Reexamining the Papacy

Up until now, I have spoken quite favorably about Pope Francis, although at times I have my doubts. A friend recently said something like “the Holy Father is not a liberal or a conservative; he is a man of God that teaches church doctrine.” Well, in actuality, the Holy Father teaches Roman Catholic Church doctrine, and I do not know if we can prove if he is a liberal or a conservative, but I am sure he knows what he is. I have to say Roman Catholic because often those that are not Christian are not aware of this fact. There isn’t much ecumenism in Christianity today. In fact, there are more denominations and groups than ever before in the history of Christianity. In 1054, the Eastern Church and the Western Church split up; this was called “the Great Schism.” In 1517, on All Saints Day, one could say that Martin Luther by posting his 95 Theses began what would later be called the Protestant Reformation. The Reformation basically became a split from the Roman Church in thought and theology which eventually produced new denominations in Christianity. Furthermore, many of those denominations split into many groups which exist today. This post is not about church history, but I strongly urge everyone to get to know this history because it is extremely important to know, and it is a basic foundation for what I am about to say. This post is about the papacy (the office of the Pope), but I will not go into every detail of what the papacy is. The Roman Catholic Pope, for one thing, is NOT the leader of all Christians worldwide which altogether amount to about 2.2 billion. The Roman Pope is, however, the leader of the Roman Catholics which are about half of that aforementioned number. Indeed, Roman Catholics are the largest of the Christian denominations. As Fr. Thomas Hopko use to say: “the Pope is the de facto leader of the Christians because of the media,” but not because Orthodox, Anglicans, and Protestants, and other groups accept him as such. Of course, I have no doubt that the Pope wants for all Christians to be Roman Catholic. To move a bit faster in this post, what exactly is the Roman Pope?

On September 24^th, 2015, Pope Francis gave a speech addressing the members of the US Congress. During the speech, Pope Francis said something interesting in between the lines, he said: “recently my brother bishops here in the United States….” The Pope said “brother bishops.” So, he considers himself a bishop, and indeed he was the Archbishop of Buenos Aires, Argentina, and his name was or is also Jorge Mario Bergoglio; however, Pope John Paul II made him a cardinal in 2001. A cardinal is still a bishop; however, his primary duty is to elect the pope when the seat is vacant. Before the schisms and divisions, and  when  Christians were a little more united, the maximum title in church leadership was that of bishop, and one became a bishop through apostolic succession, and the laying on of hands going back to Christ and the disciples. Bishops were the highest authority; for example, we get the Nicene Creed from the Council of Nicea in 325 when Christian bishops from throughout the empire (East and West) met in Nicaea in Bithynia to discuss theological beliefs...there was a presiding bishop, but no Pope yet. So, this cardinal and Pope thing are much newer hierarchical positions that did not exist in the original blue print of the Church. But, still, what is the Roman Pope?

According to Roman Catholic tradition, the Pope is the Bishop of Rome and leads the Roman Catholic Church. He is considered the successor of Saint Peter, whom Roman Catholics claim was the first bishop of Rome, although when one reads the Book of Acts, it seems that the founder or planter of the church in Rome was Saint Paul. It is known that Saint Irenaeus said that Linus was the first bishop of Rome, and Tertullian said it was Clement. I am not going to reference anyone on this post, just feel free to do the research and confirm whatever I say. Between 1868 and 1870, during Vatican I, the proclamation papal infallibility was established. Of course, many will say that I'm a heretic for saying what I may say on this subject because I may not use an accurate definition; however, 1 plus 1 equals 2, and in the case of papal infallibility, to claim that a man is infallible in any moment of his life is false…there is no need to debate, but feel free to research it yourself. Basically, when a dogma such as papal infallibility is made it also becomes the reason why at a time the phrase “vicar of Christ or God” has also been erroneously used which is an even bigger error, in my opinion, because now, instead of representing Saint Peter, one is claiming to represent God on Earth which is a very delusional claim to me because no man is flawless or perfect. Of course, don’t think I am not the only one who believes this way. Hans Kung was one of the Roman Catholic priest and theologians that participated in Vatican II who rejects papal infallibility. Moreover, Joseph Ratzinger, Pope Benedict XVI, who was the Pope that retired before Pope Francis, seems to have supported Kung in the book, Unfehlbar.This makes one wonder why he may have really resigned? I am not saying every Roman Pope has believed this way, nor Pope Francis, but if they want to claim to be the “Vicar of Christ” than they should retire very quickly similar to Pope Benedict XVI. After all, Jesus’ ministry on Earth only lasted three years, and he retired at age 33 at His Ascension.

Thinking about it, at first almost everyone criticized Pope Benedict for his retirement, but an early retirement is probably not a bad idea. Yeah, Jesus only served a three year term and retired at 33, so perhaps the Popes are retiring too late and serving at too old of an age. Well, that is for those who want to be infallible and want to be the “Vicar of Christ” on Earth. Maybe, just maybe, Popes need to be way younger, and only serve three year terms… just some food for thought. Oh, and on the idea of being the leader of all Christians, maybe Rome should have an ecumenical council that is not unilateral in which they do include leaders from all Christian denominations to participate, and have a vote as to who will be Pope every three years. I know this sounds crazy, but God gave me a mind to think, and that is what I am doing at this moment. In fact, I have a lot of other good ideas, and no man calls me a heretic.

I just spoke about three year terms for Popes which I am sure rubbed many the wrong way. Here is another crazy idea. I think maybe we should let priests get married, after all this idea of celibacy is only a thousand year old rule, more or less, and maybe that'll slow down this epidemic of child molestation which has cost the Roman Church much in financial settlements. In fact, I think the children of priest would be some of the most properly raised children. If Saint Peter was indeed the first Pope, we have to admit that he was married, although Saint Paul on the other hand was not married. Honestly, the idea of celibacy is not even fair because exceptions are made in some cases as in married clergymen of other churches such as Anglican that convert to Roman Catholicism…seriously, that is not fair to others that would rather be married like Father Albert Cutie from Miami who had to resign a few years ago to have a family, although he is now an Episcopal priest. Well, I probably seem to have got sidetracked into another subject, but it is all relevant. Pope Francis says all the beautiful words that remind us of what Jesus said, but they are just words it seems to me. Of course, these days we are all seemingly infatuated with words, but I wonder how much action is taken in adherence to the words. In Pope Francis’ speech to the US Congress, he said: "a nation can be considered great when it defends liberty as Lincoln did, when it fosters a culture which enables people to “dream” of full rights for all their brothers and sisters…." I really wish that while in Cuba a couple of days earlier he would have said the same thing because it would have been very significant due to all the human rights violations, oppression, and injustices the Cuban people have endured under the regime of the Castros these past 50 plus years, but I suppose we can't always get what we want when we want it. Instead, it seems that while in Cuba, Pope Francis did not "Open his mouth for the dumb, for the rights of all who are left desolate," as Proverbs 31: 8 claims. But, no man is perfect, so maybe next time. Obviously, we are fascinated with words.

In conclusion, and because it seems that I have gone off into a rant, I want to close quoting the Book of James. James 1: 22-24 reads:

“But be doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving yourselves.  For if any one is a hearer of the word and not a doer, he is like a man who observes his natural face in a mirror; or he observes himself and goes away and at once forgets what he was like (RSV Bible).”

I think Pope Francis is great, and he seems to have a good heart, but I am a bit skeptical of the hierarchy he represents, and all the ramifications which that title invokes and implies. Blessings and thanks for reading!

Reference:

RSV Bible