Posted on 04/04/2005 8:16:30 AM PDT by NYer
ROMA, April 3, 2005 - He was the last anti-modern pope. He was extremely modern in style, this man who was such a master of the media limelight and its languages. But he was an unyielding enemy of the spirit of the times. For him they were apocalyptic times, in the sense of revelatory times. In the Holy Year of 2000, that great Jubilee that was his very own brainchild, he presented the cosmic drama he wanted to show the world on stage between Fatima and the Colosseum. It was the drama of a modern Babylon that persecutes Christian martyrs. And this martyred but still living pope was at the head of the army of saints.
No other pope has canonized as many saints and blesseds as John Paul II - they were his legions. After three centuries of liberalism, enlightenment, communism, and capitalism all laying siege on the Church, pope Karol Wojtyla was convinced that in order to survive and launch a counter-attack, he would need heroes, both in heaven and on earth. Not those theologians and priests who were so accommodating to passing fashions. But strong and bellicose Christians. Who would not fall to their knees before the enemy, but would challenge him.
Nevertheless, when on 16 October 1978, the archbishop of Krakow was elected to Saint Peter's chair, his candidature had actually been launched by the cardinals of wealthy nations: Germans, Dutch, North Americans. The new Polish pope would be the thin end of the wedge driven into the Soviet empire. But his powerful electors had underestimated the fact that Wojtyla's criticism of communism was part of his more general condemnation of a West that no longer had morals nor faith, that was a lover of profits and a slave to consumerism. The antibourgeois Wojtyla was much more steadfast than the anticommunist Wojtyla. For him, communism was merely an unwelcome byproduct of a much deeper evil. The evil of the West.
This becomes very clear when rereading the Lenten sermons which the then-archbishop of Krakow had delivered in the Vatican three years before being made pope. But at the time, everyone acted as though the only enemy of the Church and the free world was to the east, or at least red in color. John Paul II was the right pope to fight this holy battle.
He fought and won, but without exulting or expecting any credit for the victory. After the fall of the Berlin Wall he said, "Communism fell of its own accord, as a consequence of its errors and abuses". And with its fall, it had exposed the true, much larger enemy. The global empire. The tyrant of the poor. The destroyer of the faith. In his social encyclicals, John Paul II never sees anything inherently positive in capitalism. In his opinion, if it was left to run its natural course, it could only be evil and savage. In order to tame it and make it acceptable to the Church, he said, the best thing was to continue with "the good things that communism achieved: the fight against unemployment and the care of the poor".
But did capitalism not have, inherently and to its credit, the cult of freedom that is so precious to the Church? Yes and no, was pope Wojtyla's reply. Because freedom is only worthwhile if it is "educated", he said. And, he added, only the Church has received from above the ability to provide guidance towards genuine, positive liberty.
In June 1991 John Paul II returned to his native Poland for the fourth time. The Wall had fallen, the soviet empire was in pieces. But the pope refused to celebrate. On the contrary, he had never before shown such angry with his compatriots. He gave a number of impromptu speeches, and from these words that were not recorded in writing, that were not filtered through diplomacy, his real thoughts burst forth. For example these, transcribed from an unofficial speech in Wloclwec:
“Giving in to desire, to sex, to consumption: that is the Europeanism that some supporters of our entry into Europe think we should accept. But we mustn't become part of that Europe. We were the ones who created Europe, and with much more effort than those who claim exclusive rights to Europeanism. What is their criterion? Freedom. But which freedom? The freedom to take the life of an unborn child? Brothers and sisters, I protest against this concept of Europe held by the West. And this message must be shouted loudly from this land of martyrs. Europe is waiting for redemption. The world needs a redeemed Europe.
Catholic Poland was a big disappointment to the first Polish pope in history. No sooner had it been liberated from communist domination that it fell prey to the evils of the West, to "freedom that creates slaves". John Paul II was never without some reservations about democracy. On 14 November 2002, he said to the Italian parliament that "if there is no ultimate truth to guide and orientate political action, then a democracy without values can easily become blatant or underhand totalitarianism". In the course of his life, he only actually lived in a democracy after having been made pope, in Italy. There he immediately saw his fears of tyranny become reality, with the approval in 1981 of one of the most permissive abortion laws in the world.
In pope Wojtyla's view, laws permitting abortion were much more than normal procedures. They were the new holocaust of the late 20th century. It was precisely this "planned cemetery of the unborn" that discredited democracy even more in his eyes. "Should an organization created by man, a parliament, have the right to legalize the killing of innocent and defenseless human beings?" he asked.
His answer was a flat no. In his 1995 encyclical "Evangelium Vitae", he even demanded a public disobedience against Cesar, in the name of god. "When a civil law legitimizes abortion or euthanasia, it ceases for that same reason to be a civil law, that is to say morally obligatory," and it "looses entirely its judicial validity". More than once John Paul II incited the faithful not to make sacrifices to the modern empire of evil, as though they were martyrs from the first century.
The preoccupation with abortion, family and sex was not a "personal obsession",nor was it the "backlash of an unhappy childhood", as some of his biographers have supposed. The ceaseless preaching of John Paul II on these subjects fit in perfectly with his wider view of the world. In the pope's opinion, the evil of the West was at its peak when it wanted to violate the sacta sanctorum of the life of a human being, from birth to death.
Papa Wojtyla knew that with this attitude he was clashing with many governments, even the most democratic. "The powerful people of this world don't always like a pope like me" he said one day. On the theme of war and peace he also almost always went against the mainstream. He was opposed to the Gulf war against Saddam Hussein's Iraq in 1990-91 until the bitter end, at the price finding himself in disaccord with the entire western world, with most Arabic governments and even with priests of Catholic countries including Italy. But he did the opposite for Bosnia, demanding that the west intervene to "disarm the aggressor" and establish a ceasefire. During the endless conflict between Israel and the Palestinians, he requested that any peace agreement would recognize an international statute for Jerusalem and the Holy Sites, though these wishes went unheeded. After the terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001, he gave his tacit approval of the counter-attack on Afghanistan. But he firmly opposed the Anglo-American war in Iraq. But then he did then call "peace builders" the western soldiers who remained in that country to help bring about the birth of a democracy.
John Paul II always denied being a pacifist on principle, and he proved this with his actions. From time to time he would express judgment on whether a war was "just" or not. This was also in line with the idea that the Church had the ability to "guide" the correct use of liberty and therefore of peace. Unlike the rest of the world, which when it apostatizes the Church and God, can only fall prey to barbarism.
Nothing however comes close to the force with which pope Wojtyla led the battle on the subject of birthrates and any attempts to reduce them. Unlike the issue of the morality of wars, he allowed for no exceptions on this matter. No abortion, no killing of any conceived being could ever be legitimate, not ever. The culmination of this battle was in Cairo, in September 1994 at the international conference for population and development called by the UN.
At this meeting, the word "abortion" was not actually in any of the documents on the agenda. But another expression was very common indeed: "reproductive health". First of all, the pope unmasked this formula: “we all know that this expression includes unrestricted abortion". And then he so adamantly brought home his disagreement, first with the leaders of the whole world, then with the directors of the birth control programs of the UN, and then again in a tempestuous audience with the then president of the United States, Bill Clinton, that the entire Cairo Conference was in turmoil. The pope was never actually physically at the meeting, but it revolved around him. He stood alone against the rest of the world. On paper, the Conference concluded without a winner. But in reality John Paul II took on the entire western world from his pulpit, he called things by their real name, and he made the world think about good and evil, justice and injustice, about the right that a human being has to live, from its first moment of existence.
In this attitude, John Paul II was definitely an anti-modern pope. He was the total adversary of the technocratic modernity that does not only want to interpret man, but also wants to rule over him, changing him, wanting to take possession also of his generation. Time will tell whether the pope was defeated in this. Or whether he was a prophet.
Did anyone but me hear the long ABC radio obit Saturday denying that the Soviets (and/or the Bulgarian secret police) had anything to do with the assassination attempt on the Pope?
It was read by a woman whose name I didn't catch, but a teeny, weeny amount of research would have turned up plenty of good information on the topic. Weird time for ABC radio to be running propaganda defending the bad, old Soviet Union.
The last ... until the next pope, hopefully.
Who are they to say he will be the last anti-modern Pope?
It is at least possible that the next Pope will be even more stringent on this count.
Are you kidding? In EUROPE? Poland maybe. What about Catholic France? It's a complete joke!
Thanks for the post.
If you were to enter a church in Europe on a Sunday, you would wonder where everyone was. The mighty cathedrals are empty. If you want authentic Catholics, methinks you should be looking in Nigeria, Korea, or Brazil.
Re: "I wish I had lived in Europe, where it seems the Catholics are still Catholic, not Protestant wannabees like my parish."
You wouldn't be saying that is you lived in France or Belgium or Germany, even some areas of Italy. They are every bit as bad and in some cases worse.
In his 1995 encyclical "Evangelium Vitae", he even demanded a public disobedience against [Caesar], in the name of [G]od. "When a civil law legitimizes abortion or euthanasia, it ceases for that same reason to be a civil law, that is to say morally obligatory," and it "[loses] entirely its judicial validity".Evangelium Vitae bump.
(P.S. -- This is one of the most poorly edited pieces I've seen in a long time.)
Have you ever attended mass in Europe? I have and it is not that much different. There just aren't any Europeans there. The churches are filled with Filipinos, Africans, Asians, and American Catholic tourists; but not many locals that I could see.
BTW, please educate us about the Popes stance on girls as alter servers. It was he in the '80's that made it permissible. I was unaware he had rescinded his position.
It's about time Europe was re-evangelized. (I am afraid you are right though; we do need some help here in the US.)
Although, on the other hand, we should not give up hope for them: "Faith, hope, and love..."
Any Catholic who does not support the Catholic Teaching of the church is free to leave and join another denomination. There are plenty of denominations that have free for alls.
Ok bye bye time to leave go away....
IMO there is nothing "modern" about evil.
And I suspect there will be future Popes who remain opposed to it.
But he did the opposite for Bosnia, demanding that the west intervene to "disarm the aggressor" and establish a ceasefire.
Can anyone explain why he agreed with sending troops into Bosnia, but disagreed with the Gulf War? I'm not Catholic, so I don't understand how the Pope reached these conclusions.
I wish I had lived in Europe, where it seems the Catholics are still Catholic, not Protestant wannabees like my parish.
I found myself thinking the same thing especially these last few days. Europe, or a city like NYC or DC. I watched in sadness and joy as the faithful flocked to churches in NYC, DC, Rome, etc, while my own town, the churches were empty except for a few. My own parish was locked, I couldn't even light a candle. I called to see if they were going to do anything, a prayer vigil, whatever and offer my assistance, but the office was closed for the day (Friday afternoon). Not because of the Holy Father, just business as usual. I too live in a Protestant wannabee diocese. In fact, we've bent over backwards to accomodate the local ecumenical prayer group while dropping such 'old fashioned' notions as Rosary and Adoration (restored somewhat with a new pastor). And the proof is in the pudding, we've lost a number of parishioners to the local Methodist and Baptist churches, both openly and aggressively targeting Catholics and succeeding. And using hate to do so. I know, I was 'targeted' (their words).
The "LAST" Anti-Modern Pope?
I hope not.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.