The Pope is spending the day saying good-bye to his generals. The cardinals evidently have a personal "moment" in which to give their well-wishes (or ask for pardons) to the head of the Catholic Church. For many, it will be the final time they see this man alive. For others, it will be the final time they see this man as "Pope". From the moment his successor is chosen, he becomes "Pope Emeritus"--a title which is confusing, to say the least.
When an academic retires, the person (often) is given "emeritus" status. (I've known several professors, deans, and even a president or two.) It is more than honorary; the people have earned the title through their toil in office, for sure. However, it IS honorary in terms of effects on the world--few people expect more than the occasional "historical remembering" speech from these folks. Even when it appears their wisdom is being tapped, from what I've experienced, their wisdom is largely ignored--however politely.
I imagine it will be so with this retiring Pope.
A bigger question remains for me, as a child of the 60's, brought up in a mega-Catholic household: if the Pope represents the living face of God, on Earth, as we were taught in school, can God retire?
(I am not waxing sarcastic here. I am serious.)
Can God become "emeritus"?
What would that mean, exactly?
For millions of Catholics, the retirement of this Pontiff sends shivers down their spines. Popes normally do not have a certain "shelf life". We were always taught (by nuns;by priests) that "the Pope is Pope and head of the Church until he dies".
God was to determine this trajectory.
If the Pope was weakening, well, that was God's plan..(As masses involved in the pedestrian Church, believing anything less was almost a sin...)
As an adult and an observer of global politics, it seems that what we were taught was only a shadow of the true manipulations going on. This includes the shadow-boxing and scramble for power within Rome--much to my chagrin when realized. Of course, this holds true for all political organizations--as well as spiritual ones.But I digress: we are talking about the Pope, here.
On one hand, I tried to live my life in accordance with the infallibility of the Pope. (Not an easy path, as anyone growing up in the sixties and seventies can attest.) As I worked with people from all over the planet--some in abject poverty and illiteracy, others representing the richest countries on Earth--I began to doubt the Pope's basic understanding of "life in the 20th century"--I don't just mean in the First World locations, either. These were not lessons from books--these were experiences in life.
Issues such as: basic birth control affects poor countries more directly than those places where medical care, child-care and education are readily available; or that women make up fifty-one percent of the world; or that children are at the highest risk of hunger, abuse, and neglect.
How many children have lived horrendous childhoods; suffered agonizing deaths from disease, poverty, or abuse, simply because birth control (NOT ABORTION !) was forbidden by Papal decree? How the issue of abortion might be drastically reduced, altogether, if decent birth control methods were permitted--yet, the Church forbade the most effective forms. "Abstinence" was held up as the greatest birth control method of all--and yet--"abstinence" was something many of the highest clergy couldn't (or wouldn't) indulge in, themselves, even as they remained "unmarried"...(I won't go into the irony of people on picket lines with ugly signs illustrating dying fetuses, being some of the very people who molest children--whether at home or in the backrooms of schools and churches.)
While it isn't just the poor that suffer these hardships, a Pope who was compassionate (and who was in touch with the population he was "leading"), should have, long ago, led children to safety. So far, none have. Not really. Not with strength and the power of God behind them. Not courageously or with ultimate purpose and vigor. Why not? Christ did.
Of course, the Catholic Church, like all human-run organizations, has been involved in a variety of misdeeds through the ages. From the earliest oppression of those who dared to criticize, through the Crusades, the Holocaust and all the other genocides it has been late in raising white hands to halt (including the deaths of women), the Papacy has seemed absolutely more interested in "politics" and "money" than in the needs of the very population most beloved by Jesus, Himself : The poor. The disenfranchised. The criticized. The misunderstood. The oppressed.
Again, I must ask: why?
I was taught that the Pope is on a direct line to God--divinely inspired and divinely chosen. He cannot make a mistake. After being annoited as Pope, whatever he decides for the Church is for the ultimate good of all. (Yet, continued misogyny, homophobia, racism and the tolerance of injustice in its own ranks, prevails.)
Edicts which promote inequality, allow poverty and bring spiritual (as well as emotional) insecurity to the masses, continue to flow from Rome. Historically, the Catholic Church has been no different than any other organized religion--except it has proliferated on a larger scale. Pointing to this as the absolute blessing of God and the clear proof of its Truth begins to wear thin--in my mind.
(It leads one to come to the conclusion that the words of the Christ are not its true mission statement. The words of men running the organization--and their political vices/needs/desires-- seem to be. I wait, with bated breath, praying I am wrong.)
Does this mean that there is no good that the Catholic Church has accomplished? Of course not!
Wherever there are spiritual people--truly spiritually-seeking souls--there is good. Countless generations of saints (and sinners) have found redemption in its ranks. Excellent nuns, priests and brothers, monks and lay-people have toiled for the good of others--choosing lives of unselfish dedication and devotion to a Higher Cause. (But we can find these champions of humanity in other religions, too, can't we?)
Hope is a lifeline for us all. It can lead us out of the suffering of our own, private hells. The best in the Church offer this to the masses--which is why people still come to Church. Why in the poorest countries the Church continues to grow--even today.
Yet, it isn't any of these Saints that seem to rise. It is always, historically, individuals in direct line with the elite, who clothe themselves in velvet and jewels, removed from the common people who support their endeavors. Fear (of loss of salvation; of damnation to Hell) keep the masses in check, still. Fear of "the unknown", especially in turbulent or changing times (When has life on Earth ever been otherwise?), insures that the weakest among us will seek shelter from something "Bigger than themselves". Again, it is the hallmark of most organized religions--the Church isn't alone here. But the Church is claiming the "living Face of God", in Rome. Doesn't God love the lost or heartsick or poor, anymore? Jesus surely did. More importantly, He DID SOMETHING about it.
Even as some Popes of the past have been righteous, there have been the shadow-boxers behind them; the wealthy and political;the power-hungry.This is not the Church Christ spoke of creating when He told his apostles to go out and preach to the world. (At least, in my own limited vision, it doesn't seem so.)
Hey, I could be wrong. I'm no scarlet-cloaked, gold-ringed cardinal with a full-time staff working under me. I'm only a woman. A woman whose family remains loyal, alms bearing and active, to a Church which continually threatens to close down around them and leave them (literally), outside on the sidewalk, in their old age. A Church whose "living face of God" is now retiring...to his mansion and servents and low-key status of "Pope Emeritus", while the rest of us have to keep fighting for our lives; our souls.
When an academic retires, the person (often) is given "emeritus" status. (I've known several professors, deans, and even a president or two.) It is more than honorary; the people have earned the title through their toil in office, for sure. However, it IS honorary in terms of effects on the world--few people expect more than the occasional "historical remembering" speech from these folks. Even when it appears their wisdom is being tapped, from what I've experienced, their wisdom is largely ignored--however politely.
I imagine it will be so with this retiring Pope.
A bigger question remains for me, as a child of the 60's, brought up in a mega-Catholic household: if the Pope represents the living face of God, on Earth, as we were taught in school, can God retire?
(I am not waxing sarcastic here. I am serious.)
Can God become "emeritus"?
What would that mean, exactly?
For millions of Catholics, the retirement of this Pontiff sends shivers down their spines. Popes normally do not have a certain "shelf life". We were always taught (by nuns;by priests) that "the Pope is Pope and head of the Church until he dies".
God was to determine this trajectory.
If the Pope was weakening, well, that was God's plan..(As masses involved in the pedestrian Church, believing anything less was almost a sin...)
As an adult and an observer of global politics, it seems that what we were taught was only a shadow of the true manipulations going on. This includes the shadow-boxing and scramble for power within Rome--much to my chagrin when realized. Of course, this holds true for all political organizations--as well as spiritual ones.But I digress: we are talking about the Pope, here.
On one hand, I tried to live my life in accordance with the infallibility of the Pope. (Not an easy path, as anyone growing up in the sixties and seventies can attest.) As I worked with people from all over the planet--some in abject poverty and illiteracy, others representing the richest countries on Earth--I began to doubt the Pope's basic understanding of "life in the 20th century"--I don't just mean in the First World locations, either. These were not lessons from books--these were experiences in life.
Issues such as: basic birth control affects poor countries more directly than those places where medical care, child-care and education are readily available; or that women make up fifty-one percent of the world; or that children are at the highest risk of hunger, abuse, and neglect.
How many children have lived horrendous childhoods; suffered agonizing deaths from disease, poverty, or abuse, simply because birth control (NOT ABORTION !) was forbidden by Papal decree? How the issue of abortion might be drastically reduced, altogether, if decent birth control methods were permitted--yet, the Church forbade the most effective forms. "Abstinence" was held up as the greatest birth control method of all--and yet--"abstinence" was something many of the highest clergy couldn't (or wouldn't) indulge in, themselves, even as they remained "unmarried"...(I won't go into the irony of people on picket lines with ugly signs illustrating dying fetuses, being some of the very people who molest children--whether at home or in the backrooms of schools and churches.)
While it isn't just the poor that suffer these hardships, a Pope who was compassionate (and who was in touch with the population he was "leading"), should have, long ago, led children to safety. So far, none have. Not really. Not with strength and the power of God behind them. Not courageously or with ultimate purpose and vigor. Why not? Christ did.
Of course, the Catholic Church, like all human-run organizations, has been involved in a variety of misdeeds through the ages. From the earliest oppression of those who dared to criticize, through the Crusades, the Holocaust and all the other genocides it has been late in raising white hands to halt (including the deaths of women), the Papacy has seemed absolutely more interested in "politics" and "money" than in the needs of the very population most beloved by Jesus, Himself : The poor. The disenfranchised. The criticized. The misunderstood. The oppressed.
Again, I must ask: why?
I was taught that the Pope is on a direct line to God--divinely inspired and divinely chosen. He cannot make a mistake. After being annoited as Pope, whatever he decides for the Church is for the ultimate good of all. (Yet, continued misogyny, homophobia, racism and the tolerance of injustice in its own ranks, prevails.)
Edicts which promote inequality, allow poverty and bring spiritual (as well as emotional) insecurity to the masses, continue to flow from Rome. Historically, the Catholic Church has been no different than any other organized religion--except it has proliferated on a larger scale. Pointing to this as the absolute blessing of God and the clear proof of its Truth begins to wear thin--in my mind.
(It leads one to come to the conclusion that the words of the Christ are not its true mission statement. The words of men running the organization--and their political vices/needs/desires-- seem to be. I wait, with bated breath, praying I am wrong.)
Does this mean that there is no good that the Catholic Church has accomplished? Of course not!
Wherever there are spiritual people--truly spiritually-seeking souls--there is good. Countless generations of saints (and sinners) have found redemption in its ranks. Excellent nuns, priests and brothers, monks and lay-people have toiled for the good of others--choosing lives of unselfish dedication and devotion to a Higher Cause. (But we can find these champions of humanity in other religions, too, can't we?)
Hope is a lifeline for us all. It can lead us out of the suffering of our own, private hells. The best in the Church offer this to the masses--which is why people still come to Church. Why in the poorest countries the Church continues to grow--even today.
Yet, it isn't any of these Saints that seem to rise. It is always, historically, individuals in direct line with the elite, who clothe themselves in velvet and jewels, removed from the common people who support their endeavors. Fear (of loss of salvation; of damnation to Hell) keep the masses in check, still. Fear of "the unknown", especially in turbulent or changing times (When has life on Earth ever been otherwise?), insures that the weakest among us will seek shelter from something "Bigger than themselves". Again, it is the hallmark of most organized religions--the Church isn't alone here. But the Church is claiming the "living Face of God", in Rome. Doesn't God love the lost or heartsick or poor, anymore? Jesus surely did. More importantly, He DID SOMETHING about it.
Even as some Popes of the past have been righteous, there have been the shadow-boxers behind them; the wealthy and political;the power-hungry.This is not the Church Christ spoke of creating when He told his apostles to go out and preach to the world. (At least, in my own limited vision, it doesn't seem so.)
Hey, I could be wrong. I'm no scarlet-cloaked, gold-ringed cardinal with a full-time staff working under me. I'm only a woman. A woman whose family remains loyal, alms bearing and active, to a Church which continually threatens to close down around them and leave them (literally), outside on the sidewalk, in their old age. A Church whose "living face of God" is now retiring...to his mansion and servents and low-key status of "Pope Emeritus", while the rest of us have to keep fighting for our lives; our souls.
No comments:
Post a Comment