Pope Francis: Who Am I to Judge?

 
The death of Pope Francis on Easter Monday was a hopeful sign for this sometimes scrutinized Pontiff.  Most uplifting was that, true to his evangelizing spirit, he was not content to rest silently in a secluded room to merely “add days to his life.”  (Reference:  Matthew 6:27)

 
Still, I am not going to lie.  Besides, it is a sin.  At times Pope Francis absolutely baffled me, like the blurring of genuine ecumenism.  His pronouncements and actions against “conservative” clergy and liturgy occasionally irritated me.  His silence on some critical issues and persons (laity and clergy) seemed to border on compromise, at best, and complicity, at worst,  with evil.   

 
But who was I to judge?  

 
When I first heard of Jorge Mario Bergoglio, I recall exploring background footage on the first Latin and Jesuit Pope when he was  Archbishop of Argentina.   His talks impressed me, and I was confident that this folksy but knowledgeable Pontiff would bring to Rome the best of both worlds, catechetically and pastorally.   And what a breath of fresh air that, like St. Pope John Paul II, a pope was from a different origin than Italian.   Love the Italians, but still…

 
Many years have lapsed, and I admit to the end some persistent confusion, tinged by disappointment.   Regardless, I always attested to the fact that Pope Francis was the Pope, elevated by God, and strived to respect him shoving aside emotionalism and acknowledging the possibility of personal ignorance.   Foremost, the mainstream media definitely “canned” him for questionable purposes, and there was likely a language barrier.  Moreover, I would offer the following considerations when addressing his influence:  Pope Francis, the man; we, the faithful, and; the world, at large.  All underscore the supernatural theological virtues of Faith, Hope and Charity.

 
Pope Francis was a man, a human person, body and soul, like any of us.  Read any reasonable response to the death of Pope Francis, and laudable commenting will be tempered by several, “however’s.”  He was a man for all people but most for those least recognized or even scorned…however.  He was a peacemaker and loathed war…however.  He had great zeal and compassion for the poor immigrant and marginalized…however.  He was exceptionally religiously inclusive…however.  Some are more blunt than others, but the undercurrent exists.  In the secular realm, depending on the source, the outspoken lean either heavily and blindly towards Pope Francis as a saint or towards him as an agent of evil.  The middle responses are rare.  It no longer matters.

 
At about 7:35  AM, Rome time, April 21st, 2025, he encountered Jesus Christ, authentic Truth and Perfect Love.   As we should all hope, for each of us, he experienced justice but, foremost, Divine Mercy.   I actually experienced relief that he now knows all, and, trusting in God, that he may even be a most powerful intercessor for those mired in deceit, especially by self delusion.  No longer encumbered by personal shading, perhaps borne of childhood memories; ill judgment of some of the wealthy and powerful, perhaps propagandized by the malcontented; or misconceptions about  the orthodox faithful, perhaps fueled by manipulators, Pope Francis now sees quite clearly.  Standing by  his name sake, St. Francis of Assisi, his real work may be just beginning. 

 
We the faithful should be most cautious, as there is no sin Pope Francis committed that we have not as well, and perhaps we have been worse.  Now, some may argue, “But we do no hold positions of high power that can either uplift or deceive millions of people.  Fair enough.  Yet, while we may not be capable of  initiating a religious tsunami, there is always the ripple factor—some might call it the butterfly effect.  Such malaise or evil doing may take longer to deliver lethal effects, but we see it around us and in places Pope Francis never even knew.  Secondly, I would contend that having Francis be a challenger to those more frequently in the pew, was a blessing though we may have resented what we perceived to be rebukes.  God’s Divine Will, but also his permissive will always produce good in the end, on the plus side.  Like the Prodigal’s Sons brother, we should be grateful for the Father who would welcome the errant son because how much more will we be esteemed?   

 
Also, I cannot speak for others, but one fact we should concede is that when we have leaders—secular or spiritual—to whom we gravitate, we tend to become complacent.   We not only trust these relatively few persons to “hold down the fort,” we head for the comfortable bunkers for a long nap.  On a personal note, Pope Francis challenged me to increase and intensify my study of the Church and its foundation and history.  Laborious as some research of the media became, I understood the importance of “fair and balanced” reporting.  Afterwards, I may still have questioned, but I was the richer for the deep dives.

 
I pray more frequently than I did under Pope John Paul II, and, particularly,  I lean into the Divine Mercy Chaplet.  Pope Francis was not the reason evil mushroomed in our culture; he was the one who attempted to navigate the ship through treacherous waters.  Some of us were drenched, but, then, maybe he rationalized we could survive better than weaker souls.  Furthermore, in the absence of that charismatic Pope (a Christian George Patton?)  so many faithful Catholics seek, other force emerged to fill in the gaps.  Look around at the plethora of genuinely Catholic sites, publications, organizations and associations, both corporeal and spiritual that might not have been seeded lacking the equivocal positions Pope Francis’s Papacy seemed to present.  He said to “make a mess.”  Many Catholics and others took him literally, and today, we are witnessing a cleaning up.  Conversion has become the visible sign of that,  but we cannot now stop no matter who is next Pope.   All of us, and until we take our last breath, had better be found working the vineyard.  

 
Finally, thanks to Pope Francis, I was compelled to recognize and respect the individual person with greater integrity and insight.  We did not have an orthodox galvanizing head in Rome, but those there most certainly stressed those outside the Church, and, quizzically, those who would only enter on their terms, not by the rules of the traditional Vatican.   We frequently saw their faces, heard their complaints, noticed their isolation, and withered from their presence even as we disputed their accusations, even rage.   To be the Church more fully evangelical and apostolic, reflecting what we know to be true, it is necessary to look beyond the demographically segregated subpopulations in front of us.  We tend to see groups, and often, separate them in our minds like goats from the sheep.   Until we know their personal stories, though, we an never understand or truly reach them.

 
Perhaps some day, maybe sooner than later, we will learn more about the person of Pope Francis.  We may relate to him better, as well.  History has a way of exposing falsehoods and, dare I say, misjudgments.

 
In the meantime, I will be praying to Pope Francis, trusting he is in the loving and guiding hands of Our Lord though his precise state of being remains unknown.   He is now truly the Pope I would have wholly embraced regardless.  If any criticism was just, he will rectify that and woe to those who misled him.  For any subpopulation of Catholics who remain condemning, I would warn them that they had better hope Pope Francis is with Our Lord for all our sakes.  I could also now confidently declare:  

 
Who am I to judge?  Who is anyone now to  judge?