August 29, 2025 • 36 mins
What happens when an evangelical leader and a Catholic scholar engage in honest dialogue about the papacy? In this illuminating conversation, host Brian Stiller sits down with Dr. Michael Higgins, author of "The Jesuit Disruptor," to explore Pope Francis's revolutionary impact on Catholic-Evangelical relations.
Dr. Higgins reveals how Francis fundamentally transformed the papacy through his emphasis on humility, dialogue, and authentic Christian witness. Rather than approaching evangelicals as theological opponents, Francis saw them as "companions along the way" who could teach Catholics about being "alive with the Spirit." This wasn't strategic positioning but emerged from Francis's conviction that Christians share common ground in Jesus and serving the marginalized.
The conversation takes a personal turn when Stiller shares an encounter with Pope Francis. During a private lunch, Francis told the evangelical leader: "I'm not trying to evangelize an evangelical," acknowledging the legitimacy of evangelical faith outside Catholic sacramental traditions. This profound theological recognition demonstrates Francis's commitment to authentic ecumenism that respects different Christian expressions.
Higgins unpacks Francis' preference for the title "Servant of the Servants of God" over more hierarchical papal designations, reflecting his determination to invert traditional power structures within the church. This servant-leadership approach characterized Francis's "penitential pilgrimage" to Canada, where he primarily listened to Indigenous communities harmed by residential schools rather than delivering prepared speeches.
Looking toward the future under Pope Leo XIV, Higgins analyzes early signs of continued bridge-building while acknowledging the tensions within Catholicism regarding women's roles, Vatican diplomacy, and approaches to global conflicts. Throughout, he frames Francis' legacy not merely as institutional reform but as a rediscovery of Christian leadership rooted in encounter, humility, and recognition of Christ's presence across denominational boundaries.
Whether you're curious about Catholic-Evangelical relations, intrigued by Francis's unique papacy, or seeking models of Christian leadership that transcend division, this conversation offers rich insights that challenge conventional boundaries.
You can learn more from Dr. Michael Higgins through his scholarship and publications.
And you can share this episode using hashtag #Evangelical360 and join the conversation online!
____________________
▶ Watch Interviews on YouTube
▶ Sign Up for FREE Dispatches From the Global Village
▶ Free Downloadable eBook "Here's Hope"
▶ More Info: evangelical360.com
#evangelical360
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Brian Stiller (00:10):
Hello and welcome to Evangelical 360.
I'm your host, brian Stiller,and I'm pleased to share with
you another conversation withleaders, changemakers and
influencers impacting Christianlife around the world.
My guest today is Dr MichaelHiggins, professor Emeritus and
Distinguished Scholar at StMike's University.
(00:31):
His most recent book was titledthe Jesuit Disruptor a personal
portrait of Pope Francis, andhe's written about the future of
the papacy, what he refers toas the emergence of a new Leo
XIV.
This is the second podcast in aseries of two.
Now, an obvious question forevangelicals is this why should
(00:54):
we care about who the Pope is?
What sort of impact does thepapacy have on the Protestant
Church?
Whether you're curious,cautious or simply want to be
informed, michael Higgins ishere to help us understand and
think clearly about one of themost visible roles of the
Christian faith.
So listen in and join theconversation on YouTube in the
(01:15):
comments below, and be sure tosubscribe and, when you do,
share this episode, always usinghashtag Evangelical360.
Michael Higgins, you've writtenthis very interesting book, the
Jesuit Disruptor.
If you have any interest inunderstanding the background to
(01:36):
Pope Francis, who has crossedthe Jordan, you'll want to read
this book.
Michael is very engaging.
You'll want to read this book,michael, is very engaging, very
descriptive.
Some wonderful, wonderful quotes.
This one quote Francis Lambay'sClericalism, which you have
(01:57):
talked about.
He said "clericalism is a whip,it's a scourge, it's a form of
worldliness that defiles anddamages the face of the Lord's
bride.
It enslaves God's holy andfaithful people.
And God's people, god's holy,faithful people, go forward with
patience and humility, enduringthe scorn, mistreatment and
marginalization ofinstitutionalized clericalism.
(02:18):
And how naturally we speak ofthe princes of the church or of
Episcopal appointments as careeradvancements.
It's enough to go into theecclesiastical tailor shops in
Rome to see the scandal of youngpriests trying on cassock and
hats or albs and laced coveredrobes.
" the disruptor.
This has been an interestingconversation that we've had up
(02:40):
to now, but I wonder well, manyof my friends are going to be
asking Stiller, why are youinterested in knowing about Rome
?
And I guess the question is,given that evangelicals think of
the Roman Catholic Church as aheresy, as I'm sure the Roman
Catholic Church thinksProtestantism, and evangelicals
are heretics.
(03:00):
We see the gospel differently.
We do different interpretationsof the biblical text.
You add the history of yourtheology of Rome into it.
We try to stay with just thebiblical text.
We somehow think we're purists,as you know.
But the question is, thequestion is Michael, why should
(03:25):
I, as an evangelical, have aninterest or a concern about the
Pope, about Rome and about the2.7 billion Christians in the
world half of it are RomanCatholics why should I be
concerned?
Michael Higgins (03:42):
I think you know, brian, because we have a
lot in common.
Number one and that was one ofthe things that Francis wanted
to underscore Not the thingsthat divide us, but the things
that unite us.
What's the principal thing thatunites us?
Jesus.
Where do we discover Jesus?
We discover Jesus in the poor,in the broken, in the sick, in
(04:03):
the dying.
So these are areas in which,irrespective of biblical
hermeneutics, irrespective ofsystematic and historical
theology and the differentspiritual traditions that define
us, we have this commonrootedness in the salvific
message of Jesus of Nazareth.
(04:25):
And so, for Francis particularly, evangelicals were appealing.
They weren't a body that hefelt were either hostile or
uncomprehending.
He saw them as fellowChristians.
And he did so because, in somevery fundamental way, bergoglio
(04:48):
or Pope Francis's's wholeapproach was affective and
evangelical.
He felt very comfortableexpressing himself with the
freedom of the spirit, withworking without the constraints
of office.
I remember one occasion I'vebeen to Rome in several years I
didn't begin to list them andwatching him preside at liturgy,
and how unhappy he appeared.
(05:10):
You know, his face would lightup.
He would look at the people inthe great Roman Duomo, the great
cathedral, the Basilica of Rome, and he would just be full of
(05:35):
an evangelist's energy andconviction, and I think he saw
in the evangelicals that he metin Brazil and most especially in
Argentina.
He saw people alive to theSpirit and alive with the Spirit
, and although he was notanti-intellectual he was, after
all, a Jesuit he was a sharplyintelligent man.
(05:57):
He didn't see himself in termsof a traditional scholar, in
that he always and he makes thisclear in his writings that
reality takes precedence overideas, doesn't denigrate ideas,
doesn't denigrate those who workwith new ideas, but what he
says, it's the person in frontof you, it's encounter that
(06:21):
matters.
The evangelicals they seem to dothat.
We need to learn from them.
So he never saw them as a forceto contend with.
He saw them as companions alongthe way, and evangelicals
picked that up.
They picked up the fact thatthis wasn't a political move on
his part.
Well, we better bring theevangelicals in, because we need
(06:41):
to make common ground as westruggle in certain areas.
No, no, it wasn't strategic.
It was deeply pastoral.
We should befriend them becausethey can teach us.
This is one of the things thatwas characteristic of his papacy
humility, humility.
He goes on and on about theimportance of humility with
(07:03):
priests and bishops.
We learn from others.
Brian Stiller (07:07):
Some time ago when I was invited as a guest
there.
We spent a few of us.
We spent an hour before lunchjust getting to know each other
and I asked him why he had goneto a Pentecostal church about
three weeks earlier halfway downItaly on a Sunday morning and
he apologized to the church forthe way the Catholic church had
(07:30):
treated the Pentecostals.
And I said why did you do that?
And he thought about it for amoment.
He said the pastor was myfriend and we were wrong.
And sometimes in my role,you've got to show humility.
(07:52):
I think, so then we went forlunch and we talked for a two
hour lunch and how many wouldhave been there?
Oh, there may have been six ofus.
Yeah, isn't that wonderful.
And he, he, he told the waiters, I'll look after them.
Yeah, and it was six of us.
Yeah, isn't that wonderful.
And he, he told the waiters,I'll look after them.
Yeah, and and it was aninteresting time someone got a
picture.
He was sitting just about thisdistance, maybe even closer,
(08:14):
yeah, and I saw he was going todo something.
I thought, wow, this is amazing.
He had told the waiters toleave and he saw my glass was
almost empty with water.
So he was, he was filling myglass, he was looking after us.
But in that conversation we weretalking about evangelism in a
secular Europe and he said,brian, I want you to know that
(08:34):
I'm not trying to evangelize anevangelical.
And he laughed and he said Iknow some of my senior people
will be very unhappy, but Irealized it was a theological
statement he had made.
It was soteriological.
He was talking about sin andsalvation.
He was talking about God'sgrace in the midst of failure
and he was saying, brian, yourunderstanding as a recipient of
(08:58):
the grace of God and theforgiveness of your sins.
By the way you confess Christis is legitimate.
You don't need the CatholicEucharistic meal as a way of
receiving grace.
Now, I've never heard anybodysay that elsewhere and I've
never publicly talked about this, but to me it was a remarkable
(09:21):
moment when the Pope of Romelooks at this Pentecostal boy
from Saskatchewan and says Iunderstand that your coming to
Christ is legitimate andGod-honoring and biblical, and
go for it.
That's beautiful.
Michael Higgins (09:39):
I did not know this and I think that it's a
wonderful.
What do you make of that?
I make a lot of it because it'sa wonderful encapsulation of
the fundamental pastoral,theological approach he takes to
everything, which isinclusivity.
It doesn't mean everythingmatters at the same level, but
it does matter.
It is respect.
He's saying.
Look, your tradition matters,it matters greatly.
(10:03):
You come to God, you experienceGod's grace, you experience the
power of God's love.
It's outside our ritual andcertain aspects of our creed,
but it's no less legitimate.
It's been your mode ofexperiencing God's presence in
your life.
Now, what he's doing here istaking to the next level what
(10:25):
already appeared in the SecondVatican Council's document on
ecumenism, in which the Churchmakes clear that there are ways
to holiness and salvation thatare outside of the Catholic
communion.
There are ways in which peoplecan be holy that are not
prescribed or prescribed by ourreality.
(10:45):
But it's one thing to have thatas a conciliar document or that
statement.
You can find holding this inother traditions, other
Christian denominations, butalso outside of Christ, of the
Christian tradition.
It's another thing to actuallybegin to implement it in serious
ways, including as the Bishopof Rome.
So when he says and he did thiswhen he went to meet
Waldensians, the old Protestantsof Italy, when he went to other
(11:09):
groups his special relationshipwith the Archbishop of
Canterbury, his love of workingwith other clergy in Protestant
traditions when they were tryingto make political headway in
Sudan and South Sudan and Sudanduring that horrible war that
continues to plague thecontinent.
(11:31):
Again and again, francis saw hisecumenical partners as
companions with him on the wayto Christ, that their traditions
are not insufficient, they'renot weak, they're not diminished
, they're not poor versions ofCatholicism.
They are legitimate ecclesialways of coming to God.
And that kind of ecumenism canbe very discomforting for
(11:56):
traditional prelates and otherswho operate and this would be
true of evangelicals as it wouldbe true of Lutherans and
Anglicans and Catholics that wehold the truth and that
therefore, any kind of dialoguein a sense is merely ritualistic
, it's superficial, becausewe're not going to change our
position.
Francis would say no, no, thereis truth Now.
(12:19):
There are traditions which wemust respect and indeed
reverence.
Brian Stiller (12:25):
Where is Rome going here?
We live in a world of drivingsecularity in some parts of the
world and in the global South,in Africa, in Latin America, in
Asia, you have a church that isjust booming.
It's growing.
Churches are being planted,people are coming to faith in
(12:46):
Christ, people are experiencinghealing and the filling of the
spirit.
It's like we've never known inthe world's history.
And yet we have wars, we haveecological challenges in that
and multi-religious activity.
So you have Islam on the risein some places.
(13:08):
So here you have the RomanCatholic Church.
You have Christianity two and ahalf to a set point, seven
billion, with the church, theRoman Catholic Church, being
half of that.
And the power and influencewhere is?
Is Rome leading the larger oris she a player?
Michael Higgins (13:32):
I had a friend of mine who worked with me.
You might have known him.
He was an Anglican priest,taught at Simon Fraser, was
pastor of a parish in Vancouver.
His name was Donald Graystonand he ran an institute called
the Shalom Institute.
He was very much involved inpeace issues and very much
involved in ecumenical issues.
And one day he said to me justa few years before he died he
(13:56):
died probably in his mid to late70s conclusion that all the
churches in Christianity mustfind a place for papal
leadership because he's our oneglobal leader.
He said you know, I'm anAnglican priest and Canterbury
(14:17):
matters, but Canterbury doesn'tmatter like Rome, nor Moscow,
nor Constantinople.
None of them have that globaloutreach.
And he said we just got to finda way for the Pope to exercise
his ministry that's moreinclusive.
And this was a big dream forhim.
And I thought often about his,because the Popes themselves
(14:40):
have taken initiatives to try tobring Christians who have been
separated from Rome back into atleast a working partnership
with Rome, if not actuallyinclusion in the Roman body.
And Leo XIV recently said at hisinaugural mass the same thing
(15:01):
that Francis has said thatreligion is not about propaganda
, it's not about imposingreligion on others.
It's respecting the faith ofothers.
That's how we witness this is ahuge departure from Catholic
teaching in Rome in the 19thcentury, when the standard norm
was error has no rights.
(15:23):
One of the reasons why youcould use temporal authority to
suppress or minimize otherreligions was precisely because
they were in error and error hasno rights.
Churches long since rejectedthat.
But to reject itinstitutionally and to reject it
individually and as part ofyour cultural inheritance.
(15:44):
Sometimes they're differentthings.
Francis, again and again,asserts the commonality, just
like Leda will see about theenvironment.
It's our common home AmongChristians.
This is our common faith, oneof the things that unite us and
the Pope.
The Pope is supposed to be aprinciple of unity and harmony.
That's one of the things thatPope Leo said at the beginning
(16:07):
of his pontificate.
I'm here as a symbol of love,of Christ's love.
I should be involved as achurch in expanding God's love
over the universe.
Do we do it?
Very often, no, butaspirationally.
This is what we're called to doand this is what the primacy of
(16:28):
Peter is called to do.
It's a primacy of unity and aprimacy of love.
So my job to witness that.
Brian Stiller (16:34):
So why should evangelicals care about the Pope
?
Michael Higgins (16:37):
Because I think they can look at the Pope not
as the whore of Babylon or thescarlet woman or whatever other
fancy titles given the Pope overthe centuries.
Brian Stiller (16:47):
We thought that Revelation was pretty well,
pretty descriptive.
Michael Higgins (16:50):
Really, yeah, they really revealed it right
out of the closet there.
But because, as the successorof Peter, his job is to ensure
unity, harmony and love amongChristians.
I think the big problem iswe've tended to emphasize the
wrong titles of the Pope.
For instance, what is the Pope?
(17:13):
Well, he's the Patriarch of theWest, although Benedict XVI got
rid of that because the Easternpatriarchs found it offensive.
So, but he's Bishop of Rome.
He's the successor of Peter.
He's the vicar of our LordJesus Christ.
He's the primate of Italy.
He's the head of the VaticanCity State.
These are all his titles, butsome of those we don't agree
(17:34):
with.
No, but here's one you will, andthe one he took as the most
important the service of theservants of God.
That's the title that most hewanted to communicate.
My job is to serve, not todominate, not to control, but to
(17:54):
serve, because some of theother tenors and tenors of power
head of the Vatican city stateit's power, right, temporal
power, not just spiritual power.
Temporal power but here he'ssaying I am the servant of the
servants of God indicates thatyou're at the bottom.
You're like Jesus.
Washing the feet of theservants of God indicates that
you're at the bottom.
You're like Jesus washing thefeet of the disciples.
(18:15):
You're not standing over them.
It takes a lot to be able toshift that mentality.
It's like the inverted pyramid.
It takes centuries to put oneimage in mind, to embed it in
how we think.
How do you rip that out ordisrupt it?
Brian Stiller (18:25):
To offset the Petrine claim as a servant is a
big jump, huge jump.
Michael Higgins (18:31):
It's a huge jump and the Petrine claim, of
course, is in Matthew and partin John, but mostly in Matthew,
and there have been greatdebates among biblical scholars
and reformers and evangelicalsand others about how you read
those passages.
Yes, and how do you explain?
How do you see in the Pope ofRome, peter of Galilee, like,
(18:59):
how do we get from a fishermanright, how do we get from a
fisherman to a prince?
Brian Stiller (19:04):
I mean, how is that possible?
And it's something we aren'tgoing to solve here.
But what I'd like?
I want to talk to you about LeoXIV, the new pope.
But before we do, the Jesuitdisruptor.
He came to Canada, he did andhe engaged with the Indigenous
people.
Unwrap that a bit for us.
Michael Higgins (19:27):
Well, he came to Canada at the request of the
Indigenous and he did not defineit as a state visit.
It wasn't actually a statevisit.
It wasn't even a particularlypastoral visit to the Catholics
of Canada.
It wasn't even a particularlypastoral visit to the Catholics
(19:58):
of Canada.
It was a over to Canada and toenflesh it in their land, on
their land, on their sacred land.
One of the things I noticedbecause I've covered papal trips
before, not by mediation, bytelevision, radio and commentary
, rather than by being on aplane with the Pope.
And what I noticed about thisone very quickly, is how Francis
(20:24):
actually spent less timetalking John Paul II.
All he did was talk.
Benedict never seemed terriblycomfortable in the role, but
Francis listened.
He listened most of the time hewas in Canada and the
indigenous leaders loved that.
They loved that about him.
They loved the fact that hereverenced their traditions,
(20:44):
that he listened to them.
He didn't argue with them.
He didn't have a clear programsaying this is what we're going
to do and we will admit so muchof this, but they're not going
that.
No, no, there's nothingpragmatic about it.
It was a pastoral, moralconnection with the people who
had been damaged by variousRoman Catholics who had
(21:04):
attempted to assimilate them,wipe out their religious culture
, create not intentionally, butto create what we now call
intergenerational trauma.
He accepted that.
He didn't argue with it.
He accepted it and the factthat they gave him the headdress
was one of the most movingmoments.
It and the fact that they gavehim the headdress was one of the
most moving moments, right,because you could see that he
(21:29):
brought such a deep affectionfor them.
And I've talked to several ofthe Indigenous leaders who were
with him in Rome and were withhim in Canada and the thing they
remember most is the genuineaffection he had for them and
the sorrow and remorse for theinstitution that had caused the
pain.
They believed him because theybelieved in the integrity of his
witness, and why?
Because what you saw is whatyou get.
(21:50):
That pilgrimage was in manyways magnificent, but it was not
without its difficulties, andsome of the difficulties were
internal ecclesiasticaldifficulties, and some of the
difficulties were internalecclesiastical, political power
things going on amongst someCanadian bishops?
Brian Stiller (22:07):
Francis had, and how did that disable the impact?
Michael Higgins (22:12):
Well, I think there were a couple of cases
where the church that welcomedhim, the Canadian church,
mishandled it significantly.
One was a major liturgy thatwas done in Latin.
This would have been an idealopportunity to have used several
different languages, latin withan indigenous body.
I know People were outreached,including indigenous Catholic
(22:36):
priests.
Why was this happening?
And this would not have beenFrancis, see, when the Pope
comes.
So was there logic to that?
It was just extremely bad tasteand it was a bad judgment call.
Nobody knows.
It was done by some functionaryin the Canadian Conference of
Catholic Bishops, because thePope doesn't set his retinue and
(22:57):
he comes as guests of thecountry, guests of the church in
that country.
So even when he speaks, a gooddeal of what he says has already
been crafted by the bishop.
He has to agree with it.
He won't say anything hedoesn't agree with.
But he doesn't know everyindividual situation in every
country, so he depends a greatpart on their feeding him right.
(23:18):
This is what every politicaland religious figure does, but
he gives it his own tone, hegives it his own careful
signature.
So I think what you found inthat penitential pilgrimage was
a real determination onFrancis's part to make an end,
to bring, to ask for mercy andat the same time, it's only a
(23:41):
beginning.
It's not the end.
Brian Stiller (23:44):
So give me a summation of his papacy.
Michael Higgins (23:47):
Well, I think I mentioned it almost at the very
beginning, brian, he humanizedthe papacy.
He made it less an office ofmonarchy and more the office of
the fisherman.
He went out of his way toembrace people from different
traditions religious traditionsor indeed none in his pursuit of
(24:09):
trying to find the commonground that unites us.
Because he presided over achurch that is riven.
I mean, I have been coveringFrancis, I've written about
Francis in a book and articlesand everything else, and I
realize his flaws as much as Irealize his strengths.
But I also understand what manyevangelicals and others may not
(24:31):
fully appreciate, thatopposition to Francis was mostly
from within the Catholic Church, that if you go outside the
Catholic Church you'll findpeople who don't particularly
even like the Catholic Churchbut they like Francis.
I was at a meeting of a numberof a dinner in honor of the
publication of the book bysenior editors, producers.
(24:52):
You know, in the cognoscenti,the chattering class, they don't
like the Catholic Church.
For some reason they're likemaybe they don't like the
Catholic Church, they love him.
And I said I don't know how Imean.
Well, you do understand he wasthe head of the Catholic Church.
I was kind of.
You know it was kind of a flaw,but the real important thing
(25:12):
was they loved him and I thinkthat that's one of the things
when you say what defines him.
I think what defines him isthat fragile, sometimes
vulnerable, openness and love.
You remember, very early in hispontificate he embraced a man
like Francis of Assisi, embraceda leper, and this man had a
particular disease that sodisfigured his face that he was
(25:37):
repugnant to look at like you,just you're repelled by it.
Francis embraced him, kissedhim, held him.
This wasn't a media moment,this was an expression of his
ministry.
Brian Stiller (25:50):
Thank, you, michael, but you've written
about the new Pope.
I have Leo XIV.
Leo XIV Not a book.
Not a book, not yet.
Michael Higgins (25:59):
A couple of articles.
Brian Stiller (26:01):
So give me your best introduction.
Michael Higgins (26:04):
But I think at this point it's still very early
.
As I said in one of my GlobalMail columns, the proof is in
the paper pudding.
We'll see what happens, whatappointments he makes to the
Curia, who are going to beheading the offices, how he's
going to follow up on synodality, what's up when his first
(26:24):
encyclical comes out.
So I mean, it's still kind of ahoneymoon phase.
But here's something, becauseyou're always looking for signs
and structures.
That's how it works in theRoman world Not necessarily what
you say, but how you say it.
Only what you say, but how yousay it and what symbols you
(26:45):
employ in saying it.
Recently, he approved theappointment of three bishops of
American seas or diocese, all ofthem born immigrants one from
Nicaragua, one from, I believe,ghana and one from Vietnam.
And they were born outside thecountry.
So they're immigrant born.
They're immigrant children whoare now bishops in a very
(27:08):
anti-immigrant country underPresident Trump.
This is a symbol, this is asign of Neil saying to his
fellow Catholic, jd Vance thisis not the way we work.
We don't isolate and we don'tincarcerate immigrants and
strangers.
We welcome them.
(27:29):
And what I'm going to do is I'mgoing to put bishops in major
Cs, or even minor Cs.
I think one of them is SanDiego.
I'm going to put them inpositions as bishops, and they
are themselves Not the sons ofimmigrants, but immigrants
themselves.
That's a pretty powerfulmessage.
Brian Stiller (27:47):
Michael Higgins, author of the Jesuit Disruptor
that's quite a choice of words.
Disruptor it is, as we concludetoday, michael.
Both of us confess our love forChrist, our love for his church
, the bride of Christ, we wantour lives to count for him.
(28:08):
We love the world, as he'scalled us to love the world.
What would you say to myevangelical brothers and sisters
?
Michael Higgins (28:19):
Well, I would say, using Francis's approach in
dialogue, that when we enterseriously in dialogue and
reverence the other as other, wemove to an experience of
encounter, and that experienceof encounter is the discovery of
Christ in the upper.
Brian Stiller (28:38):
On the issue of women women in ministry at
various levels?
Did he disrupt the past of theChurch with respect to women?
Michael Higgins (28:48):
In terms of sacramental ministry?
No.
In terms of governance yes,what he did is he appointed more
women to positions of seniorgovernance and responsibility in
the Catholic Church than hasever been done by any pope
combined.
And so at this moment, rightnow, the head of one of the
dicasteries, that is, thedepartment, is a woman.
(29:09):
In the past, women might besecretary.
A dicastery would be what Adicastery would be like a
ministerial department.
Like a ministerial department,so liturgy, evangelization,
orthodoxy, teaching, so verysenior in an administrative role
, very senior, always held bybishops beforehand.
(29:32):
So there's a woman doing that,there's a woman serving as a
secretary, I think, in the samecongregation or ducastery, and
there's a woman running thegovernorate, which is the body
that has responsibility for theoversight of the entire Vatican
City State.
It's now run by a woman andthere are women in all kinds of
other areas within thegovernance structure, including
(29:54):
his friend Emily Chukuda, who isthe president of the Pontifical
Commission for Latin America,married, woman and children.
And there she is, you know,right there, close to Pope
Francis, and holding a seniorposition that would have not
been held by a woman before.
So in matters of governance,leadership, modeling, witness,
(30:17):
he moved the role of women inthe Catholic Church at an
accelerated rate In terms oforders, sacrament, ministerial
work.
In that regard, no, he did notmove on the ordination of women
to the deacons, to the diaconate, and he was firm that women
would not be ordained to thepriesthood and he was firm that
(30:40):
women would not be ordained tothe priesthood.
Brian Stiller (30:41):
I was in Ukraine when Pope Francis made his
statement about the Russianinvasion of Ukraine and I got to
tell you, michael, there wasdeep disappointment as to the
lackluster approach that he tookto that issue.
There are wars all over theworld, but it seemed at that
(31:02):
point I don't know whether itwas because he was trying to
ameliorate his relationship withthe patriarch of the Russian
Orthodox Church or what, butthere just seemed to be a lack
of strength in making clear whathad happened.
Michael Higgins (31:20):
You know, he's received a fair bit of criticism
for his position on Ukraine,his position on Beijing and his
position with Tel Aviv, gaza andHamas and, without attempting
to in any way justify hispositions on these issues, which
(31:41):
he tried in many ways toachieve some reconciliation, I
want to talk just very brieflyabout the framework of his
political thinking on this.
When you look at some of hiswork Fratelli Tutti, which is
one of his encyclicals and youlook at other things that he has
done, partly again shaped, togo back to an earlier point,
(32:02):
when we're talking about hisexperience in Argentina,
particularly with the generals,with the colonels, the Dirty War
what you discover there is thatFrancis was a profound believer
in dialogue.
He felt, no matter how hostilethe adversary, if you're not at
(32:24):
the table, peace andreconciliation is impossible
because dialogue is theprecondition for encounter.
So, no matter how antipatheticthey may be, you have to be at
the table.
That's one of the reasons whyhe was persistent in relation to
Beijing and Hong Kong, greatlyannoying Lord Patton, who was
(32:45):
the last governor of Hong Kongand a devout Catholic, as well
as Cardinal Zen, the Archbishopof Hong Kong, who had
experienced direct Chinesepersecution, marxist persecution
.
But he said no, no, no, directChinese persecution, marxist
persecution.
But he said no, no, no, we haveto work with the reality on the
ground.
Similarly with Ukraine andRussia.
He didn't believe that therewas more equivalence in this,
(33:09):
but he realized that you can'tcome to a resolution until you
come to the table.
Now there would be many who say,and not unjustifiably.
How can you come to the tablewith Putin when Putin calls the
shots, or Z?
How do you make commerce with Zor work out some kind of
intercourse and negotiation,when he can't trust what he's
(33:29):
doing?
He's trying to sinicizeeverything, including religion.
Francis would say well, wecan't enter it naively.
What we have to do is we haveto chip away.
Enter it naively.
What we have to do is we haveto chip away.
We can't eliminate our presencethere.
This, in part, is thecontinuation of a policy called
(33:49):
Ostpolitik, which was crafted byCardinal Cassaroli, who was
Secretary of State to Pope PaulVI, and he worked on a classic
Vatican diplomacy ofconciliation.
John Paul II changed that.
With John Paul II and hissecretaries of state, they moved
to a more adversarial position.
Communism is the enemy and JohnPaul II was a major figure in
(34:12):
helping to bring down the Sovietempire.
So one operates in a moredirect, confrontational, perhaps
prophetic way, the otheroperates in a diplomatic way.
Let's win them over.
Dialogue, yes, is extremelydifficult.
Nonviolence, yes, isoverwhelmingly difficult.
(34:33):
But we can only move forward asdisciples of Christ if we come
to actually listen to the other.
So the impatience that peoplein Ukraine and elsewhere have
for Francis because he didn'tcome out and condemn
unequivocally one side only, isunderstandable.
But if you put it within theframework, the political,
(34:54):
ecclesial framework that he used, he was incredibly consistent
ecclesial framework that he used.
He was incredibly consistent,
Brian Stiller (35:04):
michael.
Thank you for being a guest onEvangelical 360.
Michael Higgins (35:06):
See you 40 years from now, thank you.
Brian Stiller (35:08):
Thank you, michael, for joining us today on
part two of the two-part seriesin this podcast, and thank you
for helping us grow inunderstanding as we seek to
bridge the chasm between our twosides of the Christian global
witness, and thank you for beinga part of the podcast.
I'd be so grateful if you wouldsubscribe and share this
(35:31):
episode, and remember always usehashtag Evangelical360.
If you'd like to learn moreabout today's guests, be sure to
check the show notes ordescription below, and if you
haven't already received my freee-book and newsletter, just go
to brianstillercom.
So thanks again for joining us,until next time.
(35:55):
Don't miss the next interview.
Be sure to subscribe toEvangelical 360 on YouTube.
Hello and welcome to Evangelical 360.
I'm your host, brian Stiller,and I'm pleased to share with
you another conversation withleaders, changemakers and
influencers impacting Christianlife around the world.
My guest today is Dr MichaelHiggins, professor Emeritus and
Distinguished Scholar at StMike's University.
(00:31):
His most recent book was titledthe Jesuit Disruptor a personal
portrait of Pope Francis, andhe's written about the future of
the papacy, what he refers toas the emergence of a new Leo
XIV.
This is the second podcast in aseries of two.
Now, an obvious question forevangelicals is this why should
(00:54):
we care about who the Pope is?
What sort of impact does thepapacy have on the Protestant
Church?
Whether you're curious,cautious or simply want to be
informed, michael Higgins ishere to help us understand and
think clearly about one of themost visible roles of the
Christian faith.
So listen in and join theconversation on YouTube in the
(01:15):
comments below, and be sure tosubscribe and, when you do,
share this episode, always usinghashtag Evangelical360.
Michael Higgins, you've writtenthis very interesting book, the
Jesuit Disruptor.
If you have any interest inunderstanding the background to
(01:36):
Pope Francis, who has crossedthe Jordan, you'll want to read
this book.
Michael is very engaging.
You'll want to read this book,michael, is very engaging, very
descriptive.
Some wonderful, wonderful quotes.
This one quote Francis Lambay'sClericalism, which you have
(01:57):
talked about.
He said "clericalism is a whip,it's a scourge, it's a form of
worldliness that defiles anddamages the face of the Lord's
bride.
It enslaves God's holy andfaithful people.
And God's people, god's holy,faithful people, go forward with
patience and humility, enduringthe scorn, mistreatment and
marginalization ofinstitutionalized clericalism.
(02:18):
And how naturally we speak ofthe princes of the church or of
Episcopal appointments as careeradvancements.
It's enough to go into theecclesiastical tailor shops in
Rome to see the scandal of youngpriests trying on cassock and
hats or albs and laced coveredrobes.
" the disruptor.
This has been an interestingconversation that we've had up
(02:40):
to now, but I wonder well, manyof my friends are going to be
asking Stiller, why are youinterested in knowing about Rome
?
And I guess the question is,given that evangelicals think of
the Roman Catholic Church as aheresy, as I'm sure the Roman
Catholic Church thinksProtestantism, and evangelicals
are heretics.
(03:00):
We see the gospel differently.
We do different interpretationsof the biblical text.
You add the history of yourtheology of Rome into it.
We try to stay with just thebiblical text.
We somehow think we're purists,as you know.
But the question is, thequestion is Michael, why should
(03:25):
I, as an evangelical, have aninterest or a concern about the
Pope, about Rome and about the2.7 billion Christians in the
world half of it are RomanCatholics why should I be
concerned?
Michael Higgins (03:42):
I think you know, brian, because we have a
lot in common.
Number one and that was one ofthe things that Francis wanted
to underscore Not the thingsthat divide us, but the things
that unite us.
What's the principal thing thatunites us?
Jesus.
Where do we discover Jesus?
We discover Jesus in the poor,in the broken, in the sick, in
(04:03):
the dying.
So these are areas in which,irrespective of biblical
hermeneutics, irrespective ofsystematic and historical
theology and the differentspiritual traditions that define
us, we have this commonrootedness in the salvific
message of Jesus of Nazareth.
(04:25):
And so, for Francis particularly, evangelicals were appealing.
They weren't a body that hefelt were either hostile or
uncomprehending.
He saw them as fellowChristians.
And he did so because, in somevery fundamental way, bergoglio
(04:48):
or Pope Francis's's wholeapproach was affective and
evangelical.
He felt very comfortableexpressing himself with the
freedom of the spirit, withworking without the constraints
of office.
I remember one occasion I'vebeen to Rome in several years I
didn't begin to list them andwatching him preside at liturgy,
and how unhappy he appeared.
(05:10):
You know, his face would lightup.
He would look at the people inthe great Roman Duomo, the great
cathedral, the Basilica of Rome, and he would just be full of
(05:35):
an evangelist's energy andconviction, and I think he saw
in the evangelicals that he metin Brazil and most especially in
Argentina.
He saw people alive to theSpirit and alive with the Spirit
, and although he was notanti-intellectual he was, after
all, a Jesuit he was a sharplyintelligent man.
(05:57):
He didn't see himself in termsof a traditional scholar, in
that he always and he makes thisclear in his writings that
reality takes precedence overideas, doesn't denigrate ideas,
doesn't denigrate those who workwith new ideas, but what he
says, it's the person in frontof you, it's encounter that
(06:21):
matters.
The evangelicals they seem to dothat.
We need to learn from them.
So he never saw them as a forceto contend with.
He saw them as companions alongthe way, and evangelicals
picked that up.
They picked up the fact thatthis wasn't a political move on
his part.
Well, we better bring theevangelicals in, because we need
(06:41):
to make common ground as westruggle in certain areas.
No, no, it wasn't strategic.
It was deeply pastoral.
We should befriend them becausethey can teach us.
This is one of the things thatwas characteristic of his papacy
humility, humility.
He goes on and on about theimportance of humility with
(07:03):
priests and bishops.
We learn from others.
Brian Stiller (07:07):
Some time ago when I was invited as a guest
there.
We spent a few of us.
We spent an hour before lunchjust getting to know each other
and I asked him why he had goneto a Pentecostal church about
three weeks earlier halfway downItaly on a Sunday morning and
he apologized to the church forthe way the Catholic church had
(07:30):
treated the Pentecostals.
And I said why did you do that?
And he thought about it for amoment.
He said the pastor was myfriend and we were wrong.
And sometimes in my role,you've got to show humility.
(07:52):
I think, so then we went forlunch and we talked for a two
hour lunch and how many wouldhave been there?
Oh, there may have been six ofus.
Yeah, isn't that wonderful.
And he, he, he told the waiters, I'll look after them.
Yeah, and it was six of us.
Yeah, isn't that wonderful.
And he, he told the waiters,I'll look after them.
Yeah, and and it was aninteresting time someone got a
picture.
He was sitting just about thisdistance, maybe even closer,
(08:14):
yeah, and I saw he was going todo something.
I thought, wow, this is amazing.
He had told the waiters toleave and he saw my glass was
almost empty with water.
So he was, he was filling myglass, he was looking after us.
But in that conversation we weretalking about evangelism in a
secular Europe and he said,brian, I want you to know that
(08:34):
I'm not trying to evangelize anevangelical.
And he laughed and he said Iknow some of my senior people
will be very unhappy, but Irealized it was a theological
statement he had made.
It was soteriological.
He was talking about sin andsalvation.
He was talking about God'sgrace in the midst of failure
and he was saying, brian, yourunderstanding as a recipient of
(08:58):
the grace of God and theforgiveness of your sins.
By the way you confess Christis is legitimate.
You don't need the CatholicEucharistic meal as a way of
receiving grace.
Now, I've never heard anybodysay that elsewhere and I've
never publicly talked about this, but to me it was a remarkable
(09:21):
moment when the Pope of Romelooks at this Pentecostal boy
from Saskatchewan and says Iunderstand that your coming to
Christ is legitimate andGod-honoring and biblical, and
go for it.
That's beautiful.
Michael Higgins (09:39):
I did not know this and I think that it's a
wonderful.
What do you make of that?
I make a lot of it because it'sa wonderful encapsulation of
the fundamental pastoral,theological approach he takes to
everything, which isinclusivity.
It doesn't mean everythingmatters at the same level, but
it does matter.
It is respect.
He's saying.
Look, your tradition matters,it matters greatly.
(10:03):
You come to God, you experienceGod's grace, you experience the
power of God's love.
It's outside our ritual andcertain aspects of our creed,
but it's no less legitimate.
It's been your mode ofexperiencing God's presence in
your life.
Now, what he's doing here istaking to the next level what
(10:25):
already appeared in the SecondVatican Council's document on
ecumenism, in which the Churchmakes clear that there are ways
to holiness and salvation thatare outside of the Catholic
communion.
There are ways in which peoplecan be holy that are not
prescribed or prescribed by ourreality.
(10:45):
But it's one thing to have thatas a conciliar document or that
statement.
You can find holding this inother traditions, other
Christian denominations, butalso outside of Christ, of the
Christian tradition.
It's another thing to actuallybegin to implement it in serious
ways, including as the Bishopof Rome.
So when he says and he did thiswhen he went to meet
Waldensians, the old Protestantsof Italy, when he went to other
(11:09):
groups his special relationshipwith the Archbishop of
Canterbury, his love of workingwith other clergy in Protestant
traditions when they were tryingto make political headway in
Sudan and South Sudan and Sudanduring that horrible war that
continues to plague thecontinent.
(11:31):
Again and again, francis saw hisecumenical partners as
companions with him on the wayto Christ, that their traditions
are not insufficient, they'renot weak, they're not diminished
, they're not poor versions ofCatholicism.
They are legitimate ecclesialways of coming to God.
And that kind of ecumenism canbe very discomforting for
(11:56):
traditional prelates and otherswho operate and this would be
true of evangelicals as it wouldbe true of Lutherans and
Anglicans and Catholics that wehold the truth and that
therefore, any kind of dialoguein a sense is merely ritualistic
, it's superficial, becausewe're not going to change our
position.
Francis would say no, no, thereis truth Now.
(12:19):
There are traditions which wemust respect and indeed
reverence.
Brian Stiller (12:25):
Where is Rome going here?
We live in a world of drivingsecularity in some parts of the
world and in the global South,in Africa, in Latin America, in
Asia, you have a church that isjust booming.
It's growing.
Churches are being planted,people are coming to faith in
(12:46):
Christ, people are experiencinghealing and the filling of the
spirit.
It's like we've never known inthe world's history.
And yet we have wars, we haveecological challenges in that
and multi-religious activity.
So you have Islam on the risein some places.
(13:08):
So here you have the RomanCatholic Church.
You have Christianity two and ahalf to a set point, seven
billion, with the church, theRoman Catholic Church, being
half of that.
And the power and influencewhere is?
Is Rome leading the larger oris she a player?
Michael Higgins (13:32):
I had a friend of mine who worked with me.
You might have known him.
He was an Anglican priest,taught at Simon Fraser, was
pastor of a parish in Vancouver.
His name was Donald Graystonand he ran an institute called
the Shalom Institute.
He was very much involved inpeace issues and very much
involved in ecumenical issues.
And one day he said to me justa few years before he died he
(13:56):
died probably in his mid to late70s conclusion that all the
churches in Christianity mustfind a place for papal
leadership because he's our oneglobal leader.
He said you know, I'm anAnglican priest and Canterbury
(14:17):
matters, but Canterbury doesn'tmatter like Rome, nor Moscow,
nor Constantinople.
None of them have that globaloutreach.
And he said we just got to finda way for the Pope to exercise
his ministry that's moreinclusive.
And this was a big dream forhim.
And I thought often about his,because the Popes themselves
(14:40):
have taken initiatives to try tobring Christians who have been
separated from Rome back into atleast a working partnership
with Rome, if not actuallyinclusion in the Roman body.
And Leo XIV recently said at hisinaugural mass the same thing
(15:01):
that Francis has said thatreligion is not about propaganda
, it's not about imposingreligion on others.
It's respecting the faith ofothers.
That's how we witness this is ahuge departure from Catholic
teaching in Rome in the 19thcentury, when the standard norm
was error has no rights.
(15:23):
One of the reasons why youcould use temporal authority to
suppress or minimize otherreligions was precisely because
they were in error and error hasno rights.
Churches long since rejectedthat.
But to reject itinstitutionally and to reject it
individually and as part ofyour cultural inheritance.
(15:44):
Sometimes they're differentthings.
Francis, again and again,asserts the commonality, just
like Leda will see about theenvironment.
It's our common home AmongChristians.
This is our common faith, oneof the things that unite us and
the Pope.
The Pope is supposed to be aprinciple of unity and harmony.
That's one of the things thatPope Leo said at the beginning
(16:07):
of his pontificate.
I'm here as a symbol of love,of Christ's love.
I should be involved as achurch in expanding God's love
over the universe.
Do we do it?
Very often, no, butaspirationally.
This is what we're called to doand this is what the primacy of
(16:28):
Peter is called to do.
It's a primacy of unity and aprimacy of love.
So my job to witness that.
Brian Stiller (16:34):
So why should evangelicals care about the Pope
?
Michael Higgins (16:37):
Because I think they can look at the Pope not
as the whore of Babylon or thescarlet woman or whatever other
fancy titles given the Pope overthe centuries.
Brian Stiller (16:47):
We thought that Revelation was pretty well,
pretty descriptive.
Michael Higgins (16:50):
Really, yeah, they really revealed it right
out of the closet there.
But because, as the successorof Peter, his job is to ensure
unity, harmony and love amongChristians.
I think the big problem iswe've tended to emphasize the
wrong titles of the Pope.
For instance, what is the Pope?
(17:13):
Well, he's the Patriarch of theWest, although Benedict XVI got
rid of that because the Easternpatriarchs found it offensive.
So, but he's Bishop of Rome.
He's the successor of Peter.
He's the vicar of our LordJesus Christ.
He's the primate of Italy.
He's the head of the VaticanCity State.
These are all his titles, butsome of those we don't agree
(17:34):
with.
No, but here's one you will, andthe one he took as the most
important the service of theservants of God.
That's the title that most hewanted to communicate.
My job is to serve, not todominate, not to control, but to
(17:54):
serve, because some of theother tenors and tenors of power
head of the Vatican city stateit's power, right, temporal
power, not just spiritual power.
Temporal power but here he'ssaying I am the servant of the
servants of God indicates thatyou're at the bottom.
You're like Jesus.
Washing the feet of theservants of God indicates that
you're at the bottom.
You're like Jesus washing thefeet of the disciples.
(18:15):
You're not standing over them.
It takes a lot to be able toshift that mentality.
It's like the inverted pyramid.
It takes centuries to put oneimage in mind, to embed it in
how we think.
How do you rip that out ordisrupt it?
Brian Stiller (18:25):
To offset the Petrine claim as a servant is a
big jump, huge jump.
Michael Higgins (18:31):
It's a huge jump and the Petrine claim, of
course, is in Matthew and partin John, but mostly in Matthew,
and there have been greatdebates among biblical scholars
and reformers and evangelicalsand others about how you read
those passages.
Yes, and how do you explain?
How do you see in the Pope ofRome, peter of Galilee, like,
(18:59):
how do we get from a fishermanright, how do we get from a
fisherman to a prince?
Brian Stiller (19:04):
I mean, how is that possible?
And it's something we aren'tgoing to solve here.
But what I'd like?
I want to talk to you about LeoXIV, the new pope.
But before we do, the Jesuitdisruptor.
He came to Canada, he did andhe engaged with the Indigenous
people.
Unwrap that a bit for us.
Michael Higgins (19:27):
Well, he came to Canada at the request of the
Indigenous and he did not defineit as a state visit.
It wasn't actually a statevisit.
It wasn't even a particularlypastoral visit to the Catholics
of Canada.
It wasn't even a particularlypastoral visit to the Catholics
(19:58):
of Canada.
It was a over to Canada and toenflesh it in their land, on
their land, on their sacred land.
One of the things I noticedbecause I've covered papal trips
before, not by mediation, bytelevision, radio and commentary
, rather than by being on aplane with the Pope.
And what I noticed about thisone very quickly, is how Francis
(20:24):
actually spent less timetalking John Paul II.
All he did was talk.
Benedict never seemed terriblycomfortable in the role, but
Francis listened.
He listened most of the time hewas in Canada and the
indigenous leaders loved that.
They loved that about him.
They loved the fact that hereverenced their traditions,
(20:44):
that he listened to them.
He didn't argue with them.
He didn't have a clear programsaying this is what we're going
to do and we will admit so muchof this, but they're not going
that.
No, no, there's nothingpragmatic about it.
It was a pastoral, moralconnection with the people who
had been damaged by variousRoman Catholics who had
(21:04):
attempted to assimilate them,wipe out their religious culture
, create not intentionally, butto create what we now call
intergenerational trauma.
He accepted that.
He didn't argue with it.
He accepted it and the factthat they gave him the headdress
was one of the most movingmoments.
It and the fact that they gavehim the headdress was one of the
most moving moments, right,because you could see that he
(21:29):
brought such a deep affectionfor them.
And I've talked to several ofthe Indigenous leaders who were
with him in Rome and were withhim in Canada and the thing they
remember most is the genuineaffection he had for them and
the sorrow and remorse for theinstitution that had caused the
pain.
They believed him because theybelieved in the integrity of his
witness, and why?
Because what you saw is whatyou get.
(21:50):
That pilgrimage was in manyways magnificent, but it was not
without its difficulties, andsome of the difficulties were
internal ecclesiasticaldifficulties, and some of the
difficulties were internalecclesiastical, political power
things going on amongst someCanadian bishops?
Brian Stiller (22:07):
Francis had, and how did that disable the impact?
Michael Higgins (22:12):
Well, I think there were a couple of cases
where the church that welcomedhim, the Canadian church,
mishandled it significantly.
One was a major liturgy thatwas done in Latin.
This would have been an idealopportunity to have used several
different languages, latin withan indigenous body.
I know People were outreached,including indigenous Catholic
(22:36):
priests.
Why was this happening?
And this would not have beenFrancis, see, when the Pope
comes.
So was there logic to that?
It was just extremely bad tasteand it was a bad judgment call.
Nobody knows.
It was done by some functionaryin the Canadian Conference of
Catholic Bishops, because thePope doesn't set his retinue and
(22:57):
he comes as guests of thecountry, guests of the church in
that country.
So even when he speaks, a gooddeal of what he says has already
been crafted by the bishop.
He has to agree with it.
He won't say anything hedoesn't agree with.
But he doesn't know everyindividual situation in every
country, so he depends a greatpart on their feeding him right.
(23:18):
This is what every politicaland religious figure does, but
he gives it his own tone, hegives it his own careful
signature.
So I think what you found inthat penitential pilgrimage was
a real determination onFrancis's part to make an end,
to bring, to ask for mercy andat the same time, it's only a
(23:41):
beginning.
It's not the end.
Brian Stiller (23:44):
So give me a summation of his papacy.
Michael Higgins (23:47):
Well, I think I mentioned it almost at the very
beginning, brian, he humanizedthe papacy.
He made it less an office ofmonarchy and more the office of
the fisherman.
He went out of his way toembrace people from different
traditions religious traditionsor indeed none in his pursuit of
(24:09):
trying to find the commonground that unites us.
Because he presided over achurch that is riven.
I mean, I have been coveringFrancis, I've written about
Francis in a book and articlesand everything else, and I
realize his flaws as much as Irealize his strengths.
But I also understand what manyevangelicals and others may not
(24:31):
fully appreciate, thatopposition to Francis was mostly
from within the Catholic Church, that if you go outside the
Catholic Church you'll findpeople who don't particularly
even like the Catholic Churchbut they like Francis.
I was at a meeting of a numberof a dinner in honor of the
publication of the book bysenior editors, producers.
(24:52):
You know, in the cognoscenti,the chattering class, they don't
like the Catholic Church.
For some reason they're likemaybe they don't like the
Catholic Church, they love him.
And I said I don't know how Imean.
Well, you do understand he wasthe head of the Catholic Church.
I was kind of.
You know it was kind of a flaw,but the real important thing
(25:12):
was they loved him and I thinkthat that's one of the things
when you say what defines him.
I think what defines him isthat fragile, sometimes
vulnerable, openness and love.
You remember, very early in hispontificate he embraced a man
like Francis of Assisi, embraceda leper, and this man had a
particular disease that sodisfigured his face that he was
(25:37):
repugnant to look at like you,just you're repelled by it.
Francis embraced him, kissedhim, held him.
This wasn't a media moment,this was an expression of his
ministry.
Brian Stiller (25:50):
Thank, you, michael, but you've written
about the new Pope.
I have Leo XIV.
Leo XIV Not a book.
Not a book, not yet.
Michael Higgins (25:59):
A couple of articles.
Brian Stiller (26:01):
So give me your best introduction.
Michael Higgins (26:04):
But I think at this point it's still very early
.
As I said in one of my GlobalMail columns, the proof is in
the paper pudding.
We'll see what happens, whatappointments he makes to the
Curia, who are going to beheading the offices, how he's
going to follow up on synodality, what's up when his first
(26:24):
encyclical comes out.
So I mean, it's still kind of ahoneymoon phase.
But here's something, becauseyou're always looking for signs
and structures.
That's how it works in theRoman world Not necessarily what
you say, but how you say it.
Only what you say, but how yousay it and what symbols you
(26:45):
employ in saying it.
Recently, he approved theappointment of three bishops of
American seas or diocese, all ofthem born immigrants one from
Nicaragua, one from, I believe,ghana and one from Vietnam.
And they were born outside thecountry.
So they're immigrant born.
They're immigrant children whoare now bishops in a very
(27:08):
anti-immigrant country underPresident Trump.
This is a symbol, this is asign of Neil saying to his
fellow Catholic, jd Vance thisis not the way we work.
We don't isolate and we don'tincarcerate immigrants and
strangers.
We welcome them.
(27:29):
And what I'm going to do is I'mgoing to put bishops in major
Cs, or even minor Cs.
I think one of them is SanDiego.
I'm going to put them inpositions as bishops, and they
are themselves Not the sons ofimmigrants, but immigrants
themselves.
That's a pretty powerfulmessage.
Brian Stiller (27:47):
Michael Higgins, author of the Jesuit Disruptor
that's quite a choice of words.
Disruptor it is, as we concludetoday, michael.
Both of us confess our love forChrist, our love for his church
, the bride of Christ, we wantour lives to count for him.
(28:08):
We love the world, as he'scalled us to love the world.
What would you say to myevangelical brothers and sisters
?
Michael Higgins (28:19):
Well, I would say, using Francis's approach in
dialogue, that when we enterseriously in dialogue and
reverence the other as other, wemove to an experience of
encounter, and that experienceof encounter is the discovery of
Christ in the upper.
Brian Stiller (28:38):
On the issue of women women in ministry at
various levels?
Did he disrupt the past of theChurch with respect to women?
Michael Higgins (28:48):
In terms of sacramental ministry?
No.
In terms of governance yes,what he did is he appointed more
women to positions of seniorgovernance and responsibility in
the Catholic Church than hasever been done by any pope
combined.
And so at this moment, rightnow, the head of one of the
dicasteries, that is, thedepartment, is a woman.
(29:09):
In the past, women might besecretary.
A dicastery would be what Adicastery would be like a
ministerial department.
Like a ministerial department,so liturgy, evangelization,
orthodoxy, teaching, so verysenior in an administrative role
, very senior, always held bybishops beforehand.
(29:32):
So there's a woman doing that,there's a woman serving as a
secretary, I think, in the samecongregation or ducastery, and
there's a woman running thegovernorate, which is the body
that has responsibility for theoversight of the entire Vatican
City State.
It's now run by a woman andthere are women in all kinds of
other areas within thegovernance structure, including
(29:54):
his friend Emily Chukuda, who isthe president of the Pontifical
Commission for Latin America,married, woman and children.
And there she is, you know,right there, close to Pope
Francis, and holding a seniorposition that would have not
been held by a woman before.
So in matters of governance,leadership, modeling, witness,
(30:17):
he moved the role of women inthe Catholic Church at an
accelerated rate In terms oforders, sacrament, ministerial
work.
In that regard, no, he did notmove on the ordination of women
to the deacons, to the diaconate, and he was firm that women
would not be ordained to thepriesthood and he was firm that
(30:40):
women would not be ordained tothe priesthood.
Brian Stiller (30:41):
I was in Ukraine when Pope Francis made his
statement about the Russianinvasion of Ukraine and I got to
tell you, michael, there wasdeep disappointment as to the
lackluster approach that he tookto that issue.
There are wars all over theworld, but it seemed at that
(31:02):
point I don't know whether itwas because he was trying to
ameliorate his relationship withthe patriarch of the Russian
Orthodox Church or what, butthere just seemed to be a lack
of strength in making clear whathad happened.
Michael Higgins (31:20):
You know, he's received a fair bit of criticism
for his position on Ukraine,his position on Beijing and his
position with Tel Aviv, gaza andHamas and, without attempting
to in any way justify hispositions on these issues, which
(31:41):
he tried in many ways toachieve some reconciliation, I
want to talk just very brieflyabout the framework of his
political thinking on this.
When you look at some of hiswork Fratelli Tutti, which is
one of his encyclicals and youlook at other things that he has
done, partly again shaped, togo back to an earlier point,
(32:02):
when we're talking about hisexperience in Argentina,
particularly with the generals,with the colonels, the Dirty War
what you discover there is thatFrancis was a profound believer
in dialogue.
He felt, no matter how hostilethe adversary, if you're not at
(32:24):
the table, peace andreconciliation is impossible
because dialogue is theprecondition for encounter.
So, no matter how antipatheticthey may be, you have to be at
the table.
That's one of the reasons whyhe was persistent in relation to
Beijing and Hong Kong, greatlyannoying Lord Patton, who was
(32:45):
the last governor of Hong Kongand a devout Catholic, as well
as Cardinal Zen, the Archbishopof Hong Kong, who had
experienced direct Chinesepersecution, marxist persecution
.
But he said no, no, no, directChinese persecution, marxist
persecution.
But he said no, no, no, we haveto work with the reality on the
ground.
Similarly with Ukraine andRussia.
He didn't believe that therewas more equivalence in this,
(33:09):
but he realized that you can'tcome to a resolution until you
come to the table.
Now there would be many who say,and not unjustifiably.
How can you come to the tablewith Putin when Putin calls the
shots, or Z?
How do you make commerce with Zor work out some kind of
intercourse and negotiation,when he can't trust what he's
(33:29):
doing?
He's trying to sinicizeeverything, including religion.
Francis would say well, wecan't enter it naively.
What we have to do is we haveto chip away.
Enter it naively.
What we have to do is we haveto chip away.
We can't eliminate our presencethere.
This, in part, is thecontinuation of a policy called
(33:49):
Ostpolitik, which was crafted byCardinal Cassaroli, who was
Secretary of State to Pope PaulVI, and he worked on a classic
Vatican diplomacy ofconciliation.
John Paul II changed that.
With John Paul II and hissecretaries of state, they moved
to a more adversarial position.
Communism is the enemy and JohnPaul II was a major figure in
(34:12):
helping to bring down the Sovietempire.
So one operates in a moredirect, confrontational, perhaps
prophetic way, the otheroperates in a diplomatic way.
Let's win them over.
Dialogue, yes, is extremelydifficult.
Nonviolence, yes, isoverwhelmingly difficult.
(34:33):
But we can only move forward asdisciples of Christ if we come
to actually listen to the other.
So the impatience that peoplein Ukraine and elsewhere have
for Francis because he didn'tcome out and condemn
unequivocally one side only, isunderstandable.
But if you put it within theframework, the political,
(34:54):
ecclesial framework that he used, he was incredibly consistent
ecclesial framework that he used.
He was incredibly consistent,
Brian Stiller (35:04):
michael.
Thank you for being a guest onEvangelical 360.
Michael Higgins (35:06):
See you 40 years from now, thank you.
Brian Stiller (35:08):
Thank you, michael, for joining us today on
part two of the two-part seriesin this podcast, and thank you
for helping us grow inunderstanding as we seek to
bridge the chasm between our twosides of the Christian global
witness, and thank you for beinga part of the podcast.
I'd be so grateful if you wouldsubscribe and share this
(35:31):
episode, and remember always usehashtag Evangelical360.
If you'd like to learn moreabout today's guests, be sure to
check the show notes ordescription below, and if you
haven't already received my freee-book and newsletter, just go
to brianstillercom.
So thanks again for joining us,until next time.
(35:55):
Don't miss the next interview.
Be sure to subscribe toEvangelical 360 on YouTube.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.