Pope Francis completes 3 years of his papacy this March 13. He is the darling of most Catholics (at least those who read)! And quite popular with the western media; though he does not seem to evoke the same level of interest in the mainstream Indian media.

Cardinal Karol Wojtla of Poland, when he was elected Pope John Paul II, was seen as breaking the Italian stranglehold over the papacy. As a sportsman, actor and poet he too was the darling of the media. Unfortunately, over a period of time, he became increasingly conservative, and clung to office despite his frailty. It was pathetic to see him mumbling and fumbling at the beatification of Mother Teresa. Does a similar fate await Pope Francis?

It is common knowledge that the “Establishment” is powerful everywhere – be it the political class, media, mafia, army, business cartels or the Vatican Curia. By nature the Establishment is status quoist. It detests change, but does not resist it. It simply appropriates the agents of change. Therein lies the danger.

How does the Establishment appropriate change; either by pedestalisation or assimilation. Assimilation is what Adi Shankarcharya did to Buddhism. He simply stated that Buddha was an Incarnation of a Hindu deity, and thereby nearly obliterated Buddhism from the land of its birth. In like manner present day Hindutvawadis are desperate to affix the “Made In India” tag on Jesus. Let us not be fooled by this clever ploy.

Christianity down the ages, with its “Holier than thou” attitude, has preferred the path of pedestalisation to assimilation. Emperor Constantine in the fourth century is the classic example; when he converted Christianity (a persecuted kingdom people) into Christendom (a kingly establishment).

Most of us have conveniently pedestalised both Jesus and Christianity.I understood this phenomenon from the book “The Conspiracy of God “by Jesuit Father John Haughey, with its preface by the late charismatic Cardinal Leon Suenens of Belgium.

Pedestalization is what we do to a statue or idol. We first fashion it ourselves, place it on a pedestal, and then adulate or venerate it. The object of our adulation is “up there” and we devotees are “down here,” and ne’er the twain shall meet! This is what we have done to Christ the King, the Son of God. He is up there, beyond our reach. But Haughey’s book taught me that Jesus of Nazareth is down here. In the New Testament he referred to himself 82 times as the Son of Man, Bar-e-nasa in his native Aramaic. It may be loosely translated as aam aadmi.

The “Conspiracy of the Establishment” is to encourage adulation of the one up there, rather than emulation of the one down here. This malicious conspiracy enslaves us as breast-beating sinners or zealous Alleluia singers. We go to church, recite prayers, attend novenas, go for pilgrimages, donate to the church funds and organize grand feasts (lots of flowers and food); but we don’t emulate Jesus – follow in his footsteps. Unfortunately, church history is replete with instances of how Saints and Ideals have been converted into idols. The Establishment always strikes back, and with a vengeance.

Does Pope Francis await a similar fate? Is the Establishment biding its time, waiting for him to falter or alter course, and then sacrifice him on the altar of “I told you so“? During the last two papal elections I openly petitioned the cardinal electors from India, expressing my hope for a third world pope. I was deeply disappointed at the election of Pope Benedict XVI, also known as the Panzer Cardinal. But I was overjoyed when Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio of Argentina was elected and took the name Francis, after Francis of Assisi.

Though a layman I have been largely influenced by the Franciscan lifestyle of simplicity and humility on the one hand; and Ignatian spirituality, discernment and intellectual prowess on the other. So when a Jesuit chose to be called Francis on his election as Pope, it was music to my ears. I rejoiced that the “Conspiracy of God” had triumphed over the “Conspiracy of the Establishment.”

Three years down the line I have a creeping fear that the Establishment is surely, but steadily, reasserting its vice like grip over the Church. Would that my apprehensions are unfounded, but the indications are to the contrary.

In his recent book, “Glimpses into the Uniqueness of Recent Popes” Redemptorist Father Desmond D’Souza raises a pertinent point – is Pope Francis a man of style or substance? I personally believe that Pope Francis is sincere in his desire for change. He is a man of substance. But the Establishment would love to position him as a man of Style only.

He lives in a two-room apartment, not the Vatican Palace. He uses a small car, and washes the feet of women and drug addicts. He says, “Who am I to judge“ when it comes to a person’s sexual orientation. He is deeply concerned about divorced and remarried Catholics. He wants a church of the poor, for the poor. He is against all forms of ostentatious living. He says he is pained to see priests and nuns using the latest models of cars, and advocates cycling. He expressed his priorities by organizing two synods on the family. What has been the impact of these path-breaking initiatives on the Universal or Indian Church? The answer is in the wind. Here is the report card.

A German bishop was forced to resign for spending US$43 million on renovation of his residence. Rev D’Souza records that Cardinal Sean O’Malley of Boston and Archbishop Charles Kaput of Philadelphia sold their mansions, and Bishop David Zubik of Pittsburgh put up his mansion for sale within two weeks of his appointment. Other than voluntary renunciation, the laity of Newark, Camden and Charleston dioceses, all in America, objected to their bishops’ lavish spending on themselves.

Chhotebhai

What about the remaining bishops across the world? A score of 3/3000 is pathetic! In Eddapally, Kochi, the new St George’s Church costed 500 million rupees. The cardinal inaugurated it on his birthday. He should have showed more spunk like our President Pranab Mukherjee, giving the thumbs down to Sri Sri Ravi Shankar’s Jamuna Jamboree. How many bishops, priests and nuns have taken to cycling, or at least smaller cars?

Incidentally I followed Pope Francis’ exhortation and took to cycling three years ago! What was the Indian Church’s response to the Family Synod? Pathetic. How many bishops took an active interest in it? For the Years of Religious and Mercy we have special prayer cards in all churches. No such thing was done for the Family. The laity doesn’t count in the pecking order of the Establishment.

Have we become more compassionate and merciful and less judgmental? Are we more accommodating or at least concerned about the divorced and remarried? Unfortunately the answer to all these questions is a resounding “NO.” Yet the Establishment is smiling like the cat that has drunk the milk. It is all praise and adulation for poor Pope Francis whom it has pedestallized “up there.”

Frankly, I am not interested in any more encyclicals or synods. We have had enough of pious exhortations. As a layman I simply ask for the implementation of the ecclesiology of Vatican II and the provisions of Canon Law. Only then would I be able to say if Pope Francis is a man of Style or Substance. Till then I reserve my judgment.

(The writer is a former National President of the All India Catholic Union.)