Word Up

John Allen on events in Rome:

Inside the Vatican, there are naturally different views about what to make of recent events.

Vatican personnel are unanimous in the conviction that John Paul II has been a historically important pope, and that his determination to fulfill the mission God has given him is a powerful spiritual witness. At the same time, some have long harbored doubts about what they see as the (potentially inadvertent) personalization of the papacy under John Paul -- his pop-star status, his travels, his grand events in St. Peter's Square, the very personal nature of some of his canonizations and beatifications, the way his personal spiritual tastes (such as the Divine Mercy devotion associated with Polish St. Faustina Kowalska) have been elevated as normative, and the way the pope pronounces on so many matters, risking confusion between personal commentary and magisterial teaching.

An associated concern is that the "cult of celebrity" around John Paul II projects a distorted image to the outside world, as if the church's positions, whether on gay marriage or the universality of salvation through Christ, boil down to personal opinions of the pope rather than the teaching of scripture and tradition, transmitted and upheld by the whole church.

People who share these concerns, including some inside the Vatican, find themselves wondering if part of the providential logic for the pope's physical struggles may be to remind the world that the Catholic Church is more than one man, and that the pope -- any pope -- is principally important for what he represents, not what he does or says.

No one in the Vatican, and few Catholics anywhere, are eager to say this out loud, because it can seem like taking pleasure in the pope's suffering. To be clear, I have heard no one in the Vatican who is glad that John Paul is experiencing difficulty. Everyone I know prays fervently for his full recovery.

At the same time, it's a natural Catholic instinct to ask why the God of history would allow the Holy Father to experience these trials in such a protracted, public way. Certainly his witness to the redemptive value of suffering, and to the dignity of human life, may be an important part of the answer. But also in the mix, according to some tentative views expressed more in whispers than in booming voices, may be a reminder that ultimately Jesus Christ, not the pope, is the head of the church, and that the church's capacity to teach, preach and govern does not -- and cannot -- depend upon any one person.

No doubt the first to affirm that point would be John Paul himself.

Comments

[al]

Its interesting to consider this framing of the issue, with Allen's recent remarks on the 4 factions in the Vatican (which I believe are manifestly tendentious, relegating Ratzinger's "faction" to a "defend the borders"--why not just say siege mentality, and the Natural Law in the public sphere "group" as integrists--just a hairs breadth from integralists), and his urging for Catholics to "write their Cardinals" in advance of the next conclave.

It makes one wonder how to take this admonition "and the way the pope pronounces on so many matters, risking confusion between personal commentary and magisterial teaching."

The reality, is that, cultivation of cult of personality aside, the meme that the Pope's "conservatism" and "reactionariness" is what accounts for the flauting of the spirit of Vatican II, is a propoganda propogated entirely by the likes of the National Catholic Reporter, and its allies.

No doubt there is some shrewdness in not explicitly disavowing this on the Pope's part, but its disingenuous for Allen to present this in a vacuum, as if the pages from which he writes have nothing to do with the creation of this perception, and dissemination of this to the main stream media.

[Eutychus Fell]

One of the beauties of the Catholic Church, to me anyway, is that there doesn't seem to be a sense of rushing headlong to meet history that I felt as a Methodist. I'm all for letting John Paul II's tenure play out as it will & if the Vatican slows or decisions are left unmade... it won't be forever so.

[stuart chessman]

A very insightful commentary by Mr. Allen! these anonymous "voices" get to the heart of the matter.

But I' m sure there won't be same groundswell of support for his "objectivity" on this one!!

[Father Wilson]

Very interesting; very insightful.

[BenYachov(Jim Scott 4th)]

I must admit this is a better way to put it than Bill Buckley's public abstention from praying for the Pope's recovery.

[Richard]

Hello Al,

Generally (like most of us here) I consider Allen to be reasonably even-handed and possessed of solid insights as to how the Vatican works.

But I must say "amen" to every single word in your post. Well said.

[Maureen]

I'm not sure I like the way he put it, but it's a perfectly good point. Nobody wants the Church to be a cult of personality about anyone but Jesus Christ and the other two Persons involved. ;)

But anyway, it seems as if any great leader in Church history who is loved by multitudes gets to suffer big time at the end of his or her life. Think of Paul. Think of Joan of Arc. Think of the martyrs. It's a great gift to be invited to share Christ's suffering. To do it right before death can be the express lane to Heaven. But yes, one reason the great saints suffer is to help them get over their faults -- polish up the mirror. And yes, the suffering of the great are often supposed to be instructive for those of us who are not so great.

Of course, with all that instructing us to pray not to be put to the test, I think Christ was aware that suffering's a gift generally greeted as enthusiastically as a kid finding socks and long underwear under the Christmas tree.... ;)

[broed]

Should the Pope be more contemplative, or more active? Even a mystic? Should the holder of the office be a devotee of specific customs?

What's wrong with the greatest among us being like the youngest?

Consider the Last Supper when Peter, the greatest (or holder of the church office, anyway) went through John, the youngest (who died last, anyway) who had his head on the heart of Jesus, to ask who He was talking about the one to betray Him.

Likewise the contemplative Mary and active Martha need each other.

John gets to the empty tomb first, but defers to Peter to enter first, yet John sees and believes.

On the Sea of Galilee, John sees Jesus on the shore and says "It's the Lord!" but Peter jumps in and swims to Him.

Maybe the holder of the office (and the one who takes action) needs to go through the contemplative to get to the heart of Jesus.

[R Lugari]

What Mr. Allen wrote was really nothing that we haven't heard before. What got me, and what I commented on in my blog, was the notion of lobbying your neighborhood cardinal. It sure doesn't make sense to me.

[Jason]

The Pope is a person, not an office. Yes, he inhabits an office, but an office is not our father, a person is. When your father strives to give you everything you need, you love him as a person, not as an office.

Would we prefer a distant Pope who is our king rather than our father?

[Radactrice]

No matter how beloved Pope John Paul II is, he still remains a mortal man and therefore capable of making errors in judgement on non-salvific matters. History will judge if there was a "cult of celebrity" that surrounded him and if that helped or hindered the way the faith is viewed. I'm sure that Allen is reporting accurately what he has learned within the Vatican.

[R Lugari]

The "cult of celebrity" concern really is a non-issue. History will judge the Holy Father on his actions and intentions, just as God will. The only difference is that only God’s judgment matters. St. Bernard of Clairvaux and St. Francis of Assisi both had a “cult of personality” in their day. Both were very sought after by leaders who desired their counsel and individuals who just wanted to be near their holy example. The entire Church Militant essentially canonized them before they died. The Holy Father is in good company.

[BenYachov(Jim Scott 4th)]

Even Popes who were proclaimed Saints or should have be did questionalble things. St Pius V authorized the use of torture against heretics & even attended sessions involving torture. Pius IX took that baptised Jewish boy away from his parents etc.

[Radactrice]

This Pope has been synonymous with the Catholic Church in the minds of most non-Catholics and Catholics as well for so many years, it is hard to imagine a Church that is not reflective of, as Allen puts it, "his personal spiritual tastes," among other things. But once he is gone (and barring the Second Coming, he will die sooner or later), there will be a new pope with a new set of concerns and priorities. No matter if the new pope is more conservative, less conservative, just the same conservative as JPII, his pontificate will have a different flavor, a different charism. It is highly improbable (not impossible, but highly improbable) that the next pontiff will spend his entire rule trying to duplicate that of JPII. All of us are going to experience changes and no matter where on the spectrum of liberal to conservative you fall, there are bound to be changes that will cause our hearts to rejoice as well as changes that we would not have made if we were the pope. The essentials of the faith will not change, but the external view of the Vatican and its "personality" most certainly will.

[PMC]

It's a "natural Catholic instinct to ask why the God of history would allow the Holy Father to experience these trials in such a protracted, public way"? News to me. I would have thought a natural Catholic instinct would be to assume that the Pope's suffering is not in vain.

[Liam]

Well, there is an issue about the cult of celebrity in the Roman way, but not quite the one Allen expands upon.

Roman society from the days of the Republic was generally cool to religious enthusiasm and the cult of celebrity. This cultural preference has a long pedigree, and definitely shaped how prelates are cultivated and promoted in the Catholic church. Charisma is tolerated most when it is separated from juridical power: it's the Roman way of checks and balances. Not rigid, though: it's a preference. The dull but technically solid and reliable administrator is more likely to be promoted to become pastor (and then bishop) than the charismatic curate, who may be given interestin assignments to test how his charisma holds up under different circumstances, and to avoid having the people become too attached to him. Et cet.

Pudential concerns from this perspective about this Pope's charisma have been emanating from old curial hands since 1979.

[Whitcomb]

This pope was an actor and poet in his youth, so it's not surprising that he would have a grand sense of the world stage. All great leaders possess this quality. I do not mean that he is a ham or that he craves celebrity. I mean that besides his spiritual gifts he has an understanding of history. Recall how the pope, visiting Poland after the authorities there had crushed the Solidarity labor union, refused to be cowed by General Jaruzelski and, by his presence and prayers, gave renewed hope to the Polish people. It was Jaruzelski who was sweating after his meetings with JPII.

This pope has been a charismatic figure, an evangelizer, someone eager to engage the world.

[GetALifeAgain]

Amen, Amy.