By the way, if at the outset you think that this posting might a simple and easy castigation of the pope, you will be mistaken.
That the pope
leads one of the most powerful, one of the richest, organizations in existence
today is certainly no secret. Political leaders meet with him and give him
his due respect as such a leader. The
Roman Catholic Church commands of billions of dollars and millions of people,
and the Pope is the Supreme Authority of the Roman Catholic Church. I have no problems with the acknowledgement
of such power. I may take issue with the
way the billions of dollars are invested and with certain policies, but that
belongs in a different posting.
History tells us there have been good
popes and bad popes; I do not know why people have problems with that. There have been good queens and kings, and
there have been bad kings and queens.
There have been good emperors, and there have been bad emperors. There have been good presidents and bad
presidents. Yes, the Catholic Church
has made bad decisions, terrible decisions, which have affected millions one
way or another. So have various nations
throughout history.
Through the centuries, the pope has
remained a source of holy awe by Roman Catholics. Respect is both understood and understandable. “Holy awe,” as evidenced by the recent
videos, photographs, and reports, is quite another subject. Surely, in this day and age, we are all
cognizant of what it takes to be a powerful leader of a powerful organization
with powerful dollars behind it. I do
not quibble about the basic business knowledge and acumen needed to lead. I do wonder though how “holiness” can exist
in the same job category that contains the words “power” and “money.”
The pope is considered “infallible”
by his followers. The doctrine of papal
infallibility states that when the pope teaches ex cathedra (“from the
chair”) his teachings are perfect, incontrovertible, and omniscient. Such infallible papal decrees must be
made by the pope, in his role as leader of the whole Church, and they must be
definitive decisions on matters of faith and morals which are binding on the
whole Church. The doctrine was defined at the First Vatican Council
in 1870, although it existed long before 1870. What if
the pope, in his ex cathedra role, declared that half of the Vatican’s wealth should be
distributed to the needy and hungry? I
wonder if the various Vatican counsels would still follow his orders as they
are pledged to. I wonder how long he
would remain pope after such a declaration.
The issue of infallibility of one person
it seems to me is grounded in arrogance and vanity, an arrogance in which one
equates oneself with God, and hence equates with pride which is one of the
Seven Deadly Sins. Over and above any
interpretation of sin, in an era where we are all too familiar with the
frailties of human nature, how can such a proclaimed attribute be taken
seriously?
By the way, I do not lay any blame upon
new Pope Francis personally for this double crown of thorns of infallibility
and holiness. These are responsibilities
contained in the job description, and, let us be honest, it cannot be a job that
very many people want.
However, what is more disconcerting are the
people who need to believe in that infallibility, who need to believe in that
absolute holiness, in that one man's absolute perfection. They need their
leader to be perfect so they can cling to an ideal of a certain type of faith,
actually the same type of blind faith contained in that mob that turned against
Christ within a matter of days.
What about those droves who look upon
the pope, or look upon any leader or teacher, as the perfect avatar of wisdom
and spirituality? We are not talking
about the simple need to be lead; we are talking about that need to be lead by
one who is thought of as perfect, who will give without fail the most profound
and perfect advice.
We look for answers to life’s most
profound questions, and we want those offering up answers to proclaim their words with final authority. We demand guarantees. We demand that they possess that impossible
quality of infallibility. When you think about it, the pope is really only giving people what they want.
However, when we discover that the true
answers in life must be discovered within ourselves, that no one individual
outside of ourselves has the perfect answer, that those perfect answers can
only come about when we dwell, meditate or pray, we become disillusioned. When we realize that we have to “do the work”
ourselves, that what we perceived as the promised answers (the Promised Land?)
are only really words, that disillusionment magnifies. The hordes of people, instead of accepting
responsibility for themselves, for their own souls, basically say to the pope
“Okay, Papa, tell us exactly what to do and we know we will then go to
heaven.” When it is realized that no one
can tell anyone exactly what to do in order to attain the ideal of heaven, a
sense of betrayal follows. The mob
turns.
In the little known Gospel of Thomas,
Jesus is quoted as saying: If you bring
forth what is within you, what you bring forth will save you. If you do not
bring forth what is within you, what you do not bring forth will destroy you.
Buddha admonishes: No one saves us but ourselves. No one can and no one may. We ourselves must walk the path.
The Bhagavad Gita teaches: It is better to live your own destiny imperfectly than to live an imitation of somebody else's life with perfection.
In Luke, Christ assures us: Everyone who seeks, finds.
If you are going to have blind faith in anything, have blind faith in your soul.
References:
First
Vatican Council, "First Dogmatic Constitution on the Church", chapter
4, 9infallibility means more than exemption from actual error; it means exemption from the possibility of error", P. J. Toner, infallibility, Catholic Encyclopedia, 1910.