STYLE OVER SUBSTANCE: The Papacy of Pope Francis?

Let’s face it:  there are two diametrically opposing forces within the Church, always have been and, perhaps, always will be.

The Pontificate of Pope Francis has intensified this dynamic tension and put it in sharp relief.

At the center of the conflict is authority (moral, spiritual and temporal) and its expression in the governance of the Church.

The Catholic faithful are caught in the middle of a Church divided over the issue of centralized versus decentralized authority.

One side claims to be upholding “sacred tradition” which they define narrowly in terms of the monolithic construct of Church teaching and practice during the past 500 years of the 2000 year history of Christianity.  

The other side argues that such narrow-mindedness betrays a fundamental spiritual immaturity and is responsible for much of the irresponsible and negligent exercise of ecclesiastical authority over the centuries.

Following the neo-conservative Pontificates of Pope St. John Paul II and Benedict XVI, it is clear that the overwhelming majority of Bishops they appointed are of the traditonal mindset and, thus, are reluctant to accept or engage in a style of governance which requires discernment rather than a simple obsequious obedience to the edicts and pronouncements of the Roman See.

It is so obvious.  

Pope Francis is eager to return to the Bishops the Apostolic authority they exercised prior to its usurpation by the Bishops of Rome following  both the Great Schism and the Protestant Reformation.

By now, it should be evident that Pope Francis is eager and impatient to implement a synodal structure of governance which returns to the paradigm of episcopal authority familiar to the Church for the first 1200 years of its history.

The difficulties which the Holy Father has encountered highlight the fact that most Bishops today are simply not ready or willing to accept the responsibilities which comes with their Apostolic Office.

No more clearly was this witnessed than during the two recent Synods of Bishops which the Holy Father convened.  

One can only imagine the Pope’s chagrin and disappointment when he discovered that such a surprisingly high number of Bishops (mostly Presidents of the world's Episcopal Conferences in 2014 and mainly the elected representatives of those Conferences in 2015) were incapable of any sort of creative theological or pastoral thinking that strayed from the letter of Canon Law as well as past pronouncements of the Holy See.

The Pope has a serious problem on his hands.  

If synodal governance is to be effective, it will require Bishops who are intelligent, courageous and capable of making decisions without having to constantly look to Rome for solutions.

Pope Francis has given numerous signals that he would like to make Synods a more regular and essential component of Universal Church governance.  Likewise, the Pope has shown his preference for the authoritative exercise of episcopal authority on the level of local and regional Conferences of Bishops.

The effect of all this constitutes a reform of the Papacy itself.

The problem is that, to date, Pope Francis has not provided either of these synodal exercises of authority any juridical status or structure.

If the Synod and if local and regional Episcopal Conferences are to become the manner in which authority is exercised in the future, then the days of the Roman Curia are numbered indeed.   

But the history of the Church confirms again and again that the Curia has survived any attempt to consign it to the grave.


If Pope Francis succeeds in accomplishing this, it could represent the most important reform in the last thousand years of the Church's history. 

But, unless he institutionalizes his idealist reforms, they will lack the substrata of structure and legal status so necessary to insure their continuance well after his Pontificate.

What a shame it would be if history records that the Papacy of Pope Francis was, in the end, simply a matter of style over substance!