The Church and the Culture Warrior

As I mentioned in my last column, I was trying out monastic life – and loving it – when Pope Francis’ widely-discussed La Civiltà Cattolica interview was published in September. I read the interview itself, but thankfully missed most of the resulting uproar.

I find most of the commentary on Pope Francis to be unenlightening, or just unnecessary. With all due reverence and filial obedience to the Successor of St. Peter, I would say that the Pope – any Pope – is not central to my daily practice of the faith. Christ, not Peter, is the center of our religion and our lives.

However, one piece of pontifical commentary did catch my eye. Pat Buchanan – the conservative author, pundit, and former political candidate – used one of his weekly columns to imply that Pope Francis was moving the Church toward “neutrality in the Culture War.”

Buchanan, a staunch Catholic, drew on some of Francis’ remarks – along with words dubiously attributed to him, and comments by others. He presented all of this as evidence that the Pope “seeks to move the Catholic Church to a stance of non-belligerence” in the “war for the soul of the West.”

In Buchanan’s view, the Pope’s emphasis on mercy, and care for the poor, is misplaced. The focus should be elsewhere: “In America, the family has disintegrated … Our civilization is being de-Christianized. Popular culture is a running sewer … In Europe, the churches empty out as the mosques fill up.”

I disagree with Buchanan’s presentation of Pope Francis’ views. But I see where the columnist is coming from – as I think the Pope would. Secularization and cultural decline are serious problems.

Buchanan seems to want a Pope who will hurl anathemas at cultural radicalism. Instead, he hears: “We cannot insist only on issues related to abortion, gay marriage and the use of contraceptive methods.” The Pope affirms the Church’s “clear” teaching, but does not want “to talk about these issues all the time.”

If this were Pope Francis’ entire message, I might be concerned too. Taken out of context, isolated from the Pope’s broader purpose and line of thinking, such remarks could be twisted to support a false agenda.

But Pope Francis does not want the Church to surrender. Quite the opposite, actually. As between the two men, Pat Buchanan and Pope Francis, I would say that the Pope is the more authentic warrior for Christ.

Both of them see that the modern world is in crisis. Placed side by side, however, they represent very different – if not necessarily conflicting – visions of how the Church should respond.

I have sympathized with Buchanan’s vision in the past. However, I now believe the more important “culture war” is on a different front.

The most important struggle is the struggle to evangelize: to proclaim the Gospel and make disciples. Everything else is secondary.


Pat Buchanan, understandably, seems to want the Church to focus on defending the remnants of Christian culture and traditional Western civilization. This is mainly a defensive war, against the Church’s overt enemies. It is a noble struggle, dear to my own heart, and I do not disparage those called to it.

But Pope Francis is more ambitious. He wants the Church to rediscover the zeal of Jesus’ first disciples. Their struggle – which continues today – was not a defensive war, but a permanent evangelistic “offensive” for the Kingdom of God: “Go, therefore, and make disciples of all nations” (Matthew 28:19).

These two struggles – the defense of Western civilization, and Christ’s Great Commission – are not mutually exclusive. They can be complementary.

However, if there is any question about priorities, we should know which of the two struggles is more important.

Pope Paul VI made it clear, in Evangelii Nuntiandi: evangelization is the Church’s “deepest identity. She exists in order to evangelize, that is to say, in order to preach and teach, to be the channel of the gift of grace, to reconcile sinners with God, and to perpetuate Christ’s sacrifice in the Mass.”

Pope Francis is driven by Christ’s Great Commission – as we all should be. In his apostolic exhortation Evangelii Gaudium, the Pope calls on all Catholics to be “missionary disciples,” offering “an explicit witness to the saving love of the Lord.”

This is nothing new. In 2007, the future Pope was instrumental in preparing the Conference of Latin American Bishops’ “Aparecida Document.” The charter encouraged all Catholics to recover the evangelistic fervor of the early Church. Its aim was to put the Church “permanently in a state of mission.”

“Everyone in the Church is called to be disciples and missionaries,” these bishops stated. “With the fire of the Spirit we will inflame our continent with love … Let us recover apostolic courage and boldness.”

Pope Francis brings this spirit with him to the Papacy. The result is hardly the cultural “neutrality” Pat Buchanan fears – unless you think the Apostles pursued a policy of “neutrality” by placing more emphasis on Jesus Christ than on the moral vices of the first-century Roman Empire.

Of course, the Apostles did speak out against those vices. Likewise, Pope Francis has reaffirmed the Church’s unchanging moral principles. It is a question of priorities.

There is no inherent conflict between the evangelistic vision of Aparecida, and the defense of traditional Western culture. They may come into conflict, however, if proponents of the “defensive war” treat their struggle for cultural morality as something more important than the foundational preaching of the Gospel.

This question of priorities, rather than any real disagreement on morality or faith, is what distinguishes Pope Francis from the likes of Pat Buchanan.


For Pope Francis, the Gospel – God’s offer of mercy and salvation in Jesus Christ – comes first. We should understand what God has done for us, then understand what He asks of us. We are called to the heights of virtue – but we are called by the Father of Mercies, who runs to meet us in our sinfulness.

This was a key point from Pope Francis’ interview in September. He was urging us to present moral norms as consequences of the Gospel, so that God’s offer of grace may appear clearly as the primary fact:

“The proposal of the Gospel must be more simple, profound, radiant. It is from this proposition that the moral consequences then flow. … The proclamation of the saving love of God comes before moral and religious imperatives.”

While the Gospel has serious moral consequences, it must not be presented as though it were primarily a moral code. We run that risk, when we speak and act as though the Church existed mainly to prevent vice and promote virtue.

The moral requirements of discipleship must be preached – but they are not the primary reality of Christian life, nor are they the Church’s main message to the world.

Pope Francis makes this clear. Pat Buchanan could take a lesson from him.

In light of Buchanan’s criticisms, it is ironic to recall comments he made in a 2012 interview with The American Conservative magazine. In that piece, the columnist and commentator essentially admitted that the culture needs apostles and evangelists, more than it needs people like him:

“How do you bring us together culturally?,” (Buchanan) asks, then answers himself, “You don’t need Pat Buchanan, you need St. Paul.” It is a self-awareness rare in men who have run for president three times: “Look, I’m a right-wing troublemaker from Northwest that likes poetry.”

Indeed. Pat Buchanan fights well with words, sometimes for a good cause. I wish his followers well, in their efforts to defend the remnants of Christian culture. But polemics against decline can only do so much.

When we reach that limit, there are two possibilities. One of them is despair – the heroic-doom of Wagner’s Ring Cycle and Spengler’s Decline of the West.

The other possibility is Christian Hope – the word that God speaks to us in His Mercy.

This is Pope Francis’ message. He is no naïve optimist, but a proponent of this transcendent Hope – which, he reminds us, “is a theological virtue and … cannot be reduced to optimism, which is only human.”

This kind of hope lets us see, in a sense, through God’s eyes. We can look at the wreckage of modern Western culture, and still see a mission field – ripe for evangelization.

On this point, Pat Buchanan is right: only a “St. Paul,” preaching the Gospel with power, can bring us together now. I don’t know if Pope Francis is that man; but we should give him the chance.

That means taking care to understand him correctly – as our first Pope told us to do, with St. Paul himself:

“Our beloved brother Paul wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, speaking of this as he does in all his letters. There are some things in them hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction … beware lest you be carried away with the error of lawless men and lose your own stability.”(2 Pet. 3:16-17, RSV-CE)

image: Statue of St. Paul in the front of the Basilica of St. Paul Outside the Walls/Wikimedia Commons

Benjamin Mann


Benjamin Mann is a Byzantine Catholic, former atheist, and incurable philosopher, with experience in journalism, speechwriting, and monasticism. He published a short autobiographical book, “Shouting Through the Water,” in 2014 (available as a free download at, and is preparing a sequel reflecting on his post-monastic life. His current interests center on the integration of psychology and meditation within a traditional Christian framework

Subscribe to CE
(It's free)

Go to Catholic Exchange homepage

  • windjammer

    After 10 months of ambiguity and confusion from Pope Francis and the Chair of St Peter, It is becoming evident that it is a deliberate device for communicating. Humility this is not, modernism it is. Everyone made a big deal about PF ditching the “Red Shoes”. It was a big deal alright but for the wrong reason. The Red Shoes represent the “Blood of the Martyrs” since the time of Christ and respect for same. To deliberately ditch them speaks volumes to those who were paying attention. Like removing the Brown Scapular because it is tooo Catholic? Pray for the Pope and the Church.

  • BillinJax

    Benjamin, Of all I have read in the past few months as this struggle to understand exactly who and what it is which God has given us in Pope Francis this article of yours does more to help Catholics and any open-hearted believer see through the clouds of confusion that the media pundits are trying to spin for us. Here is my short perspective in this regard.
    The Church of Jesus Christ is the living dynamic expression of God’s
    mercy and love for humanity. It is not buildings or books or bank accounts.
    These are all helpful aids to the growth and maturity of families but all that
    is really necessary for God’s people, the Church¸ to survive and serve its
    mission is to cling fast to the Truth of Jesus Christ and his message. We have
    his promise and our trust in the Holy Spirit he has sent to us to forever abide
    as the blessed children of God regardless of who is seated on the Chair of St.
    Peter. No single manner of man and his idea of what is right or wrong has the
    power to destroy or corrupt what God has set apart for himself. But when we see
    a Pope who openly shows great respect and honor to our Blessed Mother and has dedicated his mission to her that is all I need to know our ship and journey of faith is in good hands.

  • D.Anderson

    Best analysis of Pope Francis that I’ve read so far. Catholics should definitely keep doing all the things that PF said we are “obsessed” with because those issues are part of proclaiming the truth. However, those “obsessions” have not done much, nor can they do much, to convert modern man. For that, Catholics need to act in a way that will touch the hearts of nonbelievers, just as the Romans were converted by the actions (concern for the poor; love for one another) of the first Christians.

  • rakeys

    Why do we have to emphasize either morality or mercy. Jesus message was both! In fact the first thing Jesus did after his temptation in the desert, in the beginning of His ministry,is found in Mt 4:17 “From that time on, Jesus began to preach and say,
    “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.” of course He followed
    that up by healing the sick.

    But Jesus first message was REPENT! He came to die for our sins, and teach us how to live. This message of repentance was followed by the sermon on the mount. The beatitudes start out very very humble and meek , but then goes on to the
    blessedness of the clean of heart, and blessed are those who are persecuted for
    the sake of righteousness., Jesus then talks about the law and says
    “whoever breaks one of the least of the commandments and teaches others to
    do so will be called the least in the kingdom of heaven” MT 5:19.
    Jesus quickly goes on to His teaching about anger and being liable to judgment, and His teaching about adultery, that even looking at a woman with lust was gravely sinful, Jesus even called us to tear out our eye, and cut off our hand if
    it causes us to sin. Pretty powerful stuff.

    Pope Francis emphasizes god’s mercy, and calling us to be disciples and to spread
    the gospels, but is misleading about Jesus judgment and His call to follow
    the law. Implying that as pope he would not judge homosexual behavior may
    lead some homosexuals to begin to perform homosexual acts, which is gravely
    sinful.. Implying that we should not talk about abortion, contraception and gay
    marriage allow the proponents of these to feel justified in their behavior.

    I do believe that we must increase our emphasis on mercy and forgiveness, But Remember the prodigal father did not go seek out his prodigal son, but when he returned and asked for forgiveness he readily forgave him and rejoiced that his son had returned. The father did not imply that his son had been living a good
    life free of judgment.

    Yes, we need to be very forgiving of our brethren who repent, especially since Jesus said in Lk 17:3-4 “If your brother sins, rebuke him, and if he repents, forgive
    him, And if he wrongs you seven times in one day and returns to you seven times
    saying ‘I am SORRY’, you should forgive him.” I am sorry…Wow

    . Remember Jesus was not killed because He just preached love and forgiveness. He also preached repentance. In fact Jesus said he did not come to bring peace but division Lk 12;51 Preaching love brings peace, but preaching repentance does bring division.

    Why can’t we teach as Jesus did.? morality and
    forgiveness, and a call to pick up our cross and follow HIm. The truth will set us free.

  • I’m with HIM

    Just my opinion — I’m thinking our Pope feels uncomfortable wearing what i personally see as flashy red shoes that although intended to remind us of the Blood of the Martyrs, are a temporary passing object which I am thinking will not be going anywhere when our King returns.

    Re-presenation is at and on the Altar. – Peace

  • pnyikos

    The link “words dubiously attributed to him” about the Pope’s interviewer, Scalfari, was a real eye-opener, but Mann should also have investigated the message with which Buchanan opened his column:

    “Pope Francis doesn’t want cultural warriors; he doesn’t want ideologues,” said Bishop Blase Cupich of Spokane, Wash.:

    “The nuncio said the Holy Father wants bishops with pastoral sensitivity, shepherds who know the smell of the sheep.”

    Bishop Cupich was conveying instructions the papal nuncio had
    delivered from Rome to guide U.S. bishops in choosing a new leader.


    Perhaps Bishop Cupich was even more free with the words of the papal nuncio than Scalfari was with the Pope’s words. The bottom line, though, is that Buchanan took them at face value, and that accounts for much of what Buchanan wrote.

    Since Mann’s article takes none of this into account, it too needs to be read with a big grain of salt where Buchanan’s views are concerned.

  • Paul Korb

    Below is PJB’s eulogy of JP2. What will make Francis great?

    “What set John Paul II apart from the other leaders of his time
    was his goodness, his holiness, his sanctity, his moral courage in
    defending the truths of the church and his uncompromising refusal to
    alter moral truth to accommodate the spirit of an immoral age. His
    charisma, like that of Mother Teresa, came of the fact that he was a Man
    of God, not a man of this world. He became popular by testifying to the
    unpopular truths of Jesus Christ.

    What those most disappointed with John Paul’s failure to conform church teaching to trendy views on contraception, abortion, stem cell research and homosexuality fail to
    understand is that it was because the pope defied the spirit of the age that he was great. He believed in moral absolutes in a world of moral relativism. He was a beacon of light in a darkening age, a beacon of truth in a moral wilderness.”