Conservative Roman Catholics Dismayed and Distraught by Pope Francis

Conservative Roman Catholics feel they
are not helped by Pope Francis

For all the “infallible interpreters” telling us that there is nothing wrong with what this pope is saying, “he’s just got a different emphasis”, it seems as if there are others who think he is a disaster. There are a lot more like these conservative Roman Catholics who don’t feel “strengthened” by this supposed “Successor of Peter” (Luke 22:31-32).

The Washington Times carried this article from a disgruntled priest: The Pope’s Blurred Red Lines:

Of course, Pope Francis assured his interlocutor that he is a loyal son of the church and accepts the church’s teachings on the aforementioned issues.

This addendum, however, is not good enough to mitigate the damage his words have caused for the pro-life movement and those who are trying to defend marriage as being between a man and a woman. His remarks have effectively given a sword to those who want to stifle them….

There are three groups that this new tone from the top directly impact: faithful Catholics, proponents of choice on abortion and homosexual marriage, and Catholic politicians.

First, the pope’s comments are going to take the wind out of the sails of some faithful Catholics — the 28 percent who still attend Mass regularly and financially support the church. Most affected are those who have borne the heat of the day in the culture-war protests against abortion and same-sex marriages. The once-sure moral support that these groups enjoyed under past popes has been undermined. Pope Francis‘ message is clear: Cool it.


Second, the pope’s words provide a sword for those critical of the church’s moral teachings on life and of the purpose of human sexuality. It will now be quite easy for them to say, “Why don’t you just listen to the pope and move on?” This sentiment has already been advanced in a letter to the editor in the New York Times by a Planned Parenthood official, who applauds the pope for “getting in step with modern times.”

Finally, the pope’s musings have provided cover for Catholic politicians who support liberal abortion laws and legalization of same-sex marriage. They can now claim that they, like the pope, are concerned about the bigger issues, such as poverty and concern for the poor. For sure, Catholic politicians such as Vice President Joe Biden, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, and New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo can point to their liberal social-welfare policies as being Gospel-motivated. They can simply claim they are following the pope’s direction. Pope Francis has thus tied the hands of those bishops who have tried to rein in this hypocrisy.

The pope’s “big tent” approach for Catholicism is bound to diminish the church’s presence as a moral force in society. It is also detrimental to the church’s main ministry, the saving of souls. If there is only a distant and muffled voice on the life and human sexuality issues, how will people know that they are transgressing God’s laws?

The conservative National Catholic Register, published by EWTN, published this:

When I read the interview the Pope gave there was much to be admired in it. But I found some parts to be worrisome. I understand what the Pope is trying to do by emphasizing the pastoral before the doctrinal. Truly, I get it. But I wonder how, in its essence, that is any different that what the Church has tried to do over the past 45 years? As somebody who grew up in a post-Vatican II Church, I can assure you that the emphasis has not been dogma. In my experience, it has been all pastoral, all the time.

In that time we have witnessed the complete failure of the Church to engage the western mind and heart. So much so that Europe, and increasingly the Americas, has become so secularized to be again considered mission territory. While the reasons for this are complex, I take note that the post-Vatican II 'pastoral' approach has done little if anything to stem the tide and perhaps hastened the effect.

Worse, in many places and among many people the emphasis on the pastoral over the dogmatic has ultimately resulted in the rejection of doctrine. It does not take much imagination to suspect that the downplaying of doctrine makes many people believe it doesn't really matter anymore. So I cannot help but wonder if more pastoral cowbell is capable of turning things around.

So it is after a lifetime of the pastoral over the dogmatic and the resultant proliferation of errors that some have come to the reluctant conclusion that unless the Church emphasizes the whole truth with equal vigor, that nothing will change. They have come to believe that unless the Church purges that error from the Church, that souls will continue to be lost. That can sometimes make us seem unrelentingly critical. But if you believe that souls will continue to perish because the Church accommodates and even encourages error, you feel compelled to speak to it.

Even uberCatholicIntellect Michael Novak has chimed in:

“Is he Aware of the Damage He Causes?” -- Michael Novak and the Interview of Pope Francis

(Washington / Rome) The American Catholic philosopher Michael Novak commented on the Civiltà-Cattolica interview with Pope Francis': "A friend asked me if the Pope is aware of the damage, which he causes with these comments. The word obsession [Ossessione] applied to those working for the defense of life, especially for the unborn child, is something that hurt."

"In the more than 20 years, we have known him, it's never happened before that Michael Novak, perhaps the most famous Catholic philosopher in the U.S., who was closely connected to John Paul II and Benedict XVI., has uttered critical words about a Pope," said Vatican insider, which published the following interview with Michael Novak.

What do you think about the interview, which Pope Francis granted to Civiltà Cattolica granted?

I have seen two types of reactions: those of my friend, which I have described, and those of George Weigel, according to which we must get used to the behavior of an evangelical pope, who turns to us not as an academic, but as a preacher. Weigel is right, but to use words like "obsession" injured believers who have even risked their own lives to protect life."

One commenter to that thread went further:

He calls the poor suffering Catholics hanging on by sheer will through 50 years of apostacy "unstable extremists"? That is all I need to know about this jackass.