love of You;
Through those who endure sickness and trial.Happy those who endure in peace,
For by You, Most High, they will be crowned.Be praised, my Lord, through our sister Bodily Death,
From whose embrace no living person can escape.
Woe to those who die in mortal sin!
Happy those she finds doing Your most holy will.
The second death can do no harm to them.Praise and bless my Lord, and give thanks,
And serve Him with great humility.
One immediately notices that Pope Francis’s version is rather truncated, with parts at the beginning and the end left out.
What is omitted from the end is particularly significant. In speaking of “mortal sin” and “the second death,” St. Francis indicates that he is acutely aware that this life and this world are not our final home, that Heaven is, and that human life has the most dramatic stakes attached to it: either living eternally with the Lord or in eternal estrangement from Him. Because of his faith in Christ – the Christ who had suffered, died, was buried, and rose from the dead for him – he could look upon “Bodily Death” –“[f]rom whose embrace no living person can escape” – as a “sister.”
Human mortality and mortal sin, Heaven and Hell, were essential to St. Francis’s “worldview.” They, however, are omitted from the Franciscan portrait in Laudato Si’. The accent is placed elsewhere, with reductionistic effect, if not aim.
III.
Such significant, worldview-altering, omission is one thing, omission that actively conceals and even falsifies is quite another.
Above, I cited paragraph 3 of Fratelli tutti, where Francis recounted “an episode” from St. Francis’s life which exemplified Pope Francis’s vision of a fraternal bond without borders or boundries; where the exemplary Christian does not engage “in arguments and disputes”; and, in a final act of fraternal abnegation, “subjects” himself to non-Christians.
In drawing this portrait, Pope Francis claims to draw from authentic sources, indeed from a section in Saint Francis’s own “Earlier Rule of the Friars Minor.” He references a section entitled “Of those who go among the Saracens and other infidels.” The reference allows us to again observe the pontiff’s use of a source.
As is his wont, St. Francis begins with the Lord and his Word:
The Lord says: “Behold, I send you as sheep in the midst of wolves. Be ye therefore wise as serpents and simple as doves.” Wherefore, whoever of the brothers may wish, by divine inspiration, to go among the Saracens and other infidels, let them go with the permission of their minister and servant. But let the minister give them leave and not refuse them, if he sees they are fit to be sent; he will be held to render an account to the Lord if in this or in other things he acts indiscreetly. The brothers, however, who go may conduct themselves in two ways spiritually among them. One way is not to make disputes or contentions; but let them be “subject to every human creature for God’s sake,” yet confessing themselves to be Christians.
We immediately notice that Pope Francis’s version leaves out the hierarchical structure involved, whereby a brother must ask “permission” of a superior, a permission for which the latter will have “to render an account to the Lord.” He also leaves out the divine initiative at work: going forth “among the Saracens and other infidels” requires “divine inspiration.” This sort of journey is not undertaken out of mere human initiative or from simply natural motives. It is self-consciously undertaken in faith, hope, and love, confirmed by a religious superior who is acutely aware that the initiative is the Lord’s.
Having omitted the human and divine superiors at work in the drama of going out as “sheep in the midst of wolves,” Pope Francis turns to “the brothers.” Here too he omits the saint’s injunction that they expressly “confess[…] themselves to be Christians.” Actively “confessing themselves to be Christians” becomes “without renouncing their own identity.”
But, most egregiously, the pontiff omits there are “two ways” – not one – that brothers “may conduct themselves.” What is the other way? Why was it omitted? We reprise the passage and read St. Francis’s second alternative:
The other way is that when they see it is pleasing to God, they announce the Word of God, that they [the Saracens and infidels] may believe in Almighty God,—Father, and Son, and Holy Ghost, the Creator of all, our Lord the Redeemer and Saviour the Son, and that they should be baptized and be made Christians, because, “unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.”
Here the injunction and the conduct change dramatically. Evangelization, preaching “the Word of God” in its integrity and urgency, is the second way. Of this alternative, however, of the imperative of what must be done (“believe” and “be baptized”) to “enter into the kingdom of God,” there is not a word from Pope Francis. This is a most striking—indeed, scandalous—omission.
Not only is it deliberate, but it shows the deliberately misleading character of what the pontiff presented as St. Francis’s sole injunction to his followers. What the saint presented as alternative courses of conduct, to be guided by the dominical injunction, “be wise as serpents and innocent as doves,” the pontiff presents as merely not to “engage in arguments or disputes, but to be subject to every human creature for God’s sake”.
In so doing, the Gospel is dropped, as is the Franciscan, and indeed Christian, imperative to evangelize.
The reader may have noticed that the pontiff nowhere says why St. Francis travelled so far to see the Sultan. St. Bonaventure, however, does tell us.
The sultan asked them [St. Francis and Brother Innocent] by whom and why and in what capacity they had been sent, and how they got there; but Francis replied that they had been sent by God, not by men, to show him and his subjects the way of salvation and proclaim the truth of the Gospel message.
That is what a true disciple of St. Francis would do and teach, or at the very least, honestly report.
If you value the news and views Catholic World Report provides, please consider donating to support our efforts. Your contribution will help us continue to make CWR available to all readers worldwide for free, without a subscription. Thank you for your generosity!
Click here for more information on donating to CWR. Click here to sign up for our newsletter.
Bless you.
This pontificate is built upon a false understanding of St. Francis. All manner of secular fads are pawned off as Franciscan by this Pope.
Think only of the first Brothers being commissioned to preach by Pope Innocent III. They left Rome and never quit talking about conversion to Christ, except when they were at hermitage.
We must rescue this great Saint from being presented by this pontificate as an environmental hippy in a bird bath.
In gratitude to God for St. Francis, let us speak of birds and gardens.
National Catholic Register has an article by Fr. D’Souza praising a book by a man by the name of cardinal Roche. Reflecting its content, the book is entitled something like ‘Gaudium topiaria’ or ‘Amoris et gaudium horti.’
None less than the lord baron did so bless the cardinal’s crooning by publishing it all. May we expect an apology for his absence of thought while succumbing to the call from Rome? I await the fat lady’s birdsong.
Thank you for this exposure of limp evangelization by omission—with regard to Jesus Christ, and even to the whole St. Francis. The presence of other saints is also eclipsed…
About the cult of all the saints…by their holiness they are empowered to invite and assist us, here and now. The connectedness of the COMMUNION OF SAINTS. We are already “surrounded by a cloud of witnesses” (Heb 13:8). More than this. Unlike the pagan deities (with which saints are confused by secularists), our connection remains so palpable that even RELICS, as physical contact points, may be venerated—and early became transferable, not bound to the landscape as with pagan religiosity. Relocated across space and time in the twilight of the Empire, with such radiance as to anchor a new Christendom.
The key contrast, then, with pagan deities was/is the graced spirituality. And then the freedome of physical transferability, rather than the static fixity of the pagan groves and mountain tops. Quite different. (An excellent read on sainthood and relics is Peter Brown, “The Cult of the Saints: It’s Rise and Function in Latin Christianity,” University of Chicago Press, 1981.)
We look now at SYNODALITY in a post-Christian world…and the “static fixity” (!) of the arranged roundtables. Where Successors of the Apostles sit as in separate groves—rhyming their lyrics alongside equally ambiguous pagan oracles of double-speak. Is it here that we see a “backwardist” regression into the inert pagan landscape with its magic tree circles, pre-Christian sexuality, and secretive mountain top? The recidivism of Der Synodal Weg’s and the layered fluidity of the Instrumentum Laboris? Homogenous equality where even the spirit again can be the syncretic offspring of a pluralism of gods sexing it up with humans? Zeus!
Very unlike the incarnate and now marginalized Jesus Christ—NOT a hybrid or “quaternary,” but instead the One who elevates human nature into his Triune and undiluted divine nature. Grace, sacraments, and more than a relic—the Real Presence. How, possibly, to again engraft the divine self-disclosure of Christ onto surviving remnants of interior natural religion? Pachamama? Blessing of whatever? OR, instead, to closely read the real “signs of the times” and then kick the bovine feces from our soles while also “walking together”?
Like St. Paul when he departed the roundtable areopagus on his way to Corinth, unembarrassed to preach Christ crucified?
Thank you, Peter. Always spot on!
Unfortunately the author reflects on a persistent theme of liberation theology; just enough truthfulness to obscure the Real Truth, the complete Word of God. Pope Francis is simply replicating the techniques and practices of Martin Luther to promote his interpretation of Scripture irresponsibly in his effort to modernize the Church. Central to the theology of Pope Francis (IMHO) is his “God so love the world, that all men are saved” with the caveat that maybe a few will slip thru the cracks. God gets what He so desires. Lord Jesus Christ have mercy on me, a sinner.
Thank you Mr. Seaton for showing how the Pontiff Francis distorts and abuses the full Christian witness of St. Francis.
In the Confiteor we confess the sinfulness of “what I have done, and what I have failed to do.”
It brings to mind this prophecy of St. Paul:
“If for this life only we have believed in Christ, we are of all men most to be pitied.”
Consider the following, attributed to St. Margaret Mary Alacoque, on Oct. 4,
1673:”On the feast of St. Francis, our Lord let me see in prayer this great
saint, clad in a garment of light and unspeakable brilliance. He had been
raised above the other saints to an extraordinarily high degree of glory,
BECAUSE his life was so like that of the suffering Redeemer who is the life
of our souls and the love of our hearts . . the reward of his great love for
the Passion of our Lord, a love which rendered him worthy of the sacred
stigmata and made him one of the great favourites of Jesus’ Heart . . .
After I had seen all this, the Divine Bridegroom, as a token of His
love, gave me St. Francis as my soul’s guide. He was to lead me through the
pains and sufferings which awaited me.”
— translated from the French in: A. Hamon, Vie de la Bienheureuse
Margeurite-Marie (Paris: Gabriel Beauchesne & Cie, 1908), p. 125 quoted by
Timothy O’Donnell, S.T.D., [of Christendom College, Front Royal, Virginia],
in: Heart of the Redeemer, Trinity Communications, Manassas, Virginia, 1989,
p.128.
What is omitted from the end is particularly significant. In speaking of mortal sin and the second death, St. Francis indicates that he is acutely aware that this life and this world are not our final home (Paul Seton). Yes, it’s painful to scan through again, reread the omission of that martyr like commitment to Christ evident in the true Francis of Assisi.
Assumption of Saint Francis’ name by Jorge Bergoglio marked the painful path since 2013 away from all that the real Francis gave to the Church. The beginning of the distancing from sacrifice, repentance, refusal of sin, conversion, the Cross. The spiritual beauty of laying down one’s priorities for love of the brothers.
Seduction comes in many forms, from Francis I the lure of a paradisiacal world of equanimity, adoration of God’s beautiful creation. Juxtaposed to the saints, the King of Martyrs as if sacramental embrace without repentance is more consistent with the soteriological heart of the savior. A Victor Komarovsky parody wisening Zhivago that ‘We’re all made of the same clay’.
I also thank you, Mr. Seaton, for this eye-opening article.
Have tried, hopefully with genuine humility, fair-mindedness and fidelity to the Church, to give Pope Francis the benefit of the doubt through all the controversies and very serious problems that have marked his papacy. But it just just seems clear that he does not proclaim Jesus Christ faithfully. He does not proclaim his namesake St Francis of Assisi faithfully. He proclaims himself, his own personal and political views. And he empowers in the hierarchy those who share those views and falsely portray them as the Gospel.
When we encounter a teacher in the Church who does not abide in the teaching of Christ in all its fullness, the Holy Spirit directs us to ignore him ( 2 John: 10).
Great article!
“concern for the nature, justice for the poor, commitment to society” and “be subject to every human creature for God’s sake”. When Jorge Bergoglio announced the name Francis because Saint Francis loved the poor, I felt something was wrong, Saint Francis was so inflamed with the love for Christ and the Eternal Father that they called him the seraphic saint. Not concern for nature, but praise, giving glory to God; not justice for the poor but to wed Lady Poverty and become poor even as to be subject to every creature. His only wish to gain outer and inner poverty and to “offer yourself up with HIM on the altar and HOLD NOTHING BACK!
What all of you seem to be implying is that Pope Francis is somewhat dishonest, somehow suspect, sometimes giving his own take(s) on the nature of God. Bear in mind this is not new…all of us do the same. Pius V instrumentalists the tortures of the Inquisition as the hallmark of his pontificate; Urban II called for holy War in the form of Crusades; John Paul II ruthlessly suppressed any innovative thought in the Church & willingly turned a blind eye to the evil abusers of children, elevating persons like Macial Maciel et al; John XXIII called for “Agionamento” (rightfully so in my view) The point is all persons all popes take particular positions & run with them for what they see as a means of achieving a greater good for Christ’s Church. Same with Francis (I)! He is simply undertaking the process if bear ing witness to Jesus in this world, at this time…a very challenging time..
a time in which the spirit of Christ which is by infused grace the spirit that prompted St Francis; to act/bear witness to/make concrete for a “brave new world” – – that of the 21st Century in the best way possible. Why are you all condemning him (& his very perceptive views on how to make God’s Kingdom real & concrete in this age) when you don’t condem the misguided actions of some other Popes….Francis & his predecessors are fragile human beings doing the best they can/could for the People of God. Bearing witness to Christ is never easy….to condemn a good man like Pope Francis for Bearing witness is reprehensible. It seems to me that you are all strongly implying that he has somehow lost his way or is in some way disingenuous or mistaken in his approach/apostolic mandate to bring Jesus to ALL. Forgive me for so saying but my feeling is that none of you like his approach… is he too human for you? Is he not harsh enough for you? What is it about the man & his humble, light handed approach to Bearing witness to Christ that offends you so? I would remember Jesus calling out the Pharisees for their narrowness of mind, coldness of heart, mean-spiritedness, lack of empathy over weaning sinful arrogance, for closing their hearts & minds. Yes, we all do thus because we are all human…we all share in human weakness, pride, uncharitable ways of judging…the result of original sin.
To condemn Pope Francis for Bearing witness to Christ with compassion for others is not very Christian I should think! One commenter implied that Pope Francis s/b ignored!?…. what can that mean other than to imply that he’s in error?! By whose standards?…that persons standards, that’s who! Or is that commenter implying that Francis is not the Vicar of Christ???…if that be the case for that commenter perhaps he/she needs a reality check! Jorge Mario Bergoglio S.J. was canonically elected as Supreme Pontiff in March of 2013 in succession to his predecessor Benedict XVI who chose of his own free will to resign as Supreme Ponfiff!
So what’s the real nature of your condemnation of Pope Francis??…Is it perhaps you don’t like his leadership style or his views on catechizing the modern world because his approach clashes with tours? Is he too open minded & non judgemental for you? Do you object to his Christocentric acceptance of others whom you condemn?
My advice is simply Jesus’s dictum…”judge not….& you will not be judged”!
If you can’t see this, then you I would posit are in truth “sedevacantists” & perhaps need to look in the mirror.
Don’t forget Jesus…God incarnate taught love for the other as did all his followers throughout history…St Francis, PiusV, Urban II, John XXIII JP II, Francis (I) etc et al.All are flawed (part of the human condition) yet all (us too) strive to do what we can to build up the City of God as St Augusine described it.
Enough pompous utterances from me….sorry if I may have come off as offensive…Mea Culpa.
Let’s learn to love ❤️ 1 another better…Peace Blessings Prayers to you all.
(P.S. Please pray for me…I am going through some serious financial crises at this time & sorely need Prayers 🙏…Thanks) God Bless you all.
“Is he not harsh enough for you?”
He’s plenty harsh.
Brian Christopoulos, none of the above. Bergoglio does not teach the truth of Christ. He wants to establish his own will above God’s will and according to his evil desires. You cannot change the word of God and you cannot change God’s commandments. Everyone of us is called to defend the gospel, the Word of God, the truth of Christ as revealed in His word and holy life on earth. Our love for Christ demands to love and obey Him first. We will be faithful to the teaching of the faith as passed on to us by the apostles, the Fathers and Doctors of the Church through all ages and time; we have to persevere in love and obedience to Christ our Lord and God. It is not enough to talk about mercy and sin is no sin anymore. This pope is destroying the truth of Christ, may the Lord have mercy on him. I WILL PRAY FOR YOU, God bless you!
Brian, I believe that you are a good and kind soul. I also believe that you are not a Latin Mass Catholic. Open minded and non-judgmental? Try being a Latin Mass Catholic during this pontificate. Bergoglio is anything but open minded and non-judgemental. In fact he is extremely mean-spirited.
On a separate note, I will keep you in my prayers regarding your financial crises. May you know the soothing balm of the Holy Spirit.
He’s liberal
Brian, I will pray that you be freed of your financial crisis. As I am undergoing the same thing (I was made destitute by the pandemic lockdown and haven’t recovered at all), I would like to request for your prayers as well. Our help is in the name of the Lord, who made heaven and earth. Thank you and God bless you.
Brian, you ask: “So what’s the real nature of your condemnation of Pope Francis??…Is it perhaps you don’t like his leadership style or his views on catechizing the modern world because his approach clashes with tours?”
In the interests of dialogue, three questions in response:
(1) Instead of critique, who has made a “condemnation”?
(2) Might we consider that Pope Francis’s “style” is to replace leadership and catechesis with, what, “style,” and with a proceduralism imported from the secular world? Even the Synod is about a “listening” style–leadership from behind. On the so-called “hot-button concerns,” catechesis by stacking with swing votes, and by bundling with (yes) legitimate concerns, butt to achieve package-deal “consensus.”
(3) Does your typo “tours” recall differences with Tours of A.D. 732? Yes, a different world today, but “pluralism” of religions? When is the philosophy of the “greater good” (your term), really a Benthamite distortion of the “common good”? And, about being “non-judgmental”—in all matters are we now to replace moral “judgments of conscience” (!) with detached “decisions” (proportionalism, consequentialism)?
The legitimate criticisms are observations about outcomes, not judgments on the interior condition of Pope Francis’s soul.
Francis Bergollio is using and manipulating St. Francis for globalist agenda, a religion without a Cross.
And he is using St. Francis fornew global economy, “Economy of Francesco.”
https://www.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/messages/pont-messages/2023/documents/20231006-messaggio-economy-of-francesco.html
brian christopoulos,
Pope Francis is the pope and he has the authority on matters of faith and morals over us. His charism seems to be love for migrants with barely a consideration for immigration laws, love of creation seemingly apart from love of God, and love for people who are confused about the proper use of sex as God intends it. You should not compare him, flawed-person-to-flawed-person to other popes, but just his “charism” compared to theirs. You’d be surprised to find you’re comparing apples and oranges.
Compare, for example, Pius V’s “instrumentalizing the tortures of the Inquisition” to Francis’ sympathy to sodomists – you can’t, because they’re completely different kinds of “charism.” Or Urban II’s “holy War in the form of Crusades” to Francis’ war on traditionalist Catholics – you can’t, because they’re different kinds of war. Or John Paul II’s “turning a blind eye to the evil abusers of children” to Francis’ disapproval of the use of air conditioners. See what I mean? Commenters here are disapproving of Francis’ fractured teachings – it does not mean they approve of the other popes’ faulty acts.
As a Third Order (Secular) Franciscan, I am grateful for Mr. Seaton’s article and for his pointing out the last item on the Canticle of the Sun, which is “Sister Death.” This particular part of the song is often ignored, even by Franciscans themselves. The more reason Pope Francis should have dealt with it in Laudato Si.
My issue with Pope Francis is his constantly ambiguous pronouncements. I think he does it on purpose, to give room for deniability, i.e., clarification by the Vatican press office. It’s even more worrisome now that Cardinal Tucho Fernandez is chief of doctrine. With Cardinal Ladaria as former prefect of DDF, the answer to the question of blessing homosexual unions was simply, “Negative.” But with Cardinal Fernandez, it’s “No, but…” I have no dog in this fight, but it seems to fly in the face of Our Lord’s teaching, “Let your communication be, Yes, yes; No, no: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil.” (Matt 5:37.)
I’ve never heard of the word “coprophagia” until Pope Francis used it early in his pontificate. I had ran to the dictionary to find out, but couldn’t find it at first because I had misspelled it as “crapophagia.”
Bergoglian iconoclastic insistence of promoting an erroneous portrait of Francis of Assisi is merely typical of the infantile hysteria of his adminsitration. Francis was deeply devoted to Jesus Christ Crucified — crucified for the sins of the world, and to the Sacred Liturgy.
Bergoglio’s drive to relegate him to a bird bath is just another sacrilege. We are use to it by now. He has abandoned all reason and indeed credence itself.
“Bergoglio’s drive to relegate him to a bird bath is just another sacrilege”. Best line of the month.
Having been a professed secular Franciscan for 40 years, I believe I have the ability to comment on this. I agree with Mr. Seaton, but it’s not so simple. This is not new. Franciscans of every kind, religious or lay have their personal view of what our Seraphic Father meant by his words. Since 9/11 well meaning franciscans have interpreted his encounter with the Sultan as an example for us to seek peace and understanding of our Muslim brothers and sisters. Nowhere is that confirmed in anything he said and did. What this shows is that all those who believe they know the mind of God and his saints, and a pen or a keyboard to profess their opinion…. will provide it. It is up to you to seek the truth. Pray, seek wisdom, spend a lifetime trying to follow in the footsteps of the one who you believe had the answers. It’s not about the Pope being wrong so much as your desire to get it right. I’m still trying to understand my brother Francis after 40 years. Before he died, he warned the order what would happen if they went against his teaching and Rule. Look at the order now. It’s dying. Just like the church. Why?
The problem with the “Francis” of Jorge Bergoglio is that he is not the Francis that gave birth to Franciscandom but a Francis refracted very much through Jesuit (and especially Jesuit General Congregation 34) eyes–which means he is a caricature of the Francis supposedly recovered and embodied in this pontificate. (Consider, for example, that within the Franciscan family, impulses towards reform and a stricter observance of the Rule always managed to find a home under the Franciscan mantle, whereas the Jesuit “charism” has always stamped out any reforms that would have challenged the vision of the “mainstream” Jesuit interpretation of what Ignatius intended).