Tuesday, April 05, 2005 |
The Price of Infallibility |
Tom Cahill has an op-ed piece in the NYT today that addresses the true legacy of Pope John Paul II in very frank, and I felt, quite realistic terms.
But John Paul II's most lasting legacy to Catholicism will come from the episcopal appointments he made. In order to have been named a bishop, a priest must have been seen to be absolutely opposed to masturbation, premarital sex, birth control (including condoms used to prevent the spread of AIDS), abortion, divorce, homosexual relations, married priests, female priests and any hint of Marxism. It is nearly impossible to find men who subscribe wholeheartedly to this entire catalogue of certitudes; as a result the ranks of the episcopate are filled with mindless sycophants and intellectual incompetents. The good priests have been passed over; and not a few, in their growing frustration as the pontificate of John Paul II stretched on, left the priesthood to seek fulfillment elsewhere.
The situation is dire. Anyone can walk into a Catholic church on a Sunday and see pews, once filled to bursting, now sparsely populated with gray heads. And there is no other solution for the church but to begin again, as if it were the church of the catacombs, an oddball minority sect in a world of casual cruelty and unbending empire that gathered adherents because it was so unlike the surrounding society.
Sadly, John Paul II represented a different tradition, one of aggressive papalism. Whereas John XXIII endeavored simply to show the validity of church teaching rather than to issue condemnations, John Paul II was an enthusiastic condemner. Yes, he will surely be remembered as one of the few great political figures of our age, a man of physical and moral courage more responsible than any other for bringing down the oppressive, antihuman Communism of Eastern Europe. But he was not a great religious figure. How could he be? He may, in time to come, be credited with destroying his church. |
posted by Broadsheet @ 9:17 AM |
|
3 Editorial Opinions: |
-
If Frontline replays the episode on John Paul, it's well worth watching:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/pope/
very probing analysis in a week of nothing but blind praise. Although I think it really soft peddled his clamping down on Liberation Theology (or rather, paid too much creedence to the words of apologists who blamed it on bad advice from conservative bishops). Not to say that Liberation Theology was at best, very problematic to a church that tries to maintain some seperation of church and state (emphasis on "some"). But it did shed some light on the Pope willing to turn a blind eye to the sufferings and atrocities against the poor due to an unwavering commitment against perceived Marxist influence... from a man apparantly noted for his brilliant intellect.
-
(Claps back of hand to forehead) It IS difficult, being infallible...
-
I was more struck (negatively of course) by his ability to turn a blind eye on AIDS, women, and human sexuality in general. I was even more struck by his lack of leadership / accountability when it came to exposing the ranks of pedophiles within the Church.
Brilliant? Yes Humanitarian? Wanna Be Political Leader? Definitely Celebrity Spokesperson? See Above Hypocrite? Most certainly
|
|
<< Home |
|
|
|
If Frontline replays the episode on John Paul, it's well worth watching:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/pope/
very probing analysis in a week of nothing but blind praise. Although I think it really soft peddled his clamping down on Liberation Theology (or rather, paid too much creedence to the words of apologists who blamed it on bad advice from conservative bishops). Not to say that Liberation Theology was at best, very problematic to a church that tries to maintain some seperation of church and state (emphasis on "some"). But it did shed some light on the Pope willing to turn a blind eye to the sufferings and atrocities against the poor due to an unwavering commitment against perceived Marxist influence... from a man apparantly noted for his brilliant intellect.