My evening at the Oratory to hear Charles Moore’s talk on Thatcher

I’ve just attended a very stirring talk at the Oratory, given by Charles Moore, former editor of The Daily Telegraph and the official biographer of Margaret Thatcher. The talk was organised by the Friends of the Ordinariate.  The hall was heaving with people, and it was standing room only.  

The defining characteristic of the talk was Charles Moore’s memories of Thatcher and the factors that coloured her religious beliefs. Thatcher’s father denounced Catholicism as ‘spiritual totalitarianism’, but Moore insisted that, ‘she had none of her father’s animosity to Roman Catholicism’.   

Moore reminisced about a ‘perplexing’ time when he and Thatcher were both Godparents to the same child. Moore asked Thatcher if her twins had been Christened, and she replied, ‘oh, yes, but without the water’. Moore concluded, ‘she had no interest in sacraments’. 

Moore and Thatcher did make a journey together to Rome for a meeting with Pope Benedict. Moore pointed to the fact that Thatcher was, at the time, losing her mental faculties, and that he said to her, ‘isn’t it marvellous that we are going to see Pope Benedict?’ which he said, ‘was more to remind her that this would be happening’. Thatcher asked him, ‘what does one say to a Pope?’

In a crowd that big, there were probably a few who did not revere Thatcher, but the first female prime minister is dead, and while Charles Moore was clearly very fond of Mrs T, there was not one boo, hiss or sigh from the audience.  In this company, it would have been seen as downright rude to make a snide remake about the first female prime minister who passed away recently.

At the Oratory talk, the audience was mainly comprised of former Anglicans who are still drying themselves off from swimming across the Tiber.  There was a lot of date comparing, ‘I became Catholic on this date. Cheers!’  It was an atmosphere of celebration as fizzy wine was pouring into glasses and the tingle of chinking glasses filled the air.

I confess that I like former Anglicans (and Anglicans) because, in my experience, they hold true to certain values of Englishness such as good manners, minding-their-own-business, integrity, tact and honour.

Charles Moore, who himself is a convert from the Church of England, spoke frankly on the Ordinariate: “wholly Catholic, but representative of a different tradition”

“The Ordinariate is not just a case of bishops making a lot of former Anglican priests work jolly hard”

Reflecting on the fact that the Anglican Archbishop Justin Welby, has a Roman Catholic spiritual director, Moore said, ‘previously that would have prevented him from being Archbishop of Canterbury’. 

At the Q and A, I put my hand up a few times, and had quite a challenging (maybe even obnoxious) question: did Thatcher’s tempestuous relations with Northern Irish Catholics shake her relationship with the Catholic Church? 

I’ll have to read Charles Moore’s account of Thatcher's life to find out if he answers this question. 

Charles Moore signing copies of his biography of Thatcher in St Wilfrid's Hall. June 13 2013

The best explication of abortion that I have ever read

Blessed Mother Teresa:  “The so-called right to abortion has pitted mothers against their children and women against men. It has sown violence and discord at the heart of the most intimate human relationships. It has aggravated the derogation of the father's role in an increasingly fatherless society.

It has portrayed the greatest of gifts--a child--as a competitor, an intrusion and an inconvenience. It has nominally accorded mothers unfettered dominion over the dependent lives of their physically dependent sons and daughters. And, in granting this unconscionable power, it has exposed many women to unjust and selfish demands from their husbands or other sexual partners.”

Mother Teresa was a young Loreto nun when she received “a call within a call” to found the Missionaries of Charity to serve “the poorest of the poor”.
After obtaining Indian citizenship she did basic medical training, which prepared her for working in the slums. So difficult was the first year that she resorted to begging. But it wasn’t long before more young women joined her. She came to prominence after Malcolm Muggeridge’s 1969 documentary Something Beautiful for God.
For over 45 years Mother Teresa served the poor, the sick, the dying and the orphaned. When she met Hillary Clinton in 1994 they didn’t agree on abortion, but Mother Teresa assiduously sought Clinton’s help in setting up a centre in Washington DC where orphaned babies could be cared for. Clinton and Mother Teresa were good collaborators and in 1995 the Mother Teresa Home for Infant Children was founded.
Gifted with keen intelligence, Mother Teresa led the expansion of her order until shortly before her death in 1997. Today the order has over 4,500 Sisters and is active in 133 countries.
Since her death, Mother Teresa has become a role model for people enduring the dark night of the soul. For over 40 years she felt isolated from God’s presence, but her doubts never overwhelmed her.

Spiritual Simplicity

A Miraculous Medal graces the side of my vintage tea-pot

Adding a small giver-of-grace which is unobtrusive can be quite easy. I put a miraculous medal onto a vintage tea pot that I'm very fond of. The medal is gold, which colour-coordinates with the dark mustard coloured tea pot and the yellow orchid. So, instead of languishing in a cupboard or a box, the medal is pride of place on the ornament that acts as a nice background and highlights the medal. Not a good luck charm, the Miraculous Medal was designed according to Our Lady's instructions, and she promised St Catherine Labouré that 'great graces' would be given to those, 'who wear the medal with confidence'. Perhaps that not only applies to wearing the Miraculous Medal on a chain around the neck, but also to displaying the medal on an ornament 'with confidence'.

Three blogs by three young Catholics just added to my blog list

A friend asked me why I say, 'there are young Catholic bloggers blogging around Britain', but then don't have more links on my blog to young Catholics writing on the walls of the blogosphere.  Mea culpa: I have been negligent in updating my blog list with fellow young'uns (or 'yoof' as Eccles calls uz).  My conscience about including more bloggers on my blog roll was again pricked when I saw my blog address on Luke O'Sullivan's blog, and I remembered to include his blog on my list.
To remedy the lack of 'Yoof', I have put three blogs by three Catholic bloggers on my list. Drum-roll please...ladies first....

The Whistling Sentinel. The origin of the blog title comes from Chesterton, who wrote, 'it's not a question of theology, it's a question of whether, placed as a sentinel of an unknown watch, you will whistle or not.'  I derive the meaning of the blog title to be that the Catholic state-of-being is to whistle whilst in a place that is inhospitable, strange and cold, because we are offering up our stint as sentintel. A very erudite lady-blogger, Megan wrote about her conversion, and how she was converted by reading the enemies of the New Atheists, i.e. Thomas Aquinas and Pope Benedict. Recently, Megan became Catholic, at the London Oratory, and the next blogger is her God-father. 


The Thirsty Gargoyle is written by an academic who bounces from Ireland to England and back again. His stamina in travelling is matched by his intellectual stamina. His most recent post, 'He who controls the past, controls the future' is his best post to date (IMHO). It would make eye-watering reading for Pete-the-treat Boylan who was an expert witness at the inquest into Savita Halappanavar's death.

Lucas Cambrensis is written by Luke O'Sullivan, whose ancestors fled Ireland during The Potato Famine. I think Luke's contribution is as a Catholic male, will be a witness to withstanding the pressure to partake in so-called social norms for males such as peeking at Page 3 and evaluating women in terms of physical characteristics.  Luke's most recent post is entitled, 'On the quality of paving slabs in the Red Light District of Amsterdam', includes sub-headings such as 'sex bomb' and 'a failure to communicate'.

If you've read this far in my post, you may have come to agree with me that there are some enthusiastic young Catholic bloggers here in Britain. Of course, in thirty years time, Whistling Sentinel, Thirsty Gargoyle, Luke-the-Welshman and yours truly might be comparing pension plans and looking at the Catholic blogosphere and moaning, 'look at those youngsters, don't they know that we were some of the first young'uns on there? Why don't they have our blogs on their blog-lists? A little respect, please!'

I contributed a few lines to Bob Moynihan's new biography of Pope Francis

Robert Moynihan, editor of Inside the Vatican has just published a biography of Pope Francis entitled, Pray For Me. When he was writing the book, Robert Moynihan got in touch with The Catholic Herald to request if he could site some lines from the mini-bio that I wrote, the week that Pope Francis became Pope.

The two pieces from the mini-bio that were put into the official biography were: “They had a modest existence, being so thrifty that new clothes were seen as dangerously lavish, not once going on holidays and never owning a car,” writes Mary O’Regan, author of a thoughtful account of the pope’s early life, which appeared in the Catholic Herald on March 22. “They were not poor, but were unassuming upper-working-class Italians who considered themselves very fortunate to have secure housing in Flores, an ordinary suburb of Buenos Aires. Many of Mario Bergoglio’s fellow workers on the railroads would have lived in shantytowns.”

"Father Bergoglio’s six years as a leader in the Jesuit community were hard on his nerves, and in 1980 he returned to the seminary in San Miguel as rector. Going from provincial superior to rector was seen as a self-imposed demotion, but he remained in this post until 1986 . He put his culinary talent to use cooking for the students. On hearing the compliment that he was a good chef, he replied: “Well, nobody has died yet from my cooking.”

"Women wore huge hats - the reason was that they could hide behind their hats, make eyes at their boyfriends and their chaperone wouldn't be able to see them!"

Over 15 years ago Gretchen Potter started gathering hats as a way to entertain her granddaughters. Now, she has quite the collection of hats that she puts to good use.

Cardinal O'Malley speaks out against abortions for baby girls, advocates adoption and talks about the practical help he has given pregnant women, "My heart is always with women in difficult pregnancies"

The rectory behind Boston Cathedral has scaffolding and is in the process of
being partially re-built. As I walk towards it, the interior locution given
to St Francis from God rings in my ears, “Francis, re-build my church”. This
is the home of Cardinal Seán Patrick O’Malley, the only Franciscan in the
College of Cardinals.
 Ushered in by his secretary, Fr Kickham, I set up for the interview in a
plush drawing room that has a very energetic cat jumping around. Cardinal
O’Malley, dressed in his trademark brown habit with Rosary beads around his
waist strolls slowly in.
“It’s so good to see you!” I gush, overflowing with sincere verve.
“Really?” Cardinal Seán asks unassumingly, as he sits down with a mug of
cocoa.
“Yes!” I exclaim, and resist the temptation to spout that it’s an honour to
interview the cardinal who was Papabile in the 2013 Conclave and has just
been made an advisor on curial reform.

Our first order of business is to discuss our shared Irishness, and people
that we know from West Cork. But that’s where our similarities end. From the
minute that I plonk my Dictaphone on the table, it’s clear that Cardinal
O’Malley and I are polar-opposite personalities. I am a restless,
can’t-stop-moving person and run on nervous energy. Cardinal O’Malley is
still, calm and radiates a real and palpable peacefulness. He’s much more
easy-going Irish than me. A man of such high standing could be haughty, but
he insists on being called Cardinal Seán. A west of Ireland man, he says “my
mother’s family is from Mayo, and my father’s family is from Clare”. He has
that pale, almost translucent Irish skin and freckles dot his broad
forehead. And by doing this interview, this “super cardinal” is joining the
struggle to keep abortion out of Ireland. During the days before Cardinal
Seán and I agreed that this interview would be a discussion on rebutting the
pro-abortion bombast that is being used to patronise and silence the Irish
pro-life voice.
His cool demeanour disappears on being asked why Ireland, a small island,
should resist abortion legislation that the rest of the world has largely
implemented. “Abortion is the taking of an innocent human life, everyone
should resist abortion! Ireland has the good fortune, in part thanks to
Catholic sensibilities, that her people have been opposed to abortion
despite the great pressure that they have come under from secularising
forces,” he says with fervour.
Taking his lead on the subject of “great pressure” from “secularising
forces”, I suggest that since the X Case was going through the Irish courts in
1992, one manipulative scheme used by pro-abortion factions is to belittle
Ireland’s ban on abortion as primitive and archaic. Cardinal O´Malley does
not entertain the idea that Ireland is “archaic”, and states firmly,
“Ireland should be very proud of its pro-life heritage and how traditionally
there has been great importance given to human life.” Tapping himself on the
chest, he emphasises, “I am very proud that in Ireland every life counts,
even when it is so vulnerable like the unborn. I hope that Ireland will
continue to stand up against the pressures – I know the pressures are there.
Pressure to legislate for abortion is a dehumanising force in our world.”
The tactic of portraying Ireland and pro-lifers as old-fashioned prompts
Cardinal O’Malley to reminisce that at the time of abortion legislation in
America, there was a popular opinion that “people opposed to abortion will
die off, they’ll go away. But, of course, 40 years later the pro-abortion
movement is on the run, they see that the number of pro-life people has
increased and is getting younger.”
But just because abortions are not performed in Ireland, does not mean that
Irish girls are not having abortions. What does he think of the thousands of
girls who go across the Irish Sea to England for abortions? One argument
used by pro-choice campaigners in Ireland is that women will have abortions
anyway, and that it is anti-woman that they are ‘forced’ to travel. Speaking
very gently, he counters this: “the fact that they actually have to leave
Ireland to have an abortion, is a deterrent and it also teaches people that
it is wrong. The laws have a function of teaching what is right and wrong.
And simply because someone is going to do something, does not mean that we
have to facilitate it, condone it, or encourage it. Changing the laws would
facilitate, condone and encourage abortion in Ireland.” And for wider Irish
society, why would it be good for abortion to remain illegal?  Cardinal Seán
answers in his deep voice: “Abortion undermines people’s humanity and makes
us insensitive to the suffering of others.” I tell Cardinal Seán that Irish
women are being challenged that they are not in control of their bodies,
because abortion is not available on request. He raises his voice: “It is a
justification that a woman can do what she wants with her body, but what
about the baby’s body? And how about the gender selection of abortions that
take place? Where are the feminists arguing against abortion for baby girls?
Here in America, we have not been able to put in place legislation that
would prevent abortions that are done because the baby is a girl.”
The most pressing issue is the mendacious-sounding name, “The Protection of
Life During Pregnancy”, a piece of legislation that, if enacted, would allow
for suicidal women to be given an abortion. There is no time limit
stipulation in the Bill, so theoretically a woman who is in the latest
stages of pregnancy, but who has demonstrated suicidal tendencies to three
doctors, may get an abortion. The syllogism being that a woman who may be
suicidal because of her pregnancy must be rid of the baby in order to get
better. He rejects the idea that abortion is the necessary solution: “If any
woman is suicidal, she must be given treatment for depression. If she has an
abortion, there are greater chances that she will be depressed and suicidal
as a result of having had an abortion.
“There are many cases of women who have had abortions, then nine months
after the child was conceived, around the time that the child would have
been born, the woman goes into a false labour. Biologically she is aware
that she would have been having a child at that time.”
It’s all well and good to condemn abortion when the mother is depressed at
the thought of raising a baby, but does Cardinal Seán have an alternative? I
expect an answer based on better childcare possibilities and monetary
support for single mothers. But he responds quickly with, “one thing that
I’m very focused on right now is how we might market adoption better. I am
realising how negative the attitude is towards adoption. We can say very
glibly, ‘adoption, not abortion’. But when a woman is in a difficult
pregnancy, she doesn’t want to hear that, and she sees adoption as a
continuation of her problems, and that she will be a bad mother by giving
her child away, where the child might be abused or discriminated against. We
need to change that attitude, because otherwise we will never be able to
counter abortion.”
This answer stumps me, because I grew up not knowing any person my own age
who was adopted, and I was told it was a practice of the past. I want to
know why he has such a positive view of adoption. “Growing up here in the
States, we all had friends who were adopted children. In today’s world, many
Americans do not know anyone who was adopted. This is no longer something
that American women do – give a child up for adoption.
“There is one adoption for every hundred abortions, and at the same time you
have all these childless couples who are so anxious for a baby, and many of
them do IVF, where human life is being destroyed in ‘extra embryos’.” How
does he plan to encourage adoption?  “We have to do a better job of showing
the positive side of adoption and making it more user-friendly for the
mother.”
But Cardinal Seán is not a textbook ideology-only pro-lifer, but has vast
experience in the one-to-one care of pregnant women. “My heart is always
with women in difficult pregnancies. Sometimes they are in dire straits.
When I was in Washington, I ran a social service agency where we had a
medical clinic and the people that we served were undocumented, and did not
have access to insurance, and so they were under a lot of pressure to have
abortions. If an illegal immigrant has no insurance, the medical bills cost
thousands of dollars. We arranged for their medical expenses to be taken
care of, and for their pre-natal care to be provided.
“When I was bishop of the West Indies, we started a pre-natal care programme
there to help teenage girls. Before the programme, the West Indies had one
of the highest infant mortality rates, and so over the years, we reduced the
infant mortality rate to zero”.

Offering my congratulations to Cardinal Seán for this great achievement,
which showed great willpower and perseverance, we take a reprieve from
talking about pro-life, we turn our attention to Padre Pio, and compare our
devotion to his fellow Franciscan, the mystic who used to describe himself
as “a simple friar who prays”. He never met Padre Pio, but has celebrated
Mass at his tomb, and visited San Giovanna di Rotondo many times. His
favourite account of St Pio’s intercession goes back to the time that
Blessed John Paul II was Archbishop of Krakow and he wrote a letter to Padre
Pio, asking his prayers for his dear friend Wanda Półtawska. Wanda was a
professor at Krakow University, and was dying of throat cancer. Apparently,
Padre Pio held up the letter from the then Archbishop Wojtyła and said that
the Polish archbishop was destined for great things, and that he would do
his utmost to win a miraculous cure for Wanda. Wanda made a full recovery.
The reason that Cardinal Seán likes this account so much is because, “it’s
about John Paul II in contact with Padre Pio, the two saints coming
together”.
What is it about Padre Pio, the priest, that impresses Cardinal Seán?  “I am
in awe of Padre Pio’s ministry in the Confessional. Much like the Devine
Mercy devotion there is a hunger for mercy in the world. Padre Pio, in the
Confessional, was a manifestation of the merciful Christ. His whole ministry
was healing people’s souls in the Confessional and his concern for the sick
when he arranged for the Hospital for the Relief of Suffering to be built.”
This generation of Catholics will know a re-awakening of Franciscan
spirituality, thanks to Pope Francis. They met four years ago in Buenos
Aires, and have always spoken in Spanish. Cardinal Seán writes to Pope
Francis as often as possible and mentions that since he has been made an
advisor on curial reform: “I feel a certain obligation to keep in constant
contact with the Pope”. But he concedes that “there just hasn’t been much
time” and he is still getting to grips with his new appointment as a super
cardinal. When I suggest that it’s been an exhausting, emotionally-draining
time, he says, “It’s been like trying to drink water from a fire hydrant!”
April has been an exceptionally testing time for Boston, and he has spent
much time in the company of the victims, and tells me that he visited the
little sister of Martin Richard. At the tender age of six, she has lost her
foot and has severe burns.
Throughout these busy weeks, Cardinal Seán has continued to update his blog,
a platform where he showcases positive events in the Church. He dictates his
blog to his secretary, but I want to know why he gives his blog priority,
even during the most demanding of times.
“Everyone talks about the bad things that happen in Boston. My blog gives me
the opportunity to talk about the good things that are happening in Boston.”
We discuss the pros and cons of blogs, that they can be used as tools to
smear others but they can also be places where people can have life-changing
encounters with the Catholic faith. Cardinal O’Malley comes down on the side
that blogs are a good thing, and concludes, “there is so much good to be
accomplished with blogs. Some blogs can be great a great instrument of
Catholic evangelisation.”
We finish our conversation, and walk out to the entrance of the rectory. On
saying our goodbyes, I have an instinct to ask Cardinal O’Malley’s prayers
for a friend of mine who is suffering after an abortion and gets distressed
every week when the day that she had her abortion comes round. “I will, of
course, pray for her. You can be sure that my prayers are with her,” he says
earnestly.
It is a great boon for the pro-lifers of the world, and not just in Ireland,
that Pope Francis has appointed Cardinal O’Malley one of the “super
Cardinals”, or the “G8”. Not just because he has hands on experience in
coming to the aid of pregnant mothers, but because he has resolute
determination to speak out on behalf of small Catholic countries like
Ireland. We can take comfort that with an advisor like Cardinal O’Malley,
pro-life matters will be top of the agenda during Pope Francis’s
pontificate.

This interview appears in the 10th May edition of The Catholic Herald


Mary O’Regan is a journalist based in London and a TV producer on a forthcoming show Extraordinary Faith.

BREAKING NEWS: Cardinal O'Malley will not attend the Boston College graduation because they have not withdrawn the invitation to Enda Kenny who is 'aggressively promoting abortion legislation'

Cardinal O'Malley: "Because the Gospel of Life is the centerpiece of the Church’s social doctrine and because we consider abortion a crime against humanity, the Catholic Bishops of the United States have asked that Catholic institutions not honor government officials or politicians who promote abortion with their laws and policies.

Recently I learned that the Prime Minister of Ireland, the Hon. Mr. Enda Kenny was slated to receive an honorary degree at Boston College’s graduation this year. I am sure that the invitation was made in good faith, long before it came to the attention of the leadership of Boston College that Mr. Kenny is aggressively promoting abortion legislation.  The Irish Bishops have responded to that development by affirming the Church’s teaching that  “the deliberate decision to deprive an innocent human being of life is always morally wrong” and expressed serious concern that the proposed legislation “represents a dramatic and morally unacceptable change to Irish law.” 

Since the university has not withdrawn the invitation and because the Taoiseach has not seen fit to decline, I shall not attend the graduation. It is my ardent hope that Boston College will work to redress the confusion, disappointment and harm caused by not adhering to the Bishops’ directives.  Although I shall not be present to impart the final benediction, I assure the graduates that they are in my prayers on this important day in their lives, and I pray that their studies will prepare them to be heralds of the Church’s Social Gospel and “men and women for others,” especially for the most vulnerable in our midst."

Cardinal O’Malley urges Ireland to stand up to abortion lobby

Cardinal Seán O’Malley has urged Ireland to stand up to the “great pressure” it faces to legislate on abortion, saying it should be proud of its pro-life heritage.

His comments came as Irish MPs prepared to vote on legislation that would allow abortion in cases where the mother is deemed at risk of suicide.

The government claims that the legislation will merely provide “legal clarity” for doctors and codify a Supreme Court ruling that allowed abortion in such cases anyway.
But the country’s bishops’ conference have described the proposal as a “dramatic and morally unacceptable change to Irish law” that would “make the direct and intentional killing of unborn children lawful in Ireland”.

In an exclusive interview with Mary O’Regan in this week’s Catholic Herald Cardinal O’Malley said that changing the law would “encourage” and “condone” abortion.

Cardinal O’Malley said: “Abortion is the taking of an innocent human life; everyone should resist abortion. Ireland has the good fortune, in part thanks to Catholic sensibilities, that her people have been opposed to abortion despite the great pressure that they have come under from secularising forces.”

He continued: “Ireland should be very proud of its pro-life heritage and how traditionally there has been great importance given to human life. Every life counts, and I am very proud that in Ireland protection is given to life that is as vulnerable as the unborn. I hope that Ireland will continue to stand up against the pressures – I know the pressures are there. Pressure to legislate for abortion is a dehumanising force in our world.”

The cardinal, asked if the change in the law would make such a difference as many Irish women travel to Britain for an abortion, said: “The laws have a function of teaching what is right and wrong. And simply because someone is going to do something, does not mean that we have to facilitate it, condone it, or encourage it.”

The Irish bishops’ conference last week condemned the idea that abortion could be a remedy for suicidal depression.

Its statement said: “It is a tragic moment for Irish society when we regard the deliberate destruction of a completely innocent person as an acceptable response to the threat of the preventable death of another person.”

Cardinal O’Malley meanwhile said: “If any woman is suicidal, she must be given treatment for depression. If she has an abortion, there are greater chances that she will be depressed and suicidal as a result of having had an abortion.”

The cardinal also said the Church should do more to promote adoption. “I am realising how negative the attitude is towards adoption… When a woman is in a difficult pregnancy, she sees adoption as a continuation of her problems… We need to change that attitude, because otherwise we will never be able to counter abortion,” he said.

The full interview with Cardinal O’Malley is available in the May 10 print edition of The Catholic Herald.

Margaret Thatcher: the first time she ever saw the Northern Irish Parties unite was when they fought abortion legislation in 1990

Phyllis Bowman wrote the following:

"The only time in the past that a Conservative Government whipped on an abortion amendment was in 1990. A group of Labour MPs sought to introduce an amendment to the Human Fertilisation & Embryology Bill (now Act) to extend the 1967 Abortion Act to Northern Ireland.  Consequently, the Northern Ireland MPs of all parties asked for a joint meeting with Lady (then Mrs.) Thatcher when they stressed that all the political groups, the churches and a huge majority of the people in Northern Ireland, were opposed to the current abortion law. They urged that it should be left to the people of the Province to decide whether they wanted to change the law or not.

Lady Thatcher said it was the first occasion on which she had known the NI Parties to unite on any issue. Consequently, out of deference to the democratic rights of the people of the Province, the Government adopted an official policy opposing the Labour amendment and Conservative MPs were whipped...

Moreover, she certainly was not sympathetic to the pro-life cause. She voted for the Abortion Act in 1967 and subsequently always supported it. However, to be just, she had a great respect for the conscience vote of her MPs... In addition, although she was straightforward about her views, at no time did she ever seek to influence her MPs by announcing how she would vote on an amendment. (As a footnote, I would add that in her memoirs and in speaking publicly, Lady Thatcher has said that she considers she made a tragic mistake in supporting liberal abortion.)"

Francis: Portrait of the Pope as a young man and as a young Jesuit tested in the Dirty War

Just before Christmas 1936, Regina Bergoglio gave birth to her first child, who she named Jorge, which is Spanish for George. As she held her baby boy in the intense sunshine of an Argentinean summer, little did she know that she was nurturing a future Pope.
In 1929 Regina and her husband Mario had emigrated from Piedmont in northern Italy and had started their family in the Americas. Mario toiled on the railway, while Regina became a full-time housewife and devoted her life to her five children. They had a modest existence, being so thrifty that new clothes were seen as dangerously lavish, not once going on holidays and never owning a car.

They were not poor, but were unassuming upper-working-class Italians who considered themselves very fortunate to have secure housing in Flores, an ordinary suburb of Buenos Aires, a city that had its share of squatter settlements and slums. Many of Mario Bergog-lio’s fellow workers on the railroads would have lived in shanty towns.

At the time, migrants from different parts of Argentina and from Europe were trying to eke out an existence in Buenos Aires – or at least get a menial job. Society in Buenos Aires in the 1930s was stubbornly Victorian and priggish. High Victorian fashions were still de rigeur. Even the slightest bad etiquette was frowned upon. People were not easily forgiven for having come from a lower class, and the rich and poor classes painfully chafed against each other. The Bergoglios were different: unlike many of their contemporaries, they were cultured but not obsessed with social climbing.
Regina and Mario could not abide wasting food and ensured that their children cleaned their plates at meal times. Regina was an excellent cook and diligently taught Jorge how to cook all manner of Italian dishes. When he was growing up, on Saturdays Jorge would sit with his mother and listen to opera on the radio. Reminiscing about this he has said: “It was just the most lovely thing.” The Bergoglios were keen to assimilate and did not mix exclusively with other Italians. Also, snubbing the poor and resenting the penurious because they cast shadows of misfortune on the great city of Buenos Aires was not their approach. It was here, in 1940s Buenos Aires, seeing emaciated children go hungry while richer people in furs scorned them for their lowliness, that the future Pope began to abhor snobbery. 

The young Jorge was bookish, busy cultivating his love for literature and dazzled by the colourful local Jewish community, which put on plays. Known for his literary leanings, his chief field of study, however, was chemistry, a subject in which he earned a Master’s degree.

As a young man, he had a wide circle of friends and a girlfriend with whom he danced the tango, until the stirrings of a vocation caused him to break from his sweetheart and give up dancing. He told Francesca Ambrogetti and Sergio Rubin, the authors of his 2010 biography, that his ex-girlfriend “was one of the group of friends I went dancing with. But then I discovered my religious vocation.” He entered the Society of Jesus as a 21-year-old, which was then considered a slightly late vocation. In his early 20s, an unshakable lung infection and lack of the right treatment meant that he lost a lung. He was ordained in December 1969, a few days before he turned 33.

Having impressed his superiors when he was novice master of the San Miguel seminary, he was only 37 when he was elected superior of the Jesuit province of Argentina. His decision-making during this time is the most highly contested period of his biography. Present-day Argentina is still grappling with the memories of the military’s violent rule from 1976 to 1983. Allegations persist that Pope Francis was complicit in the regime of Jorge Rafael Videla. The then Fr Bergoglio was the highest-ranking Jesuit in Buenos Aires and has since been pilloried for not speaking out against the junta’s abuse of power. At the time, army generals were attempting to rid society of people who they suspected were Left-wing subversives. 

What is certain is that during the “Dirty War” he demanded absolute obedience and political neutrality of his priests, something that many of them greatly resented. The Jesuit order was showing cracks because of infighting, as many priests were seduced by a blend of Marxism and Liberation Theology, and rebelled against the traditional nature of a priestly vocation. 

One man who is leading the charge against Pope Francis is journalist Horacio Verbitsky, who in his 2005 book The Silence accuses him of allowing the military to use the Jesuit headquarters as a secret base. Denying this allegation, Pope Francis says he gave a home to dissidents in the Jesuits’ mother house. An even more contentious sequence of events involves two Jesuits, Fr Orlando Yorio and Fr Francisco Jalics, who in the 1970s were evangelising and starting literacy programmes in the shanty town Belén-Bethlehem. The military panicked, believing that such work could spark a rebellion in the slums. Fr Bergoglio gave Fr Yorio and Fr Jalics an order to stop going to Belén-Bethlehem. But a conflict arose between the zealous Fr Yorio and Fr Jalics, who wanted to educate the disadvantaged and their superior, Fr Bergoglio, who didn’t want them to lose their lives. Fr Yorio and Fr Jalics defied Fr Bergoglio and were arrested by the navy in May 1976. Later Fr Yorio claimed that he and Jalics and several youth workers were arrested because Fr Bergoglio “withdrew his protection” from them and this gave the army “a green light” to arrest him. But Pope Francis insisted in his biography that ordering them to stop going to the slums was the only way to ensure they wouldn’t be killed. The then Fr Bergoglio was not a member of the military and, even if he had been, he would have had little power to assuage the generals’ paranoia that there would be a proletarian uprising, aided by energetic young Jesuits who would empower the “subversives”. 

There is also controversy surrounding babies, born to captives, who were covertly adopted by pro-junta families after the mothers were killed. Some claim that in the 1970s Pope Francis was privy to information about these babies who were being taken from their mothers. In 2010, when he was Archbishop of Buenos Aires, he appeared in a court that was uncovering what had happened to the babies. He testified that it wasn’t until 1985 that he knew that the babies of “subversives” were being given to supporters of Videla. 

Fr Bergoglio’s six years as a leader in the Jesuit community were hard on his nerves, and in 1980 he returned to the seminary in San Miguel as rector. Going from provincial superior to rector was both peculiar and seen as somewhat of a self-imposed demotion, but he remained in this post until 1986. He put his culinary talent to full use and cooked for the students. On hearing the compliment that he was a good chef, he replied: “Well, nobody has died yet from my cooking.”

A key awakening in his spiritual life happened in 1985, when he attended a rosary that was being led by Blessed Pope John Paul II. He described it in these words: “In the middle of the prayer I became distracted, looking at the figure of the Pope: his piety, his devotion was a witness… and the time drifted away, and I began to imagine the young priest, the seminarian, the poet, the worker, the child from Wadowice… in the same position in which knelt at that moment, reciting Ave Maria after Ave Maria. His witness struck me… I felt that this man, chosen to lead the Church, was following a path up to his Mother in the sky, a path set out on from his childhood. And I became aware of the density of the words of the Mother of Guadalupe to St Juan Diego: ‘Don’t be afraid, am I not perhaps your mother?’ I understood the presence of Mary in the life of the Pope.”

From that day onwards, Pope Francis has recited the 15 mysteries of the rosary every day. That moment, when he was struck by John Paul II’s example, may have renewed his vim and vigour as a leader, something that had been sorely tested in the 1970s.

In 1992 he was appointed auxiliary bishop of Buenos Aires. In contrast to the Jesuits of the 1970s, the ordinary clergy of the diocese grew fond of their bishop. He did something simple but revolutionary: setting up a phone line that was exclusively for priests who needed to call him and he would encourage them to use it, day or night. Bishop Bergoglio had a strict code of coming in person to the aid of his priests, staying with them in crises, or keeping a bedside vigil with priests who were elderly and in poor health. In contrast to his earlier reputation for being somewhat indifferent to the people subsisting in the shanty towns, he was known in the early 1990s as a bishop who would keep tabs on precisely how his priests were helping poorer parishioners. He spent his days travelling around the diocese, so that he could keep poor people company, help out in soup kitchens and visit Aids victims. His schedule was gruelling and one of his few luxuries was taking refuge in a good novel.

The poverty-stricken children who were his peers when he was a youngster in the 1940s were in his thoughts and he was determined to use his prominence as a bishop to better the lot of the impoverished, as opposed to rubbing shoulders with the Argentinean elite. He eschewed ostentation, showiness and glamour. Journalists dogged his heels, wanting exclusive interviews, and social climbers sought photo opportunities, but with a famously understated smile, and a reserved manner, he refused interviews and walked away from them. This man for all seasons would never be their man. 

I wrote this biography of the Pope's early life for the March 22nd Catholic Herald