Philip F. Lawler - Lost Shepherd : How Pope Francis Is Misleading His Flock

Copyright 2018 by Philip F. Lawler

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system now known or to be invented, without permission in writing from the publisher, except by a reviewer who wishes to quote brief passages in connection with a review written for inclusion in a magazine, newspaper, website, or broadcast.

Regnery Gateway is a trademark of

Salem Communications Holding Corporation

Regnery is a registered trademark of

Salem Communications Holding Corporation

Cataloging-in-Publication data on file with the Library of Congress

e-book ISBN 978-1-62157-753-9

Published in the United States by Regnery Gateway

An imprint of Regnery Publishing

A Division of Salem Media Group

300 New Jersey Ave NW

Washington, DC 20001

www.RegneryGateway.com

10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

Books are available in quantity for promotional or premium use.

For information on discounts and terms, please visit our website:

www.Regnery.com.

CONTENTS

E very day I pray for Pope Francis. And every day (I am exaggerating, but only slightly), the pope issues another reminder that he does not approve of Catholics like me.

If the Holy Father were rebuking me for my sins, I would have no reason to complain. But day after weary day, in his homilies at morning Mass in the Vaticans St. Martha residence, the pope upbraids meand countless thousands of other faithful Catholicsfor clinging to, and sometimes suffering for, the truths that the Church has always taught. We are rigid, he tells us. We are the doctors of the law, the Pharisees, who only want to be comfortable with our Faith.

In the early days of his pontificate, Francis captured the public imagination with his call for a new, vigorous, worldwide mission. I was one of millions caught up in the Francis effect, enthusiastic about his vision. I found that friends and neighbors, inspired by what they read and heard about the pope, wanted to talk with me about the Catholic Faith: not about the politics of the Vatican or the scandals of the clergy, but about the fundamental message of the Gospel.

As time passed, however, the tone and even the content of the popes public statements puzzled me, then distressed me. For months, in my work reporting on the daily news from the Vatican, I did my best to provide reassurancefor my readers and sometimes for myselfthat despite his sometimes alarming remarks, Francis was not a radical, was not leading the Church away from the ancient sources of the Faith. But gradually, reluctantly, painfully, I came to the conclusion that he was.

The Roman pontiff should be a focus of unity in the Church. Francis, regrettably, has become a source of division. There are two reasons for this unhappy development: the popes autocratic style of governance and the radical nature of the program that he is relentlessly advancing.

The autocratic style, which contrasts sharply with promises of collegial and synodal governance, has never been quite so evident as in January 2017, when he tossed aside the independent and sovereign status of an ancient Catholic fraternal order, the Knights of Malta. Writing of that remarkable coup in the Wall Street Journal, Sohrab Ahmari observed that it has divided the church along familiar lines. Ahmari, a recent convert to Catholicism, continued:

As with other recent disputescommunion for the divorced-and-remarried; the status of the Latin Mass; Vatican engagement with Chinas Communist regimeconservatives are on one side and Pope Francis is on the other.

But a pope should not be on one side of disagreements within the Church. Certainly the Roman pontiff must make decisions and set policies. But unlike a political leader, he is not expected to bring his own particular agenda to his office, to promote his allies and punish his opponents. Whereas we expect President Trump to reverse policies of President Obamajust as Obama reversed policies of President Bushwe expect a pope to preserve the decisions of his predecessors. Because the Church is not, or should not be, divided into rival parties.

Every pope makes controversial decisions, and every controversial decision leaves some people unhappy. But a prudent pontiff avoids even the appearance of acting arbitrarily. Mindful that he serves as head of a college of bishopsnot as a lone monarchhe does his best to propose rather than impose solutions to pastoral problems.

Although he exercises enormous authority within the Church, a pope also acts under considerable restraints. He is empowered to speak for the universal Church, but in a sense he forfeits the ability to speak for himself. The pope cannot be partisan. He is expected to settle arguments, not to start them. At the Council of Jerusalem, St. Peter set the standard for his successors: hearing out the arguments on both sides and then rendering a judgment (in this case, ruling against the position that he himself had previously held).

By its very nature the popes role is conservative, in the best sense of that word. He is charged with preserving the purity and clarity of our Faith, a Faith that does not change. Since our fundamental beliefs were set forth by Jesus Christ, no prelate can question them without subverting the authority of the Church that Our Lord foundedthe same Church that gives him his only claim to authority. While he is the supreme teacher of the Catholic Faith, the pope can teach only what the Church has always taught: the Deposit of Faith that has been passed down to him from the apostles. He can speak infallibly, but only when he proclaims and defines what faithful Catholics have always and everywhere believed.

In short the pope cannot teach something new. He can express old truths in new ways, but if he introduces actual novelties, he is abusing his authority. And if his new teachings conflict with the established doctrines of the Church, he is undermining that authority.

Many faithful Catholics believe that with Amoris Laetitia, Francis has encouraged beliefs and practices that are incompatible with the prior teachings of the Church. If that complaint is justified, he has violated the sacred trust that is given to Peters successors. If that complaint is not justified, the Holy Father at a minimum owes us explanations, not insults.

Something snapped inside me on February 24, 2017, when Francis turned the days Gospel reading (Mark 10:112) into one more opportunity to promote his own view on divorce and remarriage. Condemning hypocrisy and the logic of casuistry, the pontiff said that Jesus rejects the approach of legal scholars. True enough. But in his rebuke to the Pharisees, what does Jesus say about marriage?

So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let not man put asunder.

and

Whoever divorces his wife and marries another, commits adultery against her; and if she divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery.

Sometimes, in his homilies, the popes interpretation of the Scriptures is forced; often his characterization of tradition-minded Catholics is insulting. But in this case, the pope turned the Gospel reading completely upside-down. Reading the Vatican Radio account of that astonishing homily, I found I could no longer pretend that Francis was merely offering a novel interpretation of Catholic doctrine. No, it was more than that. He was engaged in a deliberate effort to change what the Church teaches.