The second anniversary of Pope Francis' election last Friday prompted a number of pundits to analyze what he's done and what's he's doing and what he might do -- perhaps the best "hot take" the interview given by @pontifex himself.
At Religion News Service, I made a couple of efforts myself, based on reporting in Rome last month.
This first one looks at how the reform of the Roman Curia is going, and tries to focus on the tectonic shift that goes deeper and is far more important than the smaller and perhaps overhyped complaints by curial officials losing their parking privileges:
The real reform, however, and the key to success, is in instituting an entirely new form of governance for the Holy See, a “system of checks and balances” in Vatican operations, as a senior Vatican official put it, that reflects the highest international standards for transparency and accountability.
It is a fundamental shift for a city-state that has functioned largely like the world’s longest-running divine-right monarchy. The goal is a more rational and a fairer system of operating based on best practices and precedents, rather than on abstract principles or ancient privileges.
“What we are seeing now is the struggle to enact that vision,” said another churchman close to Francis. “People tend to see the power plays, but it’s an intellectual and philosophical debate, and some theology.”
What's interesting is that financial reform -- which has broader backing, in part because it's a no-brainer and easier to do -- is not the only template; efforts to respond to the sex abuse crisis may be the better gauge.
My second story, "Pope Francis has history, but not time, on his side in reform push," looks at the wider "reform," or reorientation, of Catholicism under Francis.
At heart it's really about whether the course Francis has set can continue after he leaves the scene, which he keeps saying will be sooner rather than later. I set out four factors (conveniently, four "C's") that may be key the the survival of the Francis legacy (such as appointing those who share his vision, changing structures, creating expectations). But the big one, as the Rev. Antonio Spadaro of Civilta Cattolica told me, is the relationship between the Church and History:
“If history is the enemy of the church and the enemy of God, then we have to be very careful,” he continued. “Does history coincide with worldliness? Or, on the other hand, is history the place where God is incarnated, where God is present, where the church and every Christian must try to discern the presence of the Lord?
“Theologically,” he said, “this is about the Incarnation” — the belief that God became man in the person of Jesus of Nazareth. “If one takes seriously the Incarnation — that is, that God made himself part of history — it’s impossible to think of doctrine as fixed code that came down from heaven.”
Sparado and Cardinal Kasper and others said many other interesting things that I'll try to write up eventually. But the other big idea is that contrary to the imaginings of Francis' foes, he doesn't seem to have a platform and agenda he wants to pass -- it's more about opening the church to the Spirit, to get closer to Jesus and the Gospels. It's not making an idol of the Second Vatican Council or going "back" to anything, but moving ahead, always, as the Council envisioned. That's an agenda in itself, of course.
Where that will lead, or if such a vision can have a structure to ensure its propagation, or whether it will always need leaders like Francis to push it, is an open question.
In American politics we often lament the focus on process over policy. In the Vatican under Francis, that’s a virtue. Policies are not the goal. How you get there is as important as where you wind up.
