For the past several decades, U.S. Catholic bishops have signaled the top priority they place on opposition to abortion and related matters by having their Committee on Pro-Life Activities chaired by a cardinal, the highest rank in the church short of the pope.
But they broke precedent Tuesday in a way that, depending on who you ask, could reflect a symbolic pushback to Pope Francis and his agenda. Or it could show a preference for a narrowly focused anti-abortion agenda versus a broader vision of what pro-life could mean.
The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, on the second day of its fall assembly in Baltimore, gave 54 percent of their 178 votes to Kansas City Archbishop Joseph Naumann to be chairman. The veteran culture warrior will head a committee that mobilizes opposition to abortion, euthanasia, artificial contraception and other items under the heading of respecting “all human life from conception to natural death.”
Forty-six percent of votes went to Cardinal Blaise Cupich, who was named by Pope Francis to head the Archdiocese of Chicago in 2014 and later to an influential committee recommending new bishop appointments.
He has been the foremost American paladin of the pope’s agenda. That has included Francis’ call for priests to accompany people in their struggles rather than preach black-and-white doctrines at them.
Both clerics are, like their colleagues, opposed to abortion.
But Archbishop Naumann would be more closely associated with the “culture of life” ethos of the pope that initially appointed him — the late St. John Paul II — with its focused opposition to abortion and assisted suicide.
Cardinal Cupich is more in the tradition of the “consistent ethic of life,” which incorporates opposition to such things as capital punishment, unjust war and environmental degradation.
Archbishop Naumann has gained headlines in recent months for ending the practice of hosting Girl Scout troops in his archdiocese’s Catholic parishes, saying they embody “an increasingly hostile secular culture.” He also raised concerns about yoga classes at a Catholic college in his archdiocese due to its Hindu roots; the school no longer uses the term.
If Tuesday’s vote did send a message to Pope Francis, it came just a day after the bishops effectively sent one to President Donald Trump and his administration.
The bishops called for affordable healthcare, for gun control, for a path to legal status for immigrants who lack it and for an unreserved condemnation of the kind of racism at play in the white supremacist rally in Charlottesville, Va., this summer, which ended in lethal violence.
Pittsburgh Bishop David Zubik declined to say which way he voted for the chairmanship but cautioned against reading too much into the results.
“They’re both very dedicated men,” he said of Archbishop Naumann and Cardinal Cupich. “I wouldn’t want to interpret it as somehow the conference of bishops trying to have have a political voice.”
Instead, he said the bishops’ stances are drawn from their experiences in connecting the gospel to the experiences of Catholics and others they encounter.
“We as bishops seek to be the best pastors we can be,” he said. “So many of our people are living (with the effects of) racism or the shootings that are taking place or what might be happening relative to immigration.”
In recent months, a small but vocal group of clerics has criticized Pope Francis, particularly over his 2016 document, Amoris Laetitia. Critics say Francis, in his pastoral emphasis, failed clearly to restate a ban on communion for those divorced and remarried without a church annulment.
Earlier this month, the Rev. Tom Weinandy left his position as a consultant to the bishops after he publicized a letter to Pope Francis criticizing his choice of bishops and saying his pontificate is marked by “chronic confusion.”
But defenders of the pope, including Cardinal Cupich, Francis is in fact widely admired for his pastoral approach.
“I don’t think that people are scandalized by the pope,” Cardinal Cupich said in a recent public forum. “I think they are being told to be scandalized. I think there is a difference.”
The Rev. Thomas Reese, a senior analyst at Religion News Service and a longtime chronicler of the church hierarchy, said that while it’s debatable how much the vote was a referendum on Pope Francis, it did reflect a desire for the pro-life committee to focus on abortion rather than cast a broad pro-life banner over other social concerns.
The two days of public discussion reinforce the fact that bishops don’t fit political categories of liberal and conservative.
“The best possible interprtation is they want the pro-life committee to go full-speed ahead on abortion but they also wanted their immigration committee to go full-speed ahead in defending immigrants and migrants and refugees,” said Father Reese, a Jesuit priest.
Peter Smith: petersmith@post-gazette.com or 412-263-1416; Twitter @PG_PeterSmith.
First Published: November 14, 2017, 4:34 p.m.
Updated: November 14, 2017, 11:21 p.m.
