The Deplorable Legacy of John Paul II

From . . the tyranny of the bishop of Rome and his detestable enormities, Good Lord, deliver us. (The Great Litany, 1544)

Now that John Paul II is safely in his tomb, perhaps we can relax a little from the old standard, "Speak no ill of the dead." The international fuss made over the death of the pope strikes me as truly inappropriate in the light of his behavior, and I think that it is time for progressive Christians to be forthright in their denunciation of his legacy.

He worked consistently against the right of women to control their own bodies and their own destinies. He was rigidly opposed to both birth control and abortion, and he would not even permit an open discussion about the possibility of ordaining women for ministry.

He revived the animosity of his church toward gay and lesbian people, insisting that they have no right to form partnerships let alone to marry.

He worked to deprive all people of the right to end the artificial prolonging of life even when the personality was long dead.

He encouraged an alliance in this country between his church and the protestant fundamentalists in attempting to give their joint religious views the force of law. These age-old antagonists finally realized that they were both cast in the same mold. They differ only on their views about the death penalty, but I have not yet heard of any bishops threatening to excommunicate politicians who advocate executing criminal offenders, a tactic they have employed with the abortion issue.

He attempted to remove from Catholic colleges and universities all teachers who failed to follow the party line or even to raise questions about the doctrine or practices of the church.

He has concentrated authority in the Vatican at the expense of the national and local manifestations of the church. He clearly mistrusted democracy as far as the Catholic church is concerned.

He refused to take seriously the abuse of children by his clergy, preferring to condemn the media for sensationalizing the issue. He promoted known pedophiles and rewarded bishops who tried to cover up the scandal.

Although he is being praised for his openness to other faiths, especially Judaism, he showed his true colors early in the year 2000 when speaking to the cardinals, bishops, and theologians who make up the Congregation of Faith. He warned the group: "In recent years a mentality has emerged in theological and ecclesial circles which tends to relativize Christ’s revelation and his unique and universal mediation in the order of salvation." He declared that the Roman Catholic Church is the "royal road" to salvation, unlike the incomplete religions of other Christians and non-Christians. He did not seem to understand that it is this exclusive and arrogant attitude that makes anti-Semitism possible.

In the light of John Paul’s destructive legacy, I think it is fair to ask if anything good might be the result of his reign. To that question, I think we can say that the good he produced was the unintended consequence of his attempt to return his church to its pre-Vatican II ways of doing things. The primary good I see is the mobilization of the Catholic laity. In Africa, Catholics are finding ways to worship that are not authorized or are even forbidden by the hierarchy. In Massachusetts, Catholics have taken over some of the parishes that their archbishop attempted to close. In Latin America, Catholics are continuing the tradition of liberation theology in spite opposition by their bishops. Catholics nearly everywhere are practicing birth control and resorting to abortion. Many Catholics have exercised their newly-found self confidence by choosing to worship in other traditions. On this last point, I must say that I consider the migration of Roman Catholics to main line churches to be a fine thing.

Perhaps another unintended positive legacy of John Paul II is the proof he offered that to build loyalty and enthusiasm, the church must use all the public relations techniques employed by those who market anything from pills to politicians. His appearances on television were as good as Ronald Reagan, often seen as the undisputed master of that medium. Like Reagan, on the small screen John Paul came across as the stern father with the kindly demeanor. It will be interesting to see if the cardinals pick another telegenic personalty to lead the church. Other churches to be successful will have to learn John Paul’s techniques.

As I look at the evidence, I think it is a great mistake for Christians of other persuasions to talk about John Paul II as if he were a saint in the universal church. I think that the early Protestants in England were wise to keep reminding themselves to keep aloof from the tyranny of the bishop of Rome and all his destructive tendencies.

Comments

[BeachOfEden]

I agree. If this was the Catholics idea of a Progressive minded Pope..than I'd hate to see their idea of rigid one. Just image what is will be like when Billy graham passes a way.;/

[Susan E. Siens]

I was really pleased to read this analysis of John Paul II's legacy. He was a man of power and authority, and for me those attributes are inimical to spirituality. Humility and marginalization are the hallmarks of a spiritual leader for me, which is why I love the teachings of Jesus Christ, or, preferably, Jeshua bar Joseph. But I have come in my lifetime to realize most people are attracted to the strong man, and the strong man does not always carry a gun.

[F.M. Elias]

When Ronald Reagan passed on, I was horrified by the outpouring of 'what a great guy' and 'what a fine example of patriotism' and 'how he stood fine and tall and made us proud to be Americans.'....
To quote the great oral historian Studs Terkel, we here in America are striken with a great communal Alzheimer's disease. We have forgotten that this man made ketchup a vegetable for our children; those older in our community conveniently ignored that this 'fine actor, once president of the Screen Actors' Guild' ratted out many of his fellow craftspeople during the dark days of the Red Scare and McCarthyism. His malaprop's and faux pas in public with leaders from around the world are too numerous to mention. His 'Star Wars' national defense program was more a joke than a mystery (thank heavens it died); his dismantling of decades of social reform is still reverberating in the lives of people of color, of disabled people, of economically challenged people of women.

And yet, as a former Pres, he was afforded more accolades and false kudo's than I-am-not-sure-what.

Jim, THANK YOU for the Truth (deliberately capitalized) on JP II. Curious how JPI didn't last that long. Does anyone even REMEMBER that there WAS a JP I -an interesting, kind, potentially liberal pope?

I was raised in a very deep Catholic tradition, complete w/12 years of very Catholic education. The very wonderful teachers I had -- Catholic nuns, Christian brothers and priests - made one fatal mistake. They taught me to think and to question. I left the Catholic church in college. I have questioned, challenged, and been completely disgusted with the non answers given by figures of authority. It's not the people - it's the institutions and those who uphold it, refuse to change it - like JP II. Despite the numerous opportunties, despite the obvious openings to make a big difference - the Pope and the cardinals steep themselves in tradition and not reality.
There are plenty of bright and beautiful lights in the persons of nuns, laity, individual priests, within the institution, who personally challenge, question and are completely disgusted with the non answers they get. They have even told me that 'the Pope needs to be re-educated' (JP II).

Now that he's entombed....I guess that won't happen in this incarnation.

Your candid and honest truth really gave me a sense of the reality community that exists (albeit hard to find at times) alongside the pseudo 'faith community' of believers of the Emperor's New Clothes, both religious and secular.

Keep the truth coming.

F. M. Elias