Pope Francis has lamented a “very strong reactionary attitude” in the US Catholic Church, saying that ideology had replaced faith in some parts of it and some members had failed to understand “there is an appropriate evolution in understanding matters of faith and morals.”

During his decade as pontiff, Francis has often faced criticism from conservative sectors of the US church, opposed to reforms such as giving women and lay Catholics more roles and making the church more welcoming and less judgmental towards some, including LGBT people.

The comments were made in Portugal on August 5, during a private meeting on Francis’ trip to Lisbon with members of the Jesuit order the pope belongs to, but were scheduled to be published in full as part of the Italian Jesuit journal Civilta Cattolica’s end-of-August edition. Daily paper La Repubblica published excerpts in advance on Monday

During the question-and-answer session, a Portuguese Jesuit said that he was saddened while on a sabbatical in the US to find many Catholics, including some bishops, who were hostile to Francis’ leadership.

“You have seen that in the United States the situation is not easy: there is a very strong reactionary attitude,” Francis said. “It is organized and shapes the way people belong, even emotionally.”

The liberal Argentine pontiff, born Jorge Mario Bergoglio, has also faced criticism from religious leaders and conservative media in the US on a host of his other stances, including climate change, immigration, social justice, gun control and opposing the death penalty as “neither human nor Christian.”

“You have been to the United States and you say you have felt a climate of closure. Yes, this climate can be experienced in some situations,” Francis told the questioner. “And there, one can lose the true tradition and turn to ideologies for support. In other words, ideology replaces faith, membership in a sector of the church replaces membership in the church.”

Francis said his critics needed to understand that “there is an appropriate evolution in the understanding of matters of faith and morals,” and that being backward-looking was “useless” for the church.

He said it was an “error” to consider church teachings to be a “monolith.”

Francis gave both a historical and a more recent example to try to illustrate this, saying there was a time when many in the Catholic Church would have supported slavery. In the more recent case of homosexuality, he said, “it is apparent that perception of this issue has changed in the course of history.”

“But what I really dislike more generally is when you look at the so-called sins of the flesh through a magnifying glass, as people did for so long,” Francis said. He argued that pastoral care required “sensitivity and creativity,” also mentioning his first meeting with trans people. “It’s become clear to me that they feel spurned. And that’s really hard,” he said.

One of the pope’s fiercest American critics is Rome-based Cardinal Raymond Burke. He wrote in an introduction for a recent book that a meeting of bishops called by Francis for this October to try to help chart the future of the church risked sowing “confusion and error and division.”

  • MonkderZweite@feddit.ch
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Jesus existed, but he was a person, not a magic man and the Old Testament was a book of parables.

    So they are really jewish in belief?

    telling them how to vote and a fellow churchgoer did the same, telling them they weren’t real catholics if they didn’t vote straight R

    What a shitshow. Church shouldn’t mingle in politics.

    • orclev@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      What a shitshow. Church shouldn’t mingle in politics.

      Yeah, so there was a broad understanding of that principle for a very long time following the complete shit show that state sponsored churches created in Europe, so much so that it was enshrined in actual law in the first amendment to the US constitution. Other countries such as Australia also have similar laws.

      Unfortunately, as a reaction to the perceived anti-religion policies of the USSR during the cold war, the US decided to emphasize religion as a staple of life in the US, going so far as to add “In God We Trust” to US currency, something that is arguably a violation of the first amendment and most likely should never have been allowed. Making things worse Republicans realized that they could weaponize ignorant evangelical Christians as part of the southern strategy, and so began to depict themselves as the party of Christianity, once again walking the line of what’s allowed under the first amendment.

      Recently evangelicals have managed to convince themselves that first amendment does not in fact prevent religion from getting involved with government, but in fact merely prevents the government from putting any restrictions on religion. They have decided that that means they can simply ignore any laws they disagree with by claiming it violates their religion, while also seeing no conflict with trying to enshrine their religious beliefs as law. Many of them also push a revisionist history that the US was founded as a Christian nation and that therefore Christian beliefs should be the basis of law in the US, some going as far as to suggest the US officially adopting Christianity as a state religion.

      The one ray of hope in all this is the waning belief in religion. If religion can be successfully kept out of politics for the next couple decades it’s possible that churches won’t have enough sway to be a useful tool of politicians anymore.

      • MonkderZweite@feddit.ch
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        Thanks for the lesson in US history! You don’t know those kinds of details as european.

        Is this too why “Gods own country” came to be?

        • mothersprotege@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          As far as I can recall, I’ve never heard anyone refer to the US as “God’s own country,” though I’m irreligious. The Wikipedia entry suggests it’s been used to refer to all sorts of places, and perhaps most notably (pertaining to the US) by Goebbels.

      • R0cket_M00se@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        Unfortunately, as a reaction to the perceived anti-religion policies of the USSR during the cold war

        The oppression of religion in the USSR wasn’t a mere perception but a daily reality for millions who were killed or thrown in Gulags.

        Everything else about your statement is pretty much spot on, from the perspective of someone who was raised to believe those lies.

        • orclev@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          I wasn’t using perceived there to suggest that the USSR didn’t oppress religion, but rather to point out that it was a reaction to beliefs in America at the time. Whether the reality of USSR was different from that belief wouldn’t have mattered as the decision to emphasize religion in the US was a direct product of the US anti-communism propaganda effort (once again, because I know there’s a significant tankie population on Lemmy, I’m not advocating FOR communism here). It’s sort of like a second order effect. First you have the reality of life in the USSR. Then you have how the US populace perceived that life. Lastly you had the political decisions designed to steer that perception towards their own ends. Encouraging deeper religiousness in the US or even the perception of such was simply seen as a wedge issue that could be used both domestically and abroad to try to steer people towards the US side of the cold war.

          • R0cket_M00se@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            For sure, sorry you seemed reasonable enough that I figured you meant it more as “regardless of the reality this is what the US thought and used it as a point to make legislation based off of” but with how many USSR apologist tankies there are I wanted to make sure everyone is clear that there was a massive push from the established powers in the Soviet Union to wipe out religion. They even had a five year plan (as if) to try to accomplish this goal.

            • orclev@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              1 year ago

              It’s also worth pointing out that this was all taking place at the height of McCarthyism. There’s a lot you could get away with in the US at the time simply by framing it as anti-communist and adding “In God We Trust” to the currency was just one such example. Something else interesting that I ran across while doing some fact checking here was this flier from 1955 that seems scarily similar to current propaganda. Just goes to show I guess that the more things change the more they stay the same.

              • R0cket_M00se@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                1 year ago

                Don’t forget adding it to the pledge, that happened around the same time because Eisenhower was onboard with McCarthyism.

    • Artichuth@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      So they are really just Jewish in belief?

      Lol, I didn’t realize how close that sounds to Judaism.

      More like, still accept him as dying for your sins and following his teachings. They’ve always ascribed more to Deistic beliefs anyway.