10 years of pontificate | François, the obstacle to going around in circles

“Not restful, but it keeps us alive. »

Jonathan Guilbault

Director of Novalis Editions

This answer does not come from grandparents out of breath after babysitting their grandchildren. It burst from the lips of a colleague whom I asked to summarize the 10 years of the pontificate of Francis, which we are highlighting on March 13.

In fact, one of the characteristic traits of the current pope is to create a stir. He likes to throw cobblestones into the pond, even jump into it himself with both feet. One immediately thinks of his many jaw-dropping tirades, but there is so much more: his astonishing appointments to key posts, his efforts to reform the curia, his lifestyle, etc.

Everything indicates that his disconcerting actions are not only due to his spontaneity. They stem from an intention: to stir the cage, to expel the Church from this comfort zone where it can blindly trust the reflexes developed during centuries of combat and influence in the West. François clearly believes in the theory of creative chaos.

Because a certain disorder promotes the expression of life. The Church too often resembles these rooms with immutable furniture, in the Empire (Roman) style, covered with cobwebs.

Francis probably conceives of the Holy Spirit as a joyful child, eager to spin around, to touch everything, at the risk of breaking a precious vase or two.

After its passage, it is necessary to arrange, and it is then the occasion not only to do housework, but also to think of new expenses the order which is appropriate.

If the objective of the Second Vatican Council, from 1962 to 1965, was to “open the windows of the Church”, according to the expression of Pope John XXIII, the present synod, which began two years ago and which is expected to peak in 2024, is squarely looking to break down walls to build new gates.

Consult believers

Because François insisted that we start with a long discussion at the local level, everywhere in the world, so that everyone can express themselves. In other words, the bishops will have the mandate, before any deliberation, to take note of the intuitions, dreams and concerns of believers in their country.

It is doubtless by doing so that the Catholic Church can allow itself, while remaining itself, to come as close as possible to a democratic process. However, François’ initiative disturbs, reveals intense resistance to any change, perceived each time as an infidelity, a compromise with the suspect fashions agitating the modern world.

And this is one of the risks of the pope’s provocative approach. By dint of creating chaos, the latter could settle permanently.

Vatican II certainly polarized, but the Church came out of the council relatively unified. At least as much as can be an institution bringing together in a single body cultures and irreducible spiritual sensitivities.

To date, it is far from certain that this synod will end on such a positive note. Cardinal Pell called the move a “toxic nightmare” some time before his death, and several conservatives, especially in the United States, share his distaste for what they perceive as senseless and dangerous chatter. In short, the risk of fiasco, at least from the point of view of the cohesion of the Church, does indeed exist.

Even on the side of the progressives, after having applauded with both hands the first “fraques” of Francis, some were disillusioned, realizing that the maverick, even inconstant style of the pope did not lend itself to in-depth reforms, which require efforts. more systematic.

Indeed, the mutations engendered by François remain fragile, even if his attacks on the culture of interpersonality, sadly reinforced by the numerous abuse scandals, have dealt a blow that we can hope will be decisive to the claim of the Church to judge from above, and alone, human affairs.

So, a blessing, this “pope of surprises”, this pontiff of the “merry brothel”, this obstacle to going around in circles?

We must resist the temptation to judge on the basis of the short-term repercussions of this synod alone. Contrary to the context of cultural and theological ferment in which Vatican II opened, the soil today is not conducive to great harvests. The only expected fruit is to succeed in mobilizing the Church, the whole Church, in the most urgent and necessary labours. And this despite the force of inertia coming from a fierce polarization.

In short, the brilliance of the balance sheet that will one day be drawn up of François’ approach will largely depend on his ability to maneuver in the storm that was already brewing before him, but which he caused to burst of his own free will. To this end, the current synod will act as a barometer: if a new mobilization emerges, then perhaps the current pope will be remembered as a captain of genius, able to take advantage of headwinds.