Jurasz: Franciszek was a pope of a moderate center. Summary of the pontificate
In the previous text published shortly after the appearance of information about the death of the head of the Catholic Church I wrote about how much Franciszek's foreign policy was similar to foreign policy conducted during the pontificate of John Paul IIwhich – as also mentioned in the text – continued, and not, as often claims in Poland, broke up with a line of his predecessors, in particular Paul VI. In the text, I argued that this element of continuation, which is a focus on ensuring religious freedom, also characterized the diplomacy of the Holy See in recent years.
Such a priority setting in conjunction with the proper Holy See of caution resulted in a frequent misunderstanding of Vatican diplomacy in Poland. At the same time, however, it is impossible not to record a few at least unfortunate statements of the Pope, who, referring to the war in Ukraine, objectively too often raised.
Autocephaly, as a challenge for the Catholic Church
Pope Francis' eastern policy, however, cannot be reduced only to the issue of war in Ukraine. Before it broke out in 2022, the Pope had to face Ukraine, although not directly regarding the Catholic Church, the challenge of the autocephaly of Ukrainian Orthodox.
This autocefalia, meaning the breaking of the Ukrainian church with the Russian Orthodox Church, She was one of the most important successes of Ukrainian diplomacy. And also Undoubtedly, the great merit of President Petro Poroshenko, who managed to convince the patriarch of Constantinople Bartłomiej and that he would publish the so -called Tomos (otherwise edict), meaning the breaking of Ukrainian Orthodox with the Russian church, which – let us add – was, and, as everything indicates it, will also remain in the future in the future tool of Russian neoimperiam. Russian Orthodoxy takes part in a peculiar secular reconquista post -Soviet space and Thus, from the beginning it was an enemy of independent Ukraine.
The funeral of Pope Francis gathered thousands of faithful
The epic associated with autocephaly and the establishment of the United Church (Church) of Orthodox Ukraine seemingly only did not apply to the Catholic Church. Immediately after the autocephaly announced the offensive, the Ukrainian Greek Catholic hierarchy, headed by the Archbishop of Swiatosław Szewczuk, who in a few subsequent lists, statements and statements suggested the possibility not only of ecumenical dialogue between Greek Catholics (i.e. Catholics of the Eastern Byzantine rite) and Orthodox, but he even seemed call for unity and create one Kiev patriarchywhich would be recognized as both by Rome and Constantinople.
The Holy See was cut off from Szewczuk's words very clearly. The above is both in Ukraine and sometimes, surprisingly, also in Poland interpreted as a papacy on the side of Moscow. In fact, it was nothing like that. To understand this, you should consider what would entail the support of the vision of Archbishop Szewczuk by Pope Francis. It would mean no longer a dispute, but an open confrontation. Most likely not only with Russian Orthodoxy. Even even the fact that the above extremely adversely influenced the situation of Catholics in Russia, but also abroad, it is a critic that the head of the church with nearly 1.5 billion faithful did not allow his policy to be determined by the head of the church with about 4 million faithful, is in itself bizarre.
Dialogue with Judaism
Dialogue with other confessions of Pope Francis was not limited to Christian denominations. In the dialogue with Judaism, the Pope skillfully combined, even after Hamas's attack on Israelrecognition of the law of the Jewish state to defense and condemnation of anti -Semitism with simultaneous criticism of the activities of the Israeli army, when this – in response to the attack of Hamas – ceased, unfortunately, it seems to take into account civil victims on the Palestinian side.
Dialogue with Islam
Francis was particularly active in the dialogue with Islam, which during his pontificate passed through Paroxicism, which was the creation of the Islamic State. The Pope visited many Muslim countries, including Jordan, Palestine, Turkey, Albania, Azerbaijan, Bangladesh, Morocco, Kazakhstan and Indonesia.
The crowning of-the dialogue with Islam, which started during his predecessors-was visiting Egypt, where the Pope met with the great imam of the Mosque and University of Al-Azhar in Cairo Ahmed El-Tayeb and the United Arab Emirates, where His meeting took place with virtually the entire elite of Sunni Islam. The breakthrough, however, was burdened, otherwise a considerable risk of a visit to Iraq, where the Pope met with the great Ajatollah alim al-Sistani, who is an authority in the world for a change of Shiite Islam.
Francis 'policy in relation to Islam is on the one hand the awareness that military dictatorships have been optimal for years from the point of view of Christians' laws, but at the same time understanding that their time is not eternal. As a result We were dealing with realism combined with diplomatic prudence With simultaneously, the church's mission was increasingly active in its religious and moral, but not necessarily political dimension. However, it was the most political attempt to balance the dialogue with Sunniths, a simultaneous dialogue with Shiites.
Theology of liberation
Speaking of the policy of Pope Francis, it is difficult to ignore the thread of a fundamental change that took place in relation to the Church towards the so -called theology of liberation, i.e. particularly widespread in Latin America electricity in a church that connected Christianity with a leftist agenda. In this dimension, which concerned the issue of social justice. Theology of liberation during the pontificate of John Paul II was clearly fought by the Holy Seewhich, of course, was associated with the appearance of the Marxist element in this current of thinking, but which was also a function of the era when communism was a threat to faith. The change in the approach to theology of liberation is, given the fact that a contemporary challenge is turbocapitalism rather than communism, is natural.
Evidence of the far -reaching modification of the Church's approach to the theology of liberation was cooperation, the result of which was the joint book of one of its creators Father Gustavo Gutiérrez with Cardinal Gerhard Müller. Müller at the moment when he met with Gutiérrez was – let's add – the prefect of the Congregation for the Science of Faith, i.e. the former Holy Inquisition. It is obvious that he acted with at least the blessing of the Pope. This is also evidenced by the fact that Francis took part in the funeral of Gutiérrez through the video.
The beatification and then canonization of the Salvador Archbishop Oscar Romero was also a very important event.which extreme -right militants murdered during the mass. Romero relationships, who was received by the left as a conservative, with theology of liberation were and remain the subject of debates. This does not change the fact that he appeared in defense of the poor and against the then ruling Salvador juntcie, and in his sermons the thread of social justice often appeared.
Correction of attitude towards theology of liberation is important because the crisis of Western democracy is significant, if the effect of phenomena that the theology of liberation in its time, even if sometimes provided missed prescriptions, has accurately read.
Encyclicals
When trying to describe the legacy of Pope Francis, the encyclicals “Laudato SI”, “Fratelli Tutti” and “Dilexit Nose” are of key importance. In “Laudato Si” the Pope expressed concern for ecology, but understood not only as a concern for the climate, but also for the impact of climate change on man. The Pope very clearly talked against environmental exploitation and introduced the concept of intergenerational justice, whose essence is the need to self -limit the currently living for the good of subsequent generations.
In “Fratelli Tutti”, in turn, Francis focused on economic problems, opposing the neoliberal dogma that the free market is able to solve all the problems of the present day. The narrative that the wealth somewhat naturally flows onto the poorer layers, and in other words with his experience of Latin America, he described as a theory that is not supported by facts. The Pope also clearly opposed the egoism of the free market and called for creation, not to eliminate jobs.
In the encyclical “dilexit nose”, Franciszek, in turn, warned against technicalization of life, And especially against excessive trust in the artificial intelligence, which, as he noted, even if he gained self -awareness, he will not have tenderness for human harm.
Moderate Center Pope
All of the above -mentioned encyclicals are not innovative, but the publicists associated with the extreme right, “leftist” say. For what is the most important in Franciszek's pontificate and what probably indicates his size, is the fact that at the time of his death He failed both extreme conservatives, who – also in Poland – accuse him of moving away from doctrine and leftists, who believe that he did not go as far in the changes as if he was wished on the left.
The fact that extreme environments are disappointed pope in fact proves the maturity of Franciszek's pontificate. The Catholic Church, whose crisis is talked about at every opportunity, will not come out of it by the path of violent, ill -considered changes, or by returning to the past. Pope Francis, as it seems, understood perfectly.
In the podcast “international report”, which I run together with Zbigniew Parafianowicz, my co -host said that Francis was not a revolutionary. This is of course true. The thing is that great breakthroughs usually have their creators, as well as those who are preparing the ground for change. Historically, someone was such, for example, Alexander the Great, and on the other, his father Filip II. The pontificate of Pope Francis, by his caution from one, but also changes on the other, opens the way to great changes in the future.
