Category Archives: Pope John Paul II

JPII and Self-Flagellation

Interesting stuff about the late pope’s ascetical practices from a forthcoming book by the Monsignor who’s promoting his candidacy for sainthood:

Pope John Paul II whipped himself with a belt, even on vacation, and slept on the floor as acts of penitence and to bring him closer to Christian perfection, according to a new book by the Polish prelate spearheading his sainthood case. . . .

At a news conference Tuesday, [Monsignor] Oder defended John Paul’s practice of self-mortification, which some faithful use to remind them of the suffering of Jesus on the cross.

“It’s an instrument of Christian perfection,” Oder said, responding to questions about how such a practice could be condoned considering Catholic teaching holds that the human body is a gift from God.

In the book, Oder wrote that John Paul frequently denied himself food — especially during the holy season of Lent — and “frequently spent the night on the bare floor,” messing up his bed in the morning so he wouldn’t draw attention to his act of penitence.

“But it wasn’t limited to this. As some members of his close entourage in Poland and in the Vatican were able to hear with their own ears, John Paul flagellated himself. In his armoire, amid all the vestments and hanging on a hanger, was a belt which he used as a whip and which he always brought to Castel Gandolfo,” the papal retreat where John Paul vacationed each summer.

For a fellow so deeply known for his book Theology of the Body, I can’t help but find this at least a bit odd/interesting. I certainly think there is plenty of good and fitting modes of ascetical practice (like fasting, vigils, etc.), but I find something deeply incongruous between the act of self-flagellation and the affirmation of the body’s goodness and dignity.

When does bodily discipline simply degenerate into bodily denigration?

H/T: Sully

Why JPII Should Not Be Canonized

Extremely conservative Catholic, Eric Giunta has a rather provocative post arguing that the late Pope John Paul II should not be canonized as a saint. He makes his argument on the basis of the ongoing sex abuse scandal among the Catholic hierarchy:

The allegations highlight what for all too many Catholics is the elephant-in-the-room when discussing the ills which beset the modern Church: the extent to which the late Pope John Paul II was an enabler of these perversions, from sexual and liturgical abuse to theological dissent and the scandal of Catholic politicians who support the most immoral of social policies with the tacit or express blessings of their Church.

One does not need to deny or disparage the personal sanctity, thoughtful conservatism, or religious orthodoxy of the late Pontiff in order to acknowledge that his Pontificate, by all accounts, was a glorious failure. Yes, he aided in the fall of Eastern European Communism, but the Pope of Rome is not primarily a mover and shaker of state politics, but a Christian pastor whose mission it is to save souls, convert the lost, and govern his church in such a way that it resembles, as best as possible, the city on a hill, the light of the world whose radiance cannot be hid under a bushel-basket. . . .

Though Catholics and others are loathe to admit it of an otherwise beloved Pope, John Paul II oversaw a church which deteriorated in both its inner and outer life. His callous indifference toward the victims of priestly sexual abuse in refusing to meet personally with a single one of them, and his stubborn refusal to compel the resignation from office of any of the bishops who aided, abetted, and covered-up the abuse, are testamentary to his utter failure: not as a Catholic or a theologian, but as a Pope.

And this is precisely why he should not be canonized. For in the Catholic (and popular) understanding, canonization is not simply a technical decree indicating one’s everlasting abode in Paradise; it is, in addition, the Church’s solemn endorsement of a Christian’s heroic virtue. The question the Catholic Church must ask herself is: Was John Paul II a model of “heroic” papal virtue?

To be clear, I’m not arguing one way or the other on this. As a non-Roman Catholic its really not my place to say. But it seems like this is a pretty important argument that Roman Catholics need to have.

Read more »

Pope John Paul II on Capitalism

Since socialism is the great fear of the day among many conservative Christians, here’s an interesting approach to the matter from an oft-claimed hero for conservative Christians, Catholic and Protestant alike:

Returning now to the initial question: can it perhaps be said that, after the failure of Communism, capitalism is the victorious social system, and that capitalism should be the goal of the countries now making efforts to rebuild their economy and society? Is this the model which ought to be proposed to the countries of the Third World which are searching for the path to true economic and civil progress?

The answer is obviously complex. If by “capitalism” is meant an economic system which recognizes the fundamental and positive role of business, the market, private property and the resulting responsibility for the means of production, as well as free human creativity in the economic sector, then the answer is certainly in the affirmative, even though it would perhaps be more appropriate to speak of a “business economy”, “market economy” or simply “free economy”. But if by “capitalism” is meant a system in which freedom in the economic sector is not circumscribed within a strong juridical framework which places it at the service of human freedom in its totality, and which sees it as a particular aspect of that freedom, the core of which is ethical and religious, then the reply is certainly negative.

The Marxist solution has failed, but the realities of marginalization and exploitation remain in the world, especially the Third World, as does the reality of human alienation, especially in the more advanced countries. Against these phenomena the Church strongly raises her voice. Vast multitudes are still living in conditions of great material and moral poverty. The collapse of the Communist system in so many countries certainly removes an obstacle to facing these problems in an appropriate and realistic way, but it is not enough to bring about their solution. Indeed, there is a risk that a radical capitalistic ideology could spread which refuses even to consider these problems, in the a priori belief that any attempt to solve them is doomed to failure, and which blindly entrusts their solution to the free development of market forces. [Italics added]

~ Pope John Paull II, Centesimus annus, §42.

What might have been reasonably called a risk at the close of the Cold War is stark reality today, I’m afraid.

JPII on the Paschal Mystery

“The events of Good Friday and, even before that, in prayer in Gethsemane, introduce a fundamental change into the whole course of the revelation of love and mercy in the messianic mission of Christ. The one who ‘went about doing good and healing’ and ‘curing every sickness and disease’ now Himself seems to merit the greatest mercy and to appeal for mercy, when He is arrested, abused, condemned, scourged, crowned with thorns, when He is nailed to the cross and dies amidst agonizing torments. It is then that He particularly deserves mercy from the people to whom He has done good, and He does not receive it. Even those who are closest to Him cannot protect Him and snatch Him from the hands of His oppressors. At this final stage of His messianic activity the words which the prophets, especially Isaiah, uttered concerning the Servant of Yahweh are fulfilled in Christ: ‘Through his stripes we are healed.’”

~ John Paul II, Dives in misericordia, par 7.

Do We Need a Theory of the State?

Pope John Paul II, in his encyclical Centesimus annus, makes the following observation:

Pope Leo XIII was aware of the need for a sound theory of the State in order to ensure the normal development of man’s spiritual and temporal activities, both of which are indispensable. For this reason, in one passage of Rerum novarum he presents the organization of society according to the three powers—legislative, executive and judicial—, something which at the time represented a novelty in Church teaching. Such an ordering reflects a realistic vision of man’s social nature, which calls for legislation capable of protecting the freedom of all. To that end, it is preferable that each power be balanced by other powers and by other spheres of responsibility which keep it within proper bounds. This is the principle of the “rule of law”, in which the law is sovereign, and not the arbitrary will of individuals.

The part of this that interests me is the first sentence. Why is a “theory of the state” necessary for the spiritual well-being of humankind? That seems like quite an odd claim, which, if true would seem to imply that vast segments of (Christian) humanity throughout history could not possibly have had access to “normal” spiritual development.

In Memoriam: Pope John Paul II

While discussions continue about Catholic-Protestant relations, it is fitting to remember that today is the third anniversary of Pope John Paull II’s death.  Pope Benedict XVI marked the day with appropriate solemnity, praying that the spiritual gifts that John Paul II imparted to the church would continue to strengthen her today.  Requiesat in pace.

The Servant of God §1: Redemptor Hominis

In his first papal encyclical, Pope John Paul II offers a profound theological reflection on the situation of the modern world in light of the reality of the redemption of the world in Christ.  Articulating themes that will define his papacy, Redemptor Hominis provides a great starting point for those attempting to understand the theology of John Paull II.  The key themes that emerge in this encyclical are first, an overwhelmingly Christocentric focus.  Throughout the encyclical, John Paul II emphasizes repeatedly the centrality of the redemption of humanity solely in and through Christ.  “Jesus Christ is the center of the universe and of history” and as such is the center of all of the Pope’s reflections of the ailments of modern life (par. 1). 

Secondly, a key theme of the encyclical is the Pope’s commitment to a personalist philosophy.  The uniqueness and inherent dignity of each individual is a central commitment that defines and shapes all of the theological thought of the late Pontiff.  The third key theme that emerges from this encyclical is the way in which it culminates in a vision of the Marian and Eucharistic church.  The practice of the Eucharist is the “center and summit of the whole sacramental life” (par. 20) from which flows the fullness of our experience of the church’s reality in union with Christ.  Likewise, the church must understand itself in light of the Mother of the Lord who embodies the form of the church whose receptive, maternal love lives in response to the active love of the Father who redeems the world through the Son (par. 22).

The first section of the encyclical is in large part a homage to the inheritance of John Paul II.  Herein he takes great pains to express his indebtedness to his predecessors Pope John XXIII and Pope Paul VI, both of whom he draws his name from, seeking to extend their legacy through his own papacy.  It should not escape notice that it was Pope John XXIII who was in many ways the unexpected architect of Vatican II, calling for the renewal of the church in a profound and (to many) surprising way.  Pope John Paul II, in taking his name from these two predecessors, illustrates clearly the nature of his pontificate as a whole: a rejection of self-focus and the desire to make a name for himself or create a legacy for himself, but rather a posture of humble service to the church, its tradition, and history.

The second section of the encyclical is focused on “the mystery of redemption.”  Here Pope John Paul II expounds an utterly Christocentric theology of salvation with a view toward showing how the Christian gospel speaks to the particular problems of the modern age.  The Christological starting point here is quite important.  It marks the basic orientation of the Pope’s theology throughout his life, and is quite consonant with the ethos of the Catholic tradition as a whole.  For John Paul II, the first word must always be Christ, “Our spirit is set in one direction, the only direction for our intellect, will and heart is towards Christ, the Redeemer of man.  We wish to look towards him because there is salvation in no one else but him, the Son of God” (par. 7). 

The Pope goes on to expound the nature of the redemption that was achieved in Christ.  Here, striking a distinctive note (indeed, one that sounds much like the theology of Thomas Torrance, and the Scottish Reformed tradition as a whole), John Paul II articulated that “by his Incarnation, he, the Son of God, in a certain way united himself with each man” (par. 9).  In Christ’s act of incarnation, God unites each and every person with himself in their concrete uniqueness as persons.  This is the basis of John Paul II’s soteriology, that humankind cannot live without being united to the God who is love.  “Man cannot live without love.  He remains a being that is incomprehensible for himself, his life is senseless, if love is not revealed to him, if he does not encounter love, if he does not experience it and make it his own, if he does not participate intimately in it” (par. 10).

It is this insistence on God’s act of uniting himself with each unique person that theological grounds the Pope’s commitment to the philosophy of personalism.  Because God, in Christ has united himself to every person, every person has indissoluble dignity and significance.  It is this conviction of the dignity of each person that grounds the Pope’s commitment to the church’s missionary task.  “the missionary attitude always begins with a feeling of deep esteem for ‘what is in man’, for what man has himself worked out in the depths of his spirit concerning the most profound and important problems” (par. 12).  It is this Christocentric orientation focused on the dignity of the individual and the church’s missional imperative that ground the Pope’s discussion of the church’s relationship to the modern world.

In moving into his third section, discussing the specific problems of modern life in depth, the Pope again underscores his Christological theme of Christ uniting himself with each person.  As he sounds that note, Pope John Paul II moves into his discussion of what precisely is the fear of modern humanity.  He notes the fundamental feature of alienation in modern life, particularly alienation between the worker who produces and the things produced which seem to continually become an object of threat.   It is the things that we, the human community created and produce that seem to be the biggest threat to human flourishing in the world.  The Pope notes that this state of fear breeds a culture of ”immediate use and consumption” which, coupled with “the ascendancy of technology” yields a way of life that is distinctly predatory on human dignity and relationships.

The Pope goes on to indict the modern world on the basis of how it separates and alienates humankind.  He insists that “the consumer civilization, which consists in a certain surplus of goods necessary for man and for entire societies” is fundamentally wrong in that it is based on the suffering of great sectors of humanity who “are suffering from hunger, with many people dying each day of starvation and malnutrition” (par. 16).  His call to the church, then is to a “principle of solidarity” by which the Pope means a thoroughgoing  commitment to the “transformation of the structures of economic life” (par. 16).

The Pope insists that “it is possible to undertake this duty”, that it is not a hopeless task for the church to attempt the transformation of the world in and through Christ.  He also insists that any such social transformation will be impossible “without the intervention of a true conversion of mind, will, and heart.”  The Pope also notes that the weapons that the church has at its disposal are the purely nonviolence weapons of love.  Making one of the most moving appeals in the encyclical, John Paul II argues that the church “has no weapons at her disposal apart from those of the spirit, of the word and of love” and thus “for this reason she does not cease to implore each side of the two [likely referring to the capitalist West and Communist Russia] and beg everybody in the name of God and the name of man.  Do not kill!  do not prepare for the destruction and extermination of men!  Think of your brothers and sisters who are suffering hunger and misery!  Respect each other’s dignity and freedom!” (par. 16). 

The fourth and final section of the encyclical brings the discussion to a close by focusing on the mystery of the church and her sacramental life as the summit of human life.  The God who unites himself with every persons calls every person into the unity of faith in one Eucharistic body.  Indeed, it is in the Eucharist that the height of the divine mystery of God in union with humanity is realized.  “The Eucharist is the centre and summit of the whole sacramental life, through which each Christian receives the saving power of the Redemption” (par. 20).  The Pope is also careful to underscore the close connection between the Eucharist and Penance.  “The Christ who  calls to the Eucharistic banquet is always the same Christ who exhorts us to penance and repeats his “Repent” (par. 20).  Striking a note that will be particularly appealing to Protestants, John Paul II insists that “We cannot, however forget that conversion is a particularly profound inward act in which the individual cannot be replaced by others and cannot make the community a substitute for him” (par. 20).  The mystery redemption reaches its summit in the Eucharist, but rightful participation in Christ’s redemption involves every person in their own concrete, irreplaceable uniqueness. 

The final paragraph of the encyclical focuses on the Mother of the Lord as the exemplar and archetype of the church, and indeed, the embodiment of the maternal love that the modern world stands so desperately in need of.  “the Church always, and particularly at our time, has need of a Mother” (par. 22) as the Pope says.  The Marian “fiat” embodies the way in which Christians are called to respond to the work of God in the world, simply saying “yes” to his redemption in Christ.  It is this mindset of active anticipation in receptive passivity which Pope John Paul II calls the church to take up in his prayer for “humanity’s new Advent.”  The encyclical ends, rightly with the invocation of the Holy Spirit whose vivifying presence mediates the redemption of Christ to the world in the formation of the Mystical Body of Christ (par. 22).

Bemoaning a Lack

One of the things that has so annoyed me in working on engaging the encyclicals of Pope John Paul II has been the fact that there is no complete collection of his encyclicals in print.  There once was such a volume, but it has since gone out of print and can’t be found online for under $200 (U.S.).  I’ll certainly be doing what I can to get a Wipf & Stock reprint going for this book, but I don’t know what complications there might be in trying to get a collection of a former pontiff’s back in print.  Regardless, it is a tragedy that these important theological writings are not readily available in one volume.  Being able to print stuff of the Vatican website is no subsititute for a bound and printed volume!

The Servant of God: Engaging Pope John Paul II’s Encyclicals

One of the ongoing commitments I have in doing this blog is a commitment to ecumenism.  One of the major ways that I have set out to continue such discussions this year is through a series of readings and reflections on the Papal encyclicals of the servant of God, Pope John Paul II.  This will be an on-going effort throughout the year (hopefully it will be done this year).  Following is a list of the encyclicals of Pope John Paul II, in chronological order, which is the order in which I’ll be reading and reflecting on them. 

  1. Redemptor Hominis “The Redeemer of Man” March 4, 1979
  2. Dives in Misericordia “Rich in Mercy” November 30, 1980
  3. Laborem Exercens “On Human Work” September 14, 1981
  4. Slavorum Apostoli “The Apostles of the Slavs”  June 2, 1985
  5. Dominum et Vivificantem “The Lord and Giver of Life” May 18, 1986
  6. Redemptoris Mater “Mother of the Redeemer” March 25, 1987
  7. Sollicitudo Rei Socialis “On Social Concerns”  December 30, 1987
  8. Redemptoris Missio “Mission of the Redeemer” December 7, 1990
  9. Centesimus Annus “The Hundredth Year” May 1, 1991
  10. Veritatis Splendor “The Splendor of Truth” August 6, 1993
  11. Evangelium Vitae “The Gospel of Life” March 25, 1995
  12. Ut Unum Sint “That They May Be One” May 25, 1995
  13. Fides et Ratio “Faith and Reason” September 14, 1998
  14. Ecclesia de Eucharistia “The Church of the Eucharist”  April 17, 2003

I am very much looking forward to this endeavor of cross-traditional theological and ecumenical engagement.  Hopefully it will be fun for some folks to read about, too!

Unity and the Papal Office: What alternative is there?

The Catholic Church, both in her praxis and in her solemn documents, holds that the communion of the particular Churches with the Church of Rome, and of their Bishops with the Bishop of Rome, is—in God’s plan—an essential requisite of full and visible communion. Indeed full communion, of which the Eucharist is the highest sacramental manifestation, needs to be visibly expressed in a ministry in which all the Bishops recognize that they are united in Christ and all the faithful find confirmation for their faith. The first part of the Acts of the Apostles presents Peter as the one who speaks in the name of the apostolic group and who serves the unity of the community—all the while respecting the authority of James, the head of the Church in Jerusalem. This function of Peter must continue in the Church so that under her sole Head, who is Jesus Christ, she may be visibly present in the world as the communion of all his disciples.

Do not many of those involved in ecumenism today feel a need for such a ministry? A ministry which presides in truth and love so that the ship—that beautiful symbol which the World Council of Churches has chosen as its emblem— will not be buffeted by the storms and will one day reach its haven.  Et Unum Sint, 91.

I find this quote from one the late John Paul II’s most important encyclicals to be quite interesting.  I’m sure at first glance, any protestant reader will immediately dispute the claims that are made in the first paragraph regarding the role of Peter and his continuing office in the church.  However, I am more interested in the second paragraph.  Is not John Paul II correct in his statement that many or perhaps most Christian who are ecumenically minded long for there to be a ministry, or a minister that can serve as a focal point for the unity of the church throughout the world?  Do we not need some sort of ministerial focal point to orient the whole church if the church is ever to be one in any meaningful sense?  I am here, of course excluding any simple talk of “spiritual unity”, which I take to be a cop out and a rejection of the corporeality and visibility of the church.

So, if it is the case that we do need some sort of centralized ministry for unity, what should that be if not the papacy?  To be sure, I think there are legitimate criticisms to be made of the papacy, but I think the question to protestants who desire unity is what alternative to the papacy they might envision that would fulfil the role that the papacy seeks to fill.  So, is there any alternative that a protestant might legitimately point to in place of the ministry of unity that the bishop of Rome provides?

Switch to our mobile site