Admittedly, that choice has gotten slightly easier since Pope Francis' election in 2013. The same was true for other Catholics; many found Pope Francis' humility and his rejection of luxury refreshing, and countless others were moved by Francis' now famous words regarding sexual orientation, "Who am I to judge?" It was hard not to be inspired by the seeming contrast this pope offered to his predecessor. Catholics and non-Catholics cheered the Pope this summer after the release of his encyclical letter "Laudato Si'," in which he expressed concern for climate change and free-market capitalism.
It was not surprising, then, that there was an overwhelming sense of excitement and hope in the days leading up to the Pope's visit to the U.S. Of course, not everything about it would be cause for celebration, such as the imminent canonization of Junipero Serra. But the Pope was also scheduled to make key addresses, during which he was bound to speak against inequality and urge us to act on human-caused environmental deterioration. Expectations were high!
Sure enough, Pope Francis did speak to the UN about care for the environment and against consumerist culture that has devastated the Earth and excluded the disadvantaged. He called for the abolition of the death penalty and evoked the Golden Rule, Dorothy Day, and her passion for justice for the oppressed in his address to Congress. He skipped lunch with prominent U.S. politicians to break bread with the homeless, and he visited inmates in a correctional facility in Philadelphia.
And yet, the Pope seemed to suggest that the family was being threatened by same-sex marriage. He met with the Little Sisters of the Poor as a gesture of support in their battle to deny contraception coverage to their employees, but failed to meet with any members of the LGBT community. During the in-flight press conference on his return trip, Pope Francis disappointed many by reaffirming the exclusion of women from the priesthood. And as we learned on Wednesday, he met secretly with Kim Davis in Washington D.C., though the exact purpose and content of their conversation remains unclear.
Unsurprisingly, many are upset. I am upset. And I admit, the Kim Davis detail has especially disappointed me. What particularly bothers me is not that the Pope met with the Kentucky clerk, but that he validated her refusal to issue marriage licenses as a government official, claiming that it is the "right" of people like Davis to not perform her job duties as a "conscientious objector." Even so, I remain hopeful (even if that hope is not as enthusiastic as it was a week ago) that the Catholic Church under the leadership of Pope Francis and others to follow will continue to head in the right direction.
I will remain hopeful that the Church will adapt to address the cultural changes of the contextual setting in which it exists. After all, the Catholic Church has survived for 2,000 years only because it has been willing to change and adapt - beginning with the abolition of the requirement of early Christian men to be circumcised, and ranging from the adoption of pagan symbols and customs into Catholic traditions, to the use of vernacular languages in Mass instead of Latin as established in the Second Vatican Council.
I believe that for the Catholic Church to adapt and change, progressive Catholics will need to keep making these critical analyses and remain steadfast in their support for a truly inclusive Church. It would be very easy for me, personally, to leave the Church and simply not worry about this anymore. (I also acknowledge and respect that the choice to stay in the Church is not so easy or possible for other individuals.) But I would rather be my own form of a "conscientious objector." We don't enact positive change by simply discarding one policy and replacing it with another. We enact positive change by the changing the culture from within. Changes in doctrine will come down the line.
Hopeful in Christ,
Paulina Piña Garcia
PCU Administrator