In defence of Pope Francis: a powerful voice speaking up against populism

The most important voice among world leaders challenging the rise of populism and right wing extremism is the Pope. This surprising situation is partly because political parties of the moderate centre, in order to keep their voters, feel obliged to tack into the wind of xenophobia, and other populist recruiting themes such as hatred of Muslims. And anyway, none of them have 1.3 billion followers.

Pope Francis has a powerful voice, but its power is not easily carried through into effective political action. Angela Merkel’s compassionate response to asylum seekers and migrants entering Germany was undoubtedly influenced by her Christian, Lutheran, family background, but she paid a heavy political price. Christian ethics are not easily incorporated into the manifestos of political parties. They are too threatening to the status quo.

For the many who seek an antidote to the rise of populism, with its orchestration and amplification of hatred, suspicion and fear, the Pope’s is a voice which speaks from and to the heart, reaching beyond the arcane language of Catholic theology and ethics into “the joys and hopes, the griefs and anxieties” of the current age ( words from Gaudium et Spes, a document from the Second Vatican Council). But the scandal of sexual abuse, the denial, the “protection of the Church”, the failure to have concern for justice and the victims, has undermined the moral authority of Catholic leaders. It is a situation Pope Francis inherited, but his reaction to the fall-out from the scandal – he initially seemed unable to believe that some of his fellow cardinals and bishops were capable of such wicked behaviour – meant much of the secular world, and some of the Catholic, shut out his voice when it needed to be heard.

But actions, particularly the actions of a Pope, speak louder than words. Visits to the migrants and refugees on the Italian island of Lampedusa, his hospitality towards the homeless invited into the Vatican, his own decamping from the grand Pontifical apartments to the modest Santa Marta guesthouse, his washing and kissing the feet of prisoners in the Catholic liturgy of Maundy Thursday, his choice of countries to visit, and an indefatigable and personal welcome to pilgrims to Rome, have struck a chord. Pope Francis may not have got the Church’s central government reformed yet – a friend described the first five years as “riding someone else’s bicycle” – but he has attracted attention and admiration beyond the religious Press. The previous owner of that bicycle is the former Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI who was a theologian and a former top Curial official. It cannot be easy for Francis to have a former Pope Emeritus living in his back garden, inevitably a focus – not of Benedict’s choosing – of opposition to Francis’ style of leadership and his priorities.

The Pope’s recent choice of new cardinals also sends a powerful message and will have a lasting impact. Through his appointments he intends to nurture respectful relationships between the major faiths. Among the new cardinals is Lancashire-born Archbishop Michael Fitzgerald, fluent Arabic speaker and former President of the Pontifical Council for Inter-religious Dialogue (PCID) now working in St. Vincent de Paul, a poor parish in Liverpool. Fitzgerald had been removed from the PCID and sent to Cairo as Apostolic Delegate by Pope Benedict. Then there was the respected Spanish historian of Islam, Bishop Miguel Ayuso, currently President of the PCID, joined by Archbishop Cristobal Lopez of Rabat, where Catholics make up only 0.1% of the country’s predominantly Muslim population. The Pope’s commitment to peace, to eliminating the prejudice and bigotry which endanger peace, are clearly indicated in these new additions to the body of cardinals.

Francis is not stepping outside Catholic tradition. Jesus’ saying, “I was a stranger and you welcomed me”, explains why the Pope advocates and enacts compassion for migrants and asylum seekers. Like workers’ rights, it has long been a consistent theme of Catholic Social teaching which balances compassionate welcome with any State’s right to control its borders. In this sense, the Pope cannot be accused of being naively idealistic. His wider approach may have been reinforced by his experience in the slums of Buenos Aires and of the theology of popular piety and respect for human dignity that came out of them in Argentina.

Pope Francis certainly does have his own tiny touch of populism in his approach to governance of the Church. He spent much of his priesthood under Peronism, the populist ideology of Argentina’s President Juan Peron and the Partido Justicialista (the so-called Social Justice Party). One of its key tenets is: “Peronism is essentially of the common people. Any political elite is anti-people, and thus, not Peronist.” Pope Francis was no Peronist; he had a fractious relationship with successive Argentinian governments, both military dictatorship and subsequent democratic leaders. But, Francis’ instincts are essentially that Catholicism is “essentially of the common people” and their faith. He has a way of castigating the Curia and chiding elitist ways of clergy, which reaches out over their heads to the Catholic faithful. A touch of Peronismo but rooted in Gospel values and Christian discipleship.

But can a single religious leader, however big their following, have a significant political impact? I would say that Pope Francis’ encyclical Laudato Si, on protection of the planet, put the weight of the Catholic Church behind the scientific evidence for climate change, and it has made a difference. It has galvanised many Catholics into action and to make changes to their lives. When an 82-year-old Italian-Argentinian Pope is saying much the same thing, in his own way, as a 16-year-old Swedish girl, its heads-up even for a secular and cynical press. Things begin to happen. Let’s hope it is not too late.