A pope can be challenged. He makes claims to
being infallible, but few people these days actually believe that. In
the first place, the doctrine of infallibility is only intended to apply to
times when the pope speaks officially on doctrine, “ex cathedra.” And
only twice has it been invoked. The first time was in 1854, when
Pius IX declared that Mary was born without having inherited the sin of Adam –
the notion of so-called “immaculate conception,” frequently misunderstood to
refer to Christ’s conception. The second time was in 1950, when Pius
XII declared that Mary entered Heaven in bodily form. Whether she died first is
left open to question.
Popes can and do make mistakes at other times, but if you
are a catholic you are required to believe without question that these two
events took place. Pius XII, labeled “Hitler’s Pope” by his
detractors for his decision to go easy on Hitler rather than risk the loss of
church property and authority, was quite specific on the doctrine of
infallibility. “(I)f anyone,” he declared, “which
God forbid, should dare willfully to deny or to call into doubt that which We
(sic - capital letter) have defined, let him know that he has fallen away
completely from the divine and Catholic Faith.”
Times change. Here we are in 2016 and Francis,
the current pope, issues a book length guideline on family life under the
title, Amoris Laetitia. We all know people have been
leaving the church in droves, not over doctrinal conflicts, which most people
seem to be able to leave to their “betters” in the hierarchy. But
over what is roundly perceived to be unrealistic demands on their
behavior. In an age when half the marriages end in divorce in many
modern nations, being told you can no longer have access to the sacraments because you've divorced and remarried strikes many as cruel. Traditionalists insist rules are rules and
the church’s truth cannot be made subject to the ebb and flow of cultural
norms. Modernists, on the other hand, argue we learn as we live, and
while some things cannot change (the divinity of Christ and his resurrection,
for example, or the importance of charity and compassion), common practices
which do not affect one’s faith may. And here is where Pope Francis
has tuned in. Many traditionalist bishops have urged that communion
be denied to legislators who support candidates who support a woman’s right to
an abortion, for example. But in Amoris Laetitia,
footnote 351, Francis writes, “I would also
point out that the Eucharist is not a prize for the perfect, but a powerful
medicine and nourishment for the weak'.”
 |
Cardinal Burke (center, in red)
|
This move on Francis’ part has many conservatives in the
church and traditionalists in the hierarchy up in arms. In June of this
year a group of Catholic scholars, 45 of them, addressed a letter to the cardinals asking them to help get the pope to backpedal on these efforts to reform the church from within. Four Cardinals: Burke, Caffara, Brandmüller and Meisner responded
by addressing the pope with what is called a dubia, or a request for clarification. Five dubia, actually. They are listed here. Basically,
they ask for clarification on the old questions of whether divorce is to be
allowed, and whether a person who divorces is not committing adultery when
remarrying and how one is supposed to reconcile the teachings of the church
with one’s individual conscience.
Francis has chosen, so far at least, not to reply. To
put a positive spin on his silence, the cardinals are suggesting it is a signal
that the issue should be reflected upon some more before proceeding.
Those who want to celebrate this pope as a liberal or a
modernizer seize on his welcome focus on pastoral care over the rigidity of
doctrine and the policing of the people in the pews. But what you
find in reading Amoris Laetitia is unmistakeably a restating
of the old rules – marriage is forever, sex is for the purpose of reproduction,
and one does not mess with Mother Nature. In other words, no sex
outside of marriage, no gay sex, no gay marriage, and put a stop to sex changes
right now.
What’s a progressive to do? We're in the same boat with Hillary
Clinton supporters, who wish she had won out against von Clownstick, knowing all the while it
would only have meant more corporate control, more military solutions, more of
the same old same old. With the pope, you get these wonderful
moments when he expresses personal humility, like that moment in the plane when
he mused, “Who am I to judge?” But then you get this rehashing of
the medieval notion that sex is the basis of morality, women are ultimately
subordinate to men, and homosexuality is “inherently evil.” One is admonished to love the sinner, but hate the sin, and your protestations that your love is not sin fall on deaf ears.
“Progressive” as he may at first appear relative to the likes of Cardinal Burke, famous for his silks and satins, and his embrace of the good old days when the mass was in Latin, performed by an elitist clique of men with special access to the deity, Francis is still the head of a ruthlessly authoritarian institution. Ironically, because he is pope, there are people in the church farther to the right than Attila the Hun who would punish these four cardinals for even questioning the authority of the pope in the first place. Sort that all out, I dare you.
“Progressive” as he may at first appear relative to the likes of Cardinal Burke, famous for his silks and satins, and his embrace of the good old days when the mass was in Latin, performed by an elitist clique of men with special access to the deity, Francis is still the head of a ruthlessly authoritarian institution. Ironically, because he is pope, there are people in the church farther to the right than Attila the Hun who would punish these four cardinals for even questioning the authority of the pope in the first place. Sort that all out, I dare you.
But to the point. How, I ask you, does one go through life hating the good within you without falling apart, knowing in your heart of hearts that homosexual love, like any other form of love, is a beautiful thing, that
it enhances and does not detract from the inclination to charity and
compassion, generosity and caring? And how does one get through life undamaged if, after marrying badly out of youthful ignorance and inexperience, you know you will never be able to use that experience to give yourself a second chance at companionship and family?
The Roman Catholic Church has had a number of times in its
history when it revealed its stunning imperfections for all to see. The
selling of indulgences to build St. Peter’s led to the Reformation. The
hypocrisy of the church’s support for the powers that be in the slave-owning
societies of Brazil and the United States, among other places, and for tyrannies
in Latin America and elsewhere help to explain the appeal of Marxism and
“godless communism.”
And today? This apparently lovely decent man I
take Jorge Mario Bergoglio to be, who expends great effort trying to get the
church to spend less time on ritual and ceremony and finger-pointing and
shaming and more on pastoral care and embracing the poor and the outlier, tries
an end-run around the traditionalists with Amoris Laetitia. It’s
basically an appeal for flexibility, for making the church a bigger, more
inclusive port in the storm. But the conservatives seize upon his strategy of
using ambiguity, and call him on it. In forcing him into a corner, they reveal he was doing little more than adjusting the deck chairs on the Titanic in the first
place. This is not the pope speaking ex cathedra. It's the pope
speaking as a man, fallible and seeking. What the cardinals are clearly
longing for is the good old days when the pope had no doubts. They want
their daddy back the way he was when he had all the answers.
How very much a matter of the zeitgeist. America wants
its Boss-Man - never mind his imperfections and limitations. Hungary and
Austria are moving toward fascism and the rest of Europe circles the wagons as well against the
imagined Muslim invader. And the church wants this pope of theirs to cut
it out with all that uncertainty of his. Get with the drill.
I’d love to be able to like the Roman Catholic Church. When
she’s good, she’s very very good. A source for schools and hospitals
and countless numbers of caring priests and other religious doing their best to
relieve pain and suffering. We feminize her. Call her "Mother
Church." See her as warm and embracing.
But when she’s bad, she’s worse than horrid. And not
feminine at all. She's more like daddy at his pig-headed best, driving down the road too proud to
ask directions.
I remember how I used to pepper my mother with questions and hear her say, "Ask your father." I did. And he always had all the answers.
I also remember the time when I came across an old Model T
in an empty field not far from my house. I used to pretend to drive it,
but for years my legs were too short to reach the pedals. And by the time they did, the engine was missing.
Eventually, somebody came and towed her away.
photo credits:
No comments:
Post a Comment