Pages

Tuesday, February 19, 2013

On Benedict XVI's Resignation

There has been a great deal of commotion over the recent announcement that the Holy Father, Benedict XVI, will be resigning his position as Bishop of Rome and Supreme Pontiff of the Catholic Church.  Thus far, I have avoided commenting on the situation, and I do not have very much to add to what has already been said by other commentators out there in the blogosphere.  But I have thought of a few things that I want to share, and some recent postings on such infamous websites as the National Catholic Reporter have inspired me to finally put something up on this site.


I was both surprised and saddened by the Holy Father’s announcement.  Having grown up through the pontificate of John Paul II, who physically deteriorated to the point of having effectively no command of his papacy, it seemed unimaginable that Benedict XVI would choose to resign for seemingly personal reasons.  I have since come to think that there must be health reasons that have compelled the Holy Father to come to his decision to resign.  Indeed, he has looked exceedingly weak in recent photographs, and apparently injured himself on one of his recent trips abroad.

Of course, at the same time, I do not begrudge the Holy Father’s decision to abdicate.  It was rumored that he had requested leave of the Holy Office at the end of John Paul II’s reign with the hope he would be reassigned to the Vatican Library or some other “academic” post.  This request was obviously denied.  I suspect Benedict XVI never wanted to be elected pope, but only accepted given the expectations of so many within the College that he would assume the Throne of Saint Peter.

Benedict XVI’s papacy has been, without a doubt, a smashing success.  It is true that he has been somewhat slow and obtuse about the abuse scandal, but I am not certain what more he could have done than what he, and other princes of the Church, actually did.  Nevertheless, we have much to celebrate: the clarity of his theological teachings; his encyclicals on the theological virtues (which will sadly go incomplete); his efforts to reach a rapprochement with the Society of Saint Pius X; his clarification on the legacy and interpretation of Vatican II; his reestablishment of traditional music, vestments, and liturgical practices; his ecumenical efforts, especially with the Orthodox (in particular, the Russians) and the Anglicans (three cheers for the Ordinariate!); the new English translation of the Novus Ordo; his episcopal assignments; his movement to reestablish orthodoxy in our seminaries and religious orders, especially amongst religious sisters and nuns; and finally, his leadership on such important issues as modernism, secularism, the decline of Western civilization, and the threat of radical Islam. (Orthodox priest, Fr. Johannes Jacobse, has written a fantastic piece on this last accomplishment and its relationship to the Regensburg Address.  Check it out.)  The list could go on and on!

Yet, while the Holy Father has accomplished a great deal, it has not been without difficulty.  The Vatican elite and the curial establishment are never exactly excited about reform, especially when it comes connected with a reinvigorated traditionalism.  Prominent members of the laity, especially politicians like Nancy Pelosi, and the popular media have been a thorn in his side, as have religious leaders.  Remember the hullabaloo over the Good Friday prayers in the 1962 Missale Romanum?  The pope is easily misunderstand and labels intended to be derogatory (“very conservative” or “reactionary”) are frequently thrown about by his opponents.  (J. L. Liedl has written an interesting article about this phenomenon over at Ethika Politka.)

The situation has improved little with the news of Benedict XVI’s resignation.  The whole situation has turned into a media frenzy, with a great deal of miscommunication and misunderstanding being spread by such eminent outlets as the New York Times, which seems intent on politicizing the whole ordeal by focusing on the sex abuse scandals.  Others have discussed whether this whole thing is smoke and mirrors—an effort to keep the pope safe from the reaches of the International Criminal Court.  Of course, this latter suggestion is beyond ignorant; the Holy Father already possess immunity as the sovereign of the Vatican City State, and if media attention were something he sought to avoid, he would have sooner abandoned ship, as it were.  And if the charges were personally directed against him, they would have surfaced by now.

Two big questions now remain.  First, what will become of Benedict XVI?  Second, who will be his successor?  As to the first question, I suspect the Holy Father will do as he has already announced: retire to a convent for prayer, meditation, and study.  My guess is he will avoid publishing anything further, or at least wait until his successor has had time to establish the tenor of his own pontificate.  I should hope that (soon to be) Ratzinger will complete his work on the theological virtues.  We may have to wait until his demise to read what he has to say, but it is bound to be enlightening!

The second question, of course, is what everyone is now focusing on.  A recently article from the National Catholic Reporter went through the “pros” and “cons” of a number of candidates: Scola, Ouellet, Sandri, Erdo, Turkson, and Dolan—to name a few.  Such speculation can only go so far.  As during the last conclave, there is a hope that the new pope will come from the global South.  This is a possibility.  If I had to bet where in the global South, I would guess Africa.  The theological tendencies of the Latin Americans would be too troublesome.  The African hierarchs are rock solid when it comes to the social issues that are at the forefront of public discourse, and they frequently are unafraid to defend the Truth as taught by the Church.  As much as I would love to see Cardinals Dolan or Burke as pope, this is also unlikely.  An American pope will be unlikely until such time as America is no longer a hegemonic power.  Of course, with another four years of the Obama Administration, this may be a reality sooner rather than later.

Earlier today, I read an article suggesting that Sean Cardinal O’Malley, the Archbishop of Boston, might be papabile.  There is certainly a strong case for why he would be an attractive candidate.  He is not too old and seems to be in good health.  He is a Capuchin friar and exceedingly modest.  He has suberb pro-life credentials.  He is one of the few church leaders (perhaps along with Cardinal Schönborn, Archbishop of Vienna) to have dealt head-on (and effectively) with the abuse scandals.  And he has done a great deal of good in Boston itself, what with its relatively full archdiocesan seminary, and the financial restructuring of parishes into a leaner, more effective “machine.”  At the same time though, O’Malley is a little distant.  Personally, I remain unconvinced as to his liturgical and theological conservatism.  This is especially disconcerting, since it is essential that Benedict XVI’s “reform of the reform” of the Latin Rite continue on schedule.

His Beatitude, Metropolitan Sviatoslav, Major-Archbishop of Kiev
My own dream would be to have Metropolitan Sviatoslav Shevchuk, Major-Archbishop of Kiev and leader of the Ukrainian Catholic Church assume the papal throne.  It would be a real life version of “Shoes of the Fisherman”! An Eastern Catholic prelate would demonstrate the true catholicity of the Church.  (Indeed, the last non-Latin pope was Zachary, a Italo-Byzantine deacon, who reigned from AD 741-752.)  Metropolitan Shevchuk’s rapid ascent through the hierarchy has been abnormal, to say the least.  He was only ordained as priest in 1994 and is 42 years old.  This is, of course, his major weakness—lack of experience.  His pontificate could last over sixty years, which might be a little too long.  Nor has he received the red hat, so his election would be doubly abnormal.  Nevertheless, his credentials remain impressive.  Perhaps at a future conclave...  Sadly, Lubomyr Cardinal Husar, his predecessor, is quite old and in poor health, and would not present the same sort of opportunity for dialogue with the Christian East.

Truly, these are exciting times in which to be a Catholic.  

No comments: