Welcome message

Man has been trying to improve himself by his own power since the beginning. The results speak for themselves.
ABOUT ADS: Please keep in mind that there is only limited control over ads that appear here. If you find something inappropriate, let me know and I'll endeavor to block it. Thanks.

Tuesday, February 12, 2013

Pope Benedict to Retire - Why It's a Bad Decision

By now everyone has heard and has formed opinions about Pope Benedict XVI's announcement that he is going to retire.

I think we should start with the notion that he is retiring rather than resigning. Now, in order to retire, one must, technically, resign, too. So maybe it doesn't matter. But one can resign for many reasons, retirement being one of them. And retirement has connotations that resignation just doesn't. Popes have resigned, but I think Benedict is the first to retire.

Let me categorize some of the reactions I've seen among friends and over the internet.

First, there is the cynical, secular, godless reaction: The Catholic Church in this view sucks, and so does the pope, whoever the pope is, including this one. Good thing he's quitting, let's hope someone that shares our cynical, secular, godless view of religion takes his place.

Then there is the polite, diplomatic reaction of non-Catholics: Oh, what a surprise, he's a good and holy man, he'll be missed. That sort of thing.

But among Catholics I see these sorts of reactions:

Heartbreak and disappointment: This is what my wife is going through. Yes, the papacy is an office that can be held by anyone and indeed is held by no one permanently. But it is not just an administrative function in the Church. He's our father. Our leader. Our role model. Our inspiration. Retiring just doesn't cut it. It feels like he's abandoning us to the vagaries of the conclave, which by the way, may just give us someone who will do much damage. For instance, a weak and inept administrator or even worse a strong, action-minded but misguided individual. Now, the pope is old, and perhaps he doesn't have much longer to live, but doggone it, he should stay until the end and be our father until the end, and forestall a potentially dangerous conclave until the end. At least stick around and appoint some more cardinals who can vote in the conclave - you can do wonders in that way alone with another 6 months, a year, two years. It seems like a disappointing lack of... heroism. I am personally not as distraught as my wife, but I do share to some degree the heartbreak and disappointment.

Relief: Pope Benedict has been very traditional and has been turning back the clock on things Catholic, so much as we believe God has put him in the papacy, maybe now we can get back on track. My view is that one person's damage is another person's progress, and in my opinion, we've been making wonderful progress under Pope Benedict.

Wonderment: What a strange and unexpected thing this retirement of the Pope is! We love you, Pope Benedict!! If YOU think this is a good decision then it MUST be! You deserve you're retirement!! We just KNOW that you'll be praying for us in your monastery and we look forward to your writings and we KNOW that we're in your heart always!! You will always be our father!! We're saddened to hear of your frail health and hope that God will strengthen you until you finish your books!! I understand this mentality, but I do not share it, or rather I do, but only a little.

Reason: Well, look, if the pope is actually in ill health, the nefarious elements in the Church might be able to take advantage of his frailty as things get worse. If he retires now, then he is protecting the Church by enabling someone more capable to take over in a timely way. This is a good thing. I see the point of this, but I think it's just trying to make lemonade out of lemons.

I'm not the pope, but I think it's a bad decision.

This is how we know the pope is fallible on things administrative - accepting that he's infallible when teaching officially about faith and morals.

It's a bad decision because it sets a precedent. If popes can retire for reasons of ill health or old age, then every pope that finds himself in ill health will be expected to, asked to, pressured to retire. "You're sick, let someone stronger take over." "Your enemies will take advantage of your infirmity. Retire while your friends still have sway among the cardinal electors." "It might be a mortal sin to leave the Church without an effective shepherd while you slowly, slowly deteriorate." "Are you sooooo proud that you want the whole world to watch you suffer and die? Well you will have your reward before you die then, and risk losing your eternal reward!"

I think this is why John Paul II never retired, though he was pressured to. Popes do not retire. "There is no room in the Church for a Pope Emeritus," I think he once said. He poured out every ounce of his life for the good of the Church. Perhaps retirement can be seen in that light. (Look at Wonderment and Reason above.)

But honestly, is avoiding martyrdom a kind of martyrdom, because one denies himself the glory of being martyred? If so, then avoiding martyrdom is the higher thing!

And the reason I think of this is the same reason I oppose so-called "death with dignity" legislation. The very existence of such a law is pressure to exercise it, and the first step in it becoming a duty rather than a mere right to kill oneself when one's suffering is too costly and too distressful for one's loved ones.

I think it's a bad decision. But what does God think?

15 comments:

  1. I am one of those heartbroken and disappointed persons. Although it has been a day for further reflection on Benedict's resignation, I am still disappointed. He has been a great witness to the faith bearing his physical infirmities as well as suffering contempt from those who don't agree with his moral and spiritual teachings of truth. So now, the fear is: whom will the Conclave choose to hold to the traditional Catholic morals and spirituality? God will not abandon us - but will the next holy father?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Isn't the Pope guided by the Holy Spirit? If so, how can we assert wrong doing unless we think he's disobeying the Holy Spirit. Is that the accusation here?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Quite possibly. We are all - INCLUDING THE POPE - only imperfectly guided by the Holy Spirit. Not everything he says and does is ratified by Divine Inspiration, and thinking it is is equally a heresy as denying infallibility in the areas where infallibility is certain. Therefore we can assert error in the areas where his actions are guided by prudential judgment. Also, I said nothing about "wrongdoing" which implies a moral dimension. I said it was a bad decision. There's a difference.

      Delete
  3. Also, if actions speak louder than words, then we are being "taught" a bad "precedent". If it's only 'official' teachings that get the infallibility rating, then I guess we can simply ignore this action as a bad administrative decision with no moral or faith based impact. Like the pain of a fatherless family, that's all we'll get here?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It IS only "official" teachings on topics of Catholic "Faith" and "morals" that come under infallibility. He is pope. He is highly authoritative. And so, yes, we are being taught by example and it is a bad precedent, from a very high authority, too. The fact that it is a bad administrative decision does not mean it has no moral- or faith-based impact. Quite the opposite, which is what makes it a bad example. What we get here is a precedent that POPES OUGHT TO RESIGN (as if FATHERS ought to abdicate as well)when the going gets tough, and there WILL BE plenty of pressure on the next pope to do exactly that.

      Please, Anonymous, try to understand my meanings before you try to imply things about me.

      I say it is a bad decision and I say why. You say it is a good decision because the pope can make no other kind. And I ask, But what about the decision itself makes it so good, in light of the precedent it sets and the opportunity it gives the enemies of future popes to pressure them into resigning and thereby manipulate the papacy?

      Delete
    2. I'm not saying it is good or bad, and my apologies, I am not implying anything about you, just trying to get clarification on the fallibility concept. I just read you said that a "bad administrative decision does not mean it has no moral- or faith-based impact. Quite the opposite." I am thinking this means you are saying that this bad administration does, in fact, have a moral or faith-based impact, and the only reason the pope may have erred on this is because it was "not official". I guess I am struggling with the "official" concept because what it appears to me what you are saying is that the Pope made a faulty decision ... he can be fallible for moral / faith based decision when they are "not offical", but is infallible for moral / faith based decision when they are "official". I would think that an administrative decision like this with such impact and magnitude on the Church, that this decision by the Pople was made with sincere deliberation, and taken with utmost seriousness due to the ramifications as you pointed out, and apparently the pople thinks "he" is right about the decision, but by the reasons you pointed out, he is wrong, and therefore one might argue that this is proof that he is, infact, NOT infallible. But, the argument goes, infallibility only applies to rulings that are deliberately categorized as "official" ... and therefore the infallibility concept remains true and intact, from a technical perspective only, not necessarily from the negative/bad measure it may actually have on the Church. Hope that makes sense.

      Delete
    3. Well, for starters, I think you need to find out more about papal infallibility from a reliable source. NewAdvent.org has the Catholic Encyclopedia on it with an entry. Other Catholic resource-type websites might have articles on it. You're on the right track, but it's not there yet. It's not a mere "technicality" but it is narrowly restricted.

      Delete
    4. Thanks for the resource. Reminds me of the US tax code in its apparent complexity. We must accept the infallibility concept on faith (much like the tax code) rather than on easily understandable reason that those of lesser learnedness might require :)

      Delete
  4. Should bad administrative decisions have such significant downstream impact, and if so, wouldn't the Church leaders, in their wisdom and guided insight, see this?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. One would hope. Others may be licking their chops. The history of the Catholic Church shows that Church leaders - including some popes - are quite able to be anything other than good, holy, wise, and guided by Heaven.

      Delete
  5. I think true martyrdom means GIVING UP up one's physical life on earth for eternal spiritual life. It would follow that avoiding true martyrdom means RETAINING one's physical life on earth, and perhaps seeking to obtain eternal spiritual life through some other means other than martyrdom. Therefore I don't think that avoiding martyrdom would be in the same category-of-degree-or-kind as the actual act of martyrdom.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Exactly. Martyrdom - being killed for the faith - is the highest thing a Christian can do, because it is a most perfect conformity to Christ Himself. Next to it is pouring out one's life in the service of Christ in accord with one's God-given lot, which is what JP-II did. And it seems to me that is what Pope Benedict appears to be avoiding. Therefore, if this decision is "better" than staying on the job until death, then it would seem that avoiding martyrdom would be "better" than martyrdom, which we agree is not the case.

      Delete
  6. The departure of Pope Benedict was predicted:
    http://www.thewarningsecondcoming.com

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I await the fulfillment of the rest of the sentence in question as verification. In the meantime, "departure" and "ousted" are not precisely synonymous...

      Man. Prophecy of Malachy, anyone?

      Delete
  7. What would happen for example if we get a new Pope, he reigns for 2 years and then suffers a stroke, or partial paralysis. Would he then resign? Leaving us 2 Popes Emerituses?? There will probably be many unforeseen consequences from this decision. I do love Pope Benedict XVI and it seems to break my heart more than I wish to admit that he will be leaving. He will always be a special Holy Father to me. I think it must have been an awful decision to make.

    ReplyDelete