Francis’s Critics, Vatican II, and the Theology of the People
For all the accusations of doctrinal confusion—and even hints of heresy—it’s important to remember that Pope Francis’s magisterium was firmly rooted in the Second Vatican Council, and more specifically in its distinctly Argentine reception, known as the theology of the People. This theological current was developed by the theological experts or periti of the Episcopal Commission of Pastoral Ministry (COEPAL, by its Spanish acronym), a synodal task force of bishops, priests, and lay advisors convened by the Argentine bishops’ conference in the wake of Vatican II. Its purpose was to implement the Council’s conclusions in the Argentine context. COEPAL’s most influential periti were two diocesan priests, Lucio Gera and Rafael Tello—arguably the most important Argentine theologians of the 20th century.
At the time, Jorge Mario Bergoglio was still completing his formation as a Jesuit and had little direct contact with COEPAL. But years later—especially after becoming auxiliary bishop and later archbishop of Buenos Aires in the 1990s—he fully embraced this theological tradition. More than any other influence, it shaped both his pastoral approach and theological worldview. As pope, his closest theological advisors came from this school: Fr. Carlos Galli, a disciple of Gera and a member of the International Theological Commission, and Cardinal Víctor Manuel Fernández, Prefect of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith. Their collaboration with Francis dates back to 2007, when then-Archbishop Bergoglio led the commission drafting the final document of the Fifth Latin American Episcopal Conference in Aparecida, Brazil. Galli and Fernández authored the final draft and would go on to contribute to all major documents of Francis’s pontificate.
Interestingly, the architects of the theology of the People never used that name. They called it “popular pastoral theology.” Its core concepts were summarized in a 1974 book titled ¿Qué es la pastoral popular? (“What Is Popular Pastoral Theology?”), published one year after COEPAL was disbanded. While attributed to Jesuit Fernando Boasso, the book is really a synthesis of years of conversations among COEPAL’s team of theologians and religious sociologists in Buenos Aires from 1968 to 1973. These discussions built upon their reading of Vatican II documents—especially Lumen Gentium and Gaudium et Spes. The two central concepts of popular pastoral theology—“people” and “popular culture”—emerged directly from these two conciliar texts.
Prior to Vatican II, the dominant image of the Church was a hierarchical structure in which clerics—by virtue of their ordination—occupied a superior role to the laity. At the top stood the pope, and the Church was governed according to what became known as the “Roman model,” formalized during the papacy of Pius IX. This clericalist vision understood the Church as a strict chain of command, with the pope as absolute monarch. Many integralist Catholics sought to extend this authoritarian model to civil society as well, treating it as a bulwark of order and stability.
Lumen Gentium replaced this vertical image with a more horizontal one: the Church as the People of God, composed of all the baptized—clergy and laity alike. This shift was symbolically reinforced in the document itself, where the chapter on the People of God precedes the chapter on the hierarchical structure of the Church. While this did not change the canonical role of bishops as successors to the apostles (a point contested by some radical reformers in the postconciliar era), it did challenge the clericalist model. When Pope Francis decried clericalism as a distortion of the Church, he was simply reiterating the vision of Vatican II.
Gaudium et Spes, for its part, recognized the legitimate autonomy of the secular world and encouraged Christians to engage with it, rather than attempt to impose their beliefs, as had often been the case in preconciliar days. The document adopted the “see, judge, act” method of the Young Christian Workers movement and called on Catholics to read the signs of the times and work to transform society in light of the Gospel.
COEPAL’s periti rooted these teachings in the particularities of Argentine life, especially the experiences of the poor and working class. Years before “the preferential option for the poor” became a global catchphrase, these theologians saw the Church’s mission as one of solidarity with the marginalized. Many of them had served as chaplains to the Argentine Young Christian Workers in the 1950s and were shaped by its pastoral obrera (worker pastoral ministry), a direct antecedent to the theology of the People.
This historical setting also helps explain the movement’s relationship with Peronism, the populist political movement founded by Juan Domingo Perón in the 1940s. For decades, Argentina’s working class has overwhelmingly identified with Peronism. Pastoral closeness to the working class inevitably meant engagement with their political loyalties, despite Peronism’s authoritarian tendencies. After a military coup deposed Perón in 1955—with the support of many middle- and upper-class Catholics—his movement was banned for nearly two decades. In the 1960s, another military dictatorship ruled the country, and the struggle to lift the ban on Peronism became intertwined with the broader movement for the return of democracy. The periti’s theology reflected this environment: they denounced U.S. imperialism and Argentina’s economic dependency as structural causes of poverty. At the same time, their embrace of a national-populist ideology was also a conscious alternative to the Marxist ideologies that drew in many progressive Catholics during this era, including some who joined guerrilla movements inspired by the Cuban Revolution.
The theology of the People has often been labeled the Argentine version of liberation theology. But that’s a mischaracterization. In fact, during the 1980s, when John Paul II launched a crackdown on liberation theology, the theology of the People—then often referred to as a theology of culture—was seen in Rome as a preferable alternative. Many progressive Catholics dismissed it as regressive, largely because of its embrace of popular piety, which they viewed as complicit in the structures of oppression. By contrast, the theology of the People interpreted popular Catholicism as a genuine expression of the sensus fidei, the Spirit-given intuition of faith that lives in the people, especially the poor. Bergoglio’s reputation as a “conservative” stemmed in large part from his defense of this view.
The collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of revolutionary utopias softened this rift between Latin America’s theological currents. Over time, both branches turned their attention to shared priorities—especially concern for the poor. The cordial exchange between Francis and Leonardo Boff at the beginning of Francis’s pontificate symbolized this convergence.
Two other areas of Francis’s magisterium that drew intense criticism were also deeply rooted in Vatican II. In Traditionis Custodes, Francis upheld the liturgical vision of Sacrosanctum Concilium against those nostalgic for the Tridentine Mass. Likewise, his pastoral outreach to divorced and remarried Catholics, as well as LGBTQ Catholics, stems from both the Council’s pastoral orientation and its emphasis on human dignity, moral discernment, and the centrality of love and mercy.
Ultimately, opposition to Pope Francis’s teachings often amounts to a rejection of Vatican II itself—sometimes overtly, sometimes cloaked in calls for a “correct” interpretation of the Council. In Benedict XVI’s famous distinction between a hermeneutic of continuity and one of rupture, Francis clearly embodied the reforming continuity the Council envisioned, shaped by his own experience in the “existential peripheries” of Buenos Aires and a deep awareness of the “throwaway culture” spreading through Latin America and the Global South.
By electing Cardinal Robert Prevost as Pope Leo XIV, the conclave affirmed the direction set by Francis over the past twelve years. And in his early actions and statements, Pope Leo has made it clear that he intends to continue that trajectory—especially with respect to synodality and popular piety. At the same time, some of his early gestures appear to extend an olive branch to more traditionalist Catholics. Time will tell whether that will be enough to appease Francis’s critics, or if the resistance to Vatican II will persist—and perhaps even grow—under Leo’s pontificate.
Image: Vatican Media
Claudio Iván Remeseira is an Argentine journalist based in New York.
Popular Posts