The old anti-Catholic stereotype that Catholicism is an absolute dictatorship in which Catholics are under the control of the Pope is one of the things I was surprised to find is, if not ubiquitous, very wide spread among online lefties. Of course anyone who bothers to find out what the truth is would know that couldn't be farther from the truth. Dissent and criticism of Popes and what they claim, even what Councils of Bishops and Cardinals declare about papal infallibility, is as Catholic as the Papacy. Catholics even criticize Popes and what they say when the love the particular Pope who says something they disagree with. Those who pretend that every word of a pope they idolize is the word of God will do everything up to and including declaring a pope they disagree with is legitimate. You can read the neo-integralist idolizers of John Paul II and Benedict XVI* who claimed infallibility for their most wrong-headed and even cruel declarations never lose an opportunity to try to discredit and condemn Francis.
I have been recommending people read Pope Francis' Gaudete et Exultate, which I think is one of the best papal documents of the past century. It is certainly one of the most user friendly, mixing theological and pastoral content, written in a style which only the very least literate would have a problem with. And the content is wonderfully practical instead of theoretical-theological.
That said, I can't disagree with this harsh criticism of some of it by Jamie Mason in The National Catholic Reporter. The criticism is in line with the criticism of Pope Francis's general view of women, something others have criticized and it rejects the defense of him on the basis of his age and the milieu he has lived in.
Those who have heard Francis' countless glorifications of motherhood and homemaking will not be surprised that the woman is a young mother who is out shopping. Her first moment of spiritual struggle comes in the urge to gossip. She declines. Then her child wants to talk with her. She is tired, but decides to listen with patience and love. When anxiety befalls her in the evening, she recalls "the love of the Virgin Mary" and picks up "her rosary and prays with faith."
These examples may seem rather innocuous to the occasional reader of Francis, but those who listen to him regularly will recognize that he is reasserting, for the umpteenth time, his belief that women's most essential vocation, and her true path to holiness, comes in motherhood and nurturing her family.
Another of Francis' recurring themes also emerges here: a woman's temptation to gossip. For the pope, gossip is no venial sin. In fact, he considers it to be "an act of terrorism," as he told a group of cloistered nuns during his recent visit in Peru in January.
"You know what a gossiping nun is? A terrorist!" Francis told the women, according to a Reuters report.
"Because gossip is like a bomb," the pope added. "One throws it, it causes destruction and you walk away tranquilly. No terrorist nuns!"
Sure, Francis was making an attempt at humor here, but it was another example of one of his "jokes" straying uncomfortably into misogynist territory. (Remember the wisecracks about Adam's rib and the priests being controlled by female housekeepers?)
These clichés give the sense that one of women's greatest spiritual temptation is to dish the dirt. Francis, of all people, should know that gossip is a far graver problem among the men in the Curia than it could ever be among women in the supermarket.
Even when Francis speaks well of women in this document, he cannot help but see the path to holiness through a gendered lens. For example, he speaks highly of women saints whose great faith has produced reforms in the church through their "feminine styles of holiness" and "attractiveness."
There is a lot more in the criticism of the document which should be considered by anyone who reads it. It is, though, not discrediting of the general goals and aims and arguments of the document or even of Francis.
One of the best things about Pope Francis, especially as contrasted with John Paul II and, to an extent, Benedict XVI, he listens to his critics and, as recently on his actions in regard to the Church in Chile, he is quite capable of learning from criticism and changing even important decisions he's taken. If he read Jamie Mason's article or something making the same points, I'm sure he'll consider them and learn from what they said. That's a total contrast to how John Paul II took the public exhortation of Theresa Kane President of the US Leadership of the Women Religious on the role of Women in the Catholic Church. I remember watching it on TV and thinking he looked like he just hated having to listen to a woman speaking up and pretty much the rest of his pontificate included trying to put uppity nuns in their place. I can't imagine Francis doing that, afterall one of the early things he did was to end the John Paul II - Benedict XVI inquisition against Women Religious.
I will still recommend Gaudete et Exultate but I'll also recommend reading Mason's criticism of it too. As I said the other day the Scriptures are human documents, even those of the most obvious inspiration, they are attempts to understand, like even the most reliable of human attempts to do that, they aren't infallible.
* I think that Benedict XVI's decision to retire was probably the most responsible thing he did as Pope, he faced the fact that his papacy was pretty much a self-created wreck. John Paul II was incapable of that level of self-reflection. I think the decision to canonize JPII was unfortunate and unconvincing. I don't buy it.
No comments:
Post a Comment