The unique impossibility
of the Papacy
by George Weigel
ROME, March 6, 2013 — At the point at which John Paul II began his papacy in the first volume of my biography of him,
Witness to Hope, I borrowed some thoughts from Hans Urs von Balthasar and tried to explain a bit of the uniqueness of the papal office:
To be pope is to take on a task that is, by precise theological definition, impossible. Like every other office in the Church, the papacy exists for the sake of holiness. The office, though, is a creature of time and space, and holiness is eternal.
No one, not even a Pope who is a saint, can fully satisfy the office’s demands. Yet the office, according to the Church’s faith, is of the will of God, and the office cannot fail, although the officeholder will always fall short of the mark. That distinction between the office and the man who holds it is a consolation to any Pope.
According to Balthasar, it is also “unutterably terrible.”
The office reflects the unity of person and mission in Jesus Christ, of whom the Pope is vicar. Every Pope, the saints as well as the scoundrels, “stands at an utterly tragic place” [Balthasar continued], because he cannot be fully what the office demands.
If he tries to be that, he arrogantly makes himself the equal of the Lord. If he consoles himself too easily with the thought that he must, necessarily, fail, he betrays the demand that the office makes of him, the demand of radical love.
The Office of Peter always reflects Christ’s words to Peter—that, because of the depth of his love, he will be led where he does not want to go
(John 21:18).
But if the job is essentially impossible, the Church is not without the resources of history and contemporary experience to imagine the qualities one would like to see in the man who must, as someone must, take up this uniquely impossible yet essential task.
[I hope all the above is not a none-too-subtle criticism of Benedict XVI's decision. As Weigel suggests below, a papal resignation was not something he had factored into his new book, nor one imagines, in the list of qualities he draws up that a Pope must have. Nor, for that matter, did Hans Urs von Balthasar, in his reflections, factor in the inevitable toll of advanced age, if not serious degenerative illness, on even the most qualified and holiest Pope there is! Benedict XVI's historic decision opens up the discussion to pragmatic and realistic considerations in the completely new world of the 21st century compared to the last one!]
In
Evangelical Catholicism: Deep Reform in the 21st-Century Church, published just before Pope Benedict XVI’s stunning announcement of his resignation, I suggest seven such qualities.
A profound and transparent faith. The Pope must be so convinced of the Catholic symphony of truth, and so transparent to it in his own life, that he readily invites others into friendship with Jesus Christ, simply by being who and what he is. The preaching, catechetics, and teaching are important, but they come “after” transparency to Christ and his love.
Natural resilience amplified by grace. The Pope must be able to draw from the wellspring of his prayer an abundance of energy, patience, endurance, and compassion. The Pope knows the wickedness and evil sins of the world in macrocosm and the sorrows of individual men and women in microcosm. The grace of strength needed to bear that burden of knowledge without being crushed by it must build on a
natural physical and psychological
hardiness and resilience.
[Mr. Weigel fails to take the effects of advanced age into his equation. What physical resilience can a man over 80 possibly have, when physical decline is inexorable with age? Perhaps like the rest of us, who have had no experience nor historical memory of an octogenarian Pope with no specific serious health problems, he simply assumed Benedict XVI could continue into his 90s even, as Leo XIII did, even if conditions today are far different. What do we know, for instance, about Leo's last seven years, at a time when most Catholics knew their Pope only through an official photograph or portrait? Compare that to the literally morbid death watch that kept the global media focused - in images and sound - on John Paul II 24/7 for a number of years! I dare anyone to say that they would have welcomed another such experience of anguish watching a beloved person literally decay before our eyes in a process that could and did take years. John Paul II left us his powerful catechesis of suffering, if we did not already know it from the supreme example of Christ himself. Benedict XVI was wise to decide not to have to subject us all to his potential ordeal, leaving us instead with a living catechesis on humility - Jean Guenois in Le Figaro called it his greatest encyclical - and faith.]
Pastoral experience. John Paul II’s papacy was previewed by his work as archbishop of Cracow and his successful ministry there. That model makes sense for future popes, who must have demonstrated evangelically effective pastoral leadership and a capacity to meet the challenges of aggressive secularism, which did not end when the Berlin Wall came down.
[Forgive me for being touchy, but does this imply that Joseph Ratzinger's pastoral experience as bishop of Europe's second largest diocese for five years was any less meritorious or somehow inadequate????]
Good judgment in people. A holy, brilliant, humanly decent Pope will find his ministry impeded if he does not have shrewd judgment in choosing men for high Church office, both as local bishops and as leaders in the Church’s central administrative machinery in Rome.
[Hmmm, one might say that on this count, both John Paul II and Benedict XVI were wanting, the former more than the latter (whose only egregious judgment lapse, IMHO, was choosing Cardinal Bertone as his #2 man, as the latter turned out to be more of a public liability for him).
In the choice of bishops, judging from the dismal record of many bishops named in the previous Pontificate (Benedict XVI dismissed or nudged some 70 bishops appointed by his predecessor to resign their episcopal seats due to dissent, indiscipline, financial or moral questions), Benedict XVI was much more discerning, seeking to name bishops who think as he does about the priorities of the Church.]
Openness and curiosity. One of the keys to the success of John Paul II’s papacy was his openness to a range of inputs from outside conventional ecclesiastical channels. A twenty-first-century Pope must look to a wide range of information to inform his own evangelical ministry.
[I am surprised - and disappointed - that Weigel does not mention this was one of Benedict xVI's outstanding and most obvious characteristics, recognized by all his interlocutors outside the Church and in the secular world.]
Courage. A timid man who sees dilemmas but not ways to address them is ill-qualified for the papacy. So is a man easily rattled by failure. Doing what is hard and absorbing the criticism for doing it is part of the essential responsibility of the Pope.
[Lest it may even brush the thought of anyone that the qualification cited above could in any way refer to Benedict XVI, some words need to be said about him and the way he was described in the media. One of the most commonly used adjectives for him in the languages that I understand has been 'timid' or the equivalent thereof, which is quite misleading. Anyone who has seen him the past eight years on countless live coverages and video clips would know.
He is hardly fearful and thereby wary and closed, in the usual connotation of timid. Those who know him best say he is naturally a reserved person, who is not given to displaying his emotions, but we could all see from TV coverage that he is very spontaneous, one who reacts to the moment with unfeigned openness and warmth; and a modest person (not SHY at all, the other overused adjective for him) despite his exceptional gifts and achievements.
Not shy at all, because after 25 years in academia, 23 years as the most influential man in the Vatican after the Pope, and 8 years as Pope, he early gained the aplomb and poise to face any social situation, from university lecture halls where he had to address not just his students but many outsiders who came just to listen to him, to the crowds that turned out to acclaim him and the many world leaders he met with during his Pontificate.
As for courage, his renunciation is arguably the most courageous act by a Pope in centuries, certainly in modern times.]
Languages. In a multilingual Church, a multilingual Pope is helpful.
All of which suggests that nationality is irrelevant in choosing a Pope.
[We should all hope so! All this media talk about skin color or geographical origin or proportional representation is typically secular, political and monomaniacal. The cardinals are called on to elect the most suitable among them to be Pope, one who can meet most if not all of the qualities cited by Weigel, regardless of skin color, geographical origin or proportional representation.]
[Modificato da TERESA BENEDETTA 08/03/2013 04:14]