A Pope by any other name...

The selection of the new Pope to lead the Catholic Church last week was an incredibly historic moment.  While all such selections carry historic weight, this particular selection was especially notable, because it involved so many unprecedented (or nearly unprecedented) elements.  For the first time, the man selected to lead the Catholic Church is from the Western Hemisphere, the “New World”, the first non-European Pope since the 8th century (Pope Gregory III, who was from Syria).  The selection of a Cardinal from Latin America was not unexpected, but it still marks a turning point in the history of the Church, as our population shifts from Europe and the ‘developed’ world to the ‘developing’ world.

The man chosen to lead the Church, Cardinal Brogoglio of Argentina, is also the first Pope to have originated from the Society of Jesus (commonly known as the Jesuits).  Common thinking has long held that no Jesuit would ever become Pope, a belief that was shared by most Jesuits as well.  This is because the rules of the order bar its priests from seeking higher offices, so that it is extremely rare for any of them to become bishops.  Brogoglio was chosen by Pope John Paul II to become a bishop, and since Jesuits also take a special vow of obedience to the Pope, he was dismissed from the order so he could be ordained as a bishop.  His rise to the College of Cardinals and ultimate selection as Pope are therefore remarkable, and may remain unique for a very long time.

The very first action of the newly elected Pope was his selection of a papal name.  This is very old tradition, where the newly elected leader chooses a name that is usually symbolic of what the new Pope hopes to accomplish in the office or the tone they want to be associated with their leadership.  Every newly chosen Pope for the last 1,100 years has chosen the name of some earlier Pope (or in the case of John Paul I, the names of both of the two preceding Popes).  This long precedent was ignored by Brogoglio, who instead chose the previously unused name “Francis”.  And in this selection, this man picked a name that conveys layer upon layer of symbolic meaning.

After some initial confusion, it has been clarified that the name is, in fact, a reference to St. Francis of Assisi, the founder of the Franciscan orders, who is perhaps the most widely recognized and admired of all the saints of the Catholic Church.  It is a name that conveys meaning to people far beyond the membership of the Church, even to non-Christians.  In the statements that have been reported, Pope Francis seems to have chosen the name to reflect his desire to focus attention on the poor, which is certainly one of the well-known aspects of St. Francis’s vocation.  St. Francis was also known for the simplicity of his lifestyle, which, by all accounts, is also a hallmark of the new Pope’s way of life.  And it also sounds as if Pope Francis is also planning to emulate St. Francis’s message of respect for all of God’s creation, perhaps in advocating for more responsible attitudes towards the environment.

There are other elements of the life of St. Francis that might be worthy of emulation by our new Pope who bears his name.  Benedict XVI initiated an effort by the Church to engage in a “new evangelization”.  It is perhaps fitting that the man who now inherits these efforts is named Francis, after the saint who is credited with saying “Preach the Gospel at all times, and when necessary, use words.”  It would be to the Church’s great credit if this idea of spreading the Gospel message by living it, by having the Church leadership provide a living example of what the Gospels mean.

Finally, St. Francis was an outspoken advocate for reform at a time when the Church leadership was riddled with corruption.  Once again, the Church finds itself facing a multitude of scandals because of corruption within the institution, and is in need of a voice calling for reform.  It is my hope that the example of St. Francis will motivate this new Pope to address the ways in which the Church is governed, allowing for transparency and accountability throughout the instittution.

I have heard some people express disappointment that this new Pope has held conservative positions on a wide range of issues of doctrine and Church teaching.  However, I think that anyone who was hoping for a radical change in those areas was deceiving themselves.  That hand was never going to be dealt by this conclave, because the deck being used by the Cardinals did not include any of those cards.

Eight years ago, the election of Benedict the XVI left me immensely disappointed, as it seemed to reflect a retrenchment by the reactionary elements in the Church.  I don’t know that I would call his papacy a success, but it wasn’t the complete disaster I had expected either.  I suspect that his legacy will end up being his decision to resign, especially if it sets a precedent that becomes the norm going forward.  My initial reaction last week was much more hopeful.  Is Francis everything I would want in a Pope?  No, he isn’t, but in many ways he looks to be better than I expected, and that gives me hope for the future.