DeoOmnisGloria.com

The Secular vs. the Mystical in the choice of Pope

It always fascinates me to see the media feel free to offer their suggestions for the next pope. First, most of the media aren’t Catholic and only see the pope in terms of his secular power – typically they view the Church as an organization that must be sustained by the pope and is in real danger of becoming non-existent if the wrong pope is chosen (I suggest they read some history). Second, their suggestions tend to focus not on the pope’s role as a spiritual leader, but his role in either “making the Church relevant” or “bringing about change” both of which are euphemisms for ignoring God and allowing such things as contraception, homosexuality, or the atrocity of abortion.

The latest contribution comes from a liberal think tank’s publication Foreign Policy (by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace). The January/February 2004 magazine features an article by Mr. R. Scott Appleby URGENT: Job Description for the Next Pope and breaks out what the next pope needs to accomplish. I could not let this article go by without comment. I won’t bore you with all of the details, but the essence of the article is that Mr. Appleby knows the roles and responsibilities of the new pope as well as the qualities he must have. Let’s examine the evidence.

First he states (rather boldly):

Advocacy of human rights, including the crucial right of religious freedom, must remain the central message of Roman Catholicism to the world.

Pardon me, Mr. Appleby, but Christ Crucified is the central message of the Catholic Church to the world. Human rights are important, and Pope John Paul II has done an extraordinary job working for them, but they are nothing compared to the mission of proclaiming the Gospel. This section is titled “The Challenge of Secularism” and makes some decent points on how the world currently views religion, but Mr. Appleby seems to view the pope as a purely political figure whose biggest reason for existence is human rights. The pope’s reason for existence, however, is to lead the faithful to Christ.

The next accomplishment involves the “Challenge of Islam.” It is in this section that I am most greatly offended:

Certainly, the next pope must preserve and extend the Catholic realignment inaugurated by the Second Vatican Council and advocated by John Paul II – the realignment from state to civil society, from theocracy to democracy, from religious exclusivism to religious freedom.

I’ll refrain from four-letter words, but the Church is not a democracy and won’t ever be. This is a classic misunderstanding by liberally-oriented journalists (is that PC enough?). They consistently argue that the Church should be run by the masses. Wrong. We can simply look at the confusion and constant division that plagues protestant churches to see the eventual effects of this type of church government. Our Church is run by Christ, The High Priest, and it is a theocracy of sorts (though mystically, rather than worldly). This second section is quite odd. This quote perhaps best explains Mr. Appleby’s views (it is highlighted in the magazine):

To allay such fears [of “a global culture war pitting” Catholicism and Islam “against the enlightened forces of the democratic and liberalized rich nations"], the next pope must be the architect of a Christian-Muslim dialogue that fosters alternatives to policies and programs that violate the principles of Catholic social teaching. These principles include the preferential option of the poor, the sanctity of human life, and the need to formulate policies serving the common good rather than narrow interests.

This blows me away. Mr. Appleby seems to be suggesting that Catholics change their views on everything from the poor to human life in order to “allay” the fears of “democratic and liberalized rich nations.” What? This is another secular mistake: the notion that the pope can simply change his mind on abortion or contraception. The pope cannot. God decided certain things long ago that cannot be negotiated or altered in order to make mere men happy. It’s important for the secular world to understand that abortion will always be wrong. Contraception will always be a grave sin. The poor will never be seen as less than they are. And sin will always be sin, no matter how much you try to make it “okay”. This is the nature of reality. We often ignore reality for an edited version, for example ‘scientific reality’ that ignores the spiritual realities of life. The Catholic Church does not do this. Sorry again, Mr. Appleby.

Finally, he again shows his real problem with the Church: her moral stance on current issues. Mr. Appleby suggests that the pope’s clear position on bioethical issues could be improved if the pope would work more closely with research groups at American Catholic colleges. He is basically suggesting that the Church’s policies against using fetal tissue, in particular, are simply a factor of the Church’s lack of scientific knowledge. This section ends with this gem:

The next pope must exercise far-sighted intellectual leadership in this critical task of updating Catholic theory by scrutinizing contemporary practices and rapidly changing ethical horizons. The Church cannot afford to pontificate from a dated platform of knowledge.

Listen, ethics are not based on scientific “knowledge” but on God’s design of the world; and ethics don’t change, especially not “rapidly.” Unfortunately for Mr. Appleby, the issues he likes will always be unethical (he really doesn’t like the condemnation of using fetal tissue from abortions and miscarriages).

At the end of this stunningly secular article, Mr. Appleby is generous enough to give us the qualities the next pope must possess. My favorite is his insistence that the next pope must have an intellect formed not just by Catholic philosophy and theology, but also “modern politics, economics, and science.” In other words, Catholic philosophy and theology isn’t modern and it isn’t enough to run the Catholic Church. Good grief. Note to Foreign Policy: next time you have someone write an article on the Catholic Church, they should actually understand the role of the Church in the world and the way the Church perceives herself – it wouldn’t be a bad idea to pick a practicing Catholic, either.

To give Mr. Appleby a break, the entire article isn’t rubbish (he does acknowledge the Holy Spirit in the end). But the end really crushed me: Mr. Appleby is the “director of the Joan B. Kroc Institute for International Peace Studies at the University of Notre Dame.” Is nothing sacred?

God bless,
Jay

Posted by Jay at January 16, 2004 04:17 PM | TrackBack