The National Catholic Review

Washington does not quite know what to make of Pope Francis. Some ecclesial and political spinners are trying to fit him into their own agendas and biases. Before the conclave we heard contradictory hopes for a new pope: culture warrior or less focused on sexual matters, manager or evangelizer, enforcer or communicator. Instead we have a humble, hopeful and holy pastor. Like his namesake, Pope Francis is likely to make the powerful uneasy. As he declared: “Francis of Assisi—for me, he is the man of poverty, the man of peace, the man who loves and protects creation.... How I would like a church which is poor and for the poor!”

It would be hard to identify three priorities that draw less attention in Washington than poverty, peace and protecting creation. Official Washington is about helping the “middle class,” confronting global enemies and economic growth, not lifting up the poor, seeking peace or caring for the earth. On parts of the left, secular deities are sexual freedom and unrestrained choice. On the right, many worship at the altar of unlimited economic freedom and the unfettered market. Both ideological orthodoxies reflect overwhelming individualism and neither focuses on the common good or protecting the weak.

Pope Francis challenges the economic status quo because he believes it leaves too many behind; this inequality is a “social sin that cries out to heaven.” He will also discomfit elites who are comfortable with a million abortions a year or who insist that resisting the march to same-sex marriage is bigotry. Ecclesial chaplains to ideological factions find Francis threatening because of the consistency he demonstrates in protecting the weak from secularism and materialism, from unrestrained markets and unlimited government. Pope Francis is insistent on the church’s distinctive religious witness: “We can build many things, but if we do not confess Jesus Christ, things go wrong. We may become a charitable N.G.O., but not the church.”

Neither President Obama nor Speaker Boehner traveled to Rome. In fact, Pope Francis asked his friends to stay home and spend the resources on the poor. In that spirit, Washington should honor this new pope by focusing on the neglected national scandal of pervasive poverty. Sadly, lifting up the poor had no meaningful place in last fall’s election. The Romney campaign cited rising poverty in its indictment of the president’s policies, but cynically dismissed the poor behind closed doors (the “47 percent”). More clearly, the G.O.P. budget protects tax cuts for the affluent while cutting help for the hungry, homeless and jobless. The Obama campaign decided that abortion, Planned Parenthood and gay marriage were winning issues, but overcoming poverty was not. In fairness, the administration has worked well with religious leaders in a “Circle of Protection” to protect essential lifelines for poor families and poor nations. However, the Obama bully pulpit has been silent on poverty. Thankfully, President Obama may have found his voice in his inaugural address: “We must be a source of hope to the poor, the sick, the marginalized, the victims of prejudice. Not out of mere charity, but because peace in our time requires the constant advance…tolerance and opportunity, human dignity and justice.”

In facing this moral imperative, the nation must move beyond false choices where progressives focus primarily on better economic policies and conservatives mostly on stronger families. Poor children are helped or hurt by choices of parents and policies of government. Overcoming poverty requires greater personal and public responsibility, both subsidiarity and solidarity, the power of family and community and recognition of the responsibilities and limitations of market and government.

The Catholic community should help end this stalemate. We teach the values of work, family and education. A “church for the poor” serves and defends those left behind by a broken economy and failing public policies. At his inaugural Mass, Pope Francis made his priorities clear, calling us to be “protectors” of “the poorest, the weakest, the least important.” These may not be the priorities of Washington, but they are the moral test of our nation.

John Carr, Washington correspondent for America, has served as director of justice, peace and human development for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops and as a residential fellow at the Harvard Institute of Politics.

Comments

Janice Rose | 7/15/2013 - 1:53pm

J Cosgrove,
How could anyone think that there is not rampant poverty in America when 16.7 million children living in 'food insecure' households in the U.S? If you do not know the poverty in this country, you are living in a glass house in affluent-land. Open your eyes and see the world as it truly is: the wealthy, on the whole, are concerned with more wealth not with helping those with less.

J Cosgrove | 4/14/2013 - 3:54pm

There are so many things wrong with this article. Because it focuses on the false stereotypes in our conventional wisdom, essays like this will never lead to any true understanding or constructive solution to the real problems of the day. Inequality is a bogus concept as each year it becomes less and less throughout the world. Tell me a time when there was less inequality than today. The answer is there never was one unless Mr. Carr wants to go back to when humans were hunter/gatherers on the African savannas and even then we do not know the structure of the social network that prevailed.

The problem today is not material poverty but a cultural, moral and spiritual poverty. Certainly there are large pockets of poor in the world but they are decreasing each year and are less than at any time in history. One might ask why poverty is declining but the answer is something that many do not want to admit is working to help cure ills that cause hardships in so many places. So I suggest that Mr. Carr look into what is really happening in the world and particularly the United States. A lot of it is not pretty but it is not material poverty that is the major issue. It may be that some of the problems are due to past and present policies that are supported by many of the authors and commenters on this site.

He did get one thing right, namely:

"We can build many things, but if we do not confess Jesus Christ, things go wrong. We may become a charitable N.G.O., but not the church."

Too many of the authors here at America only view the Church as a social institution for their personal political agenda and forget that Christ came to save souls.

Larry DiPaul | 4/13/2013 - 1:56pm

A pope of the poor. Why is that not redundant? The Vicar of Christ should live Matthew 25, yes? Pope Francis, unfortunately, is refreshing by contrast. Once more the Gospels indict the Church. Good article, John, with discussable and debatable points. Maybe Washington will wake up when our pulpits wake up.

Annette McDermott | 4/12/2013 - 5:20pm

John, I have always loved your precision regarding the Church's teaching. Miss those days of the Social Ministry conference when you would give us your analysis of the federal policy and the Washington scene. You have not lost your touch!

Recently by John Carr

Staying Consistent (June 29, 2016)
The Other Campaigns (May 3, 2016)
Our Political Mandate (April 14, 2016)
Our Political Mandate (April 6, 2016)
The Voters’ Revolt (March 9, 2016)

Recently in Washington Front