Not the Very Worst Choice. (I intended to comment on the College of Cardinals' election of the new Pope the day it happened, but computer problems forbade. I have triumphed over those difficulties, and celebrate with this belated commentary.)
+
The selection of Josef Ratzinger, Cardinal of Munich, as the new Pope Benedict XVI, seems, at this juncture, profoundly unwise, verging on abysmally stupid and rash, not conservative. The only way the College of Cardinals could have done worse is to have elected a young Italian of identical views.
+
John Paul II was the first non-Italian Pope in 455 years. That could have been a fluke, and Italians were pushing hard for a return of the papacy to Italy. It's not enuf for them that it's called the "Roman" Catholic Church and is headquartered within Italy — tho not technically in Italy, Vatican City being a separate "country". In their (plainly limited) wisdom, the cardinals at least opted not to elect an Italian. Unfortunately, they stayed with a European, a major disappointment, and irritation, to the rest of the world. But in refusing to elect an Italian, they did opt, as some commentators observed, for a pope from "the global church". That is the first good thing about their choice.
+
The new Pope is an old fool, but at least he is old. That is the second (and last) good thing about this choice. We can expect him to die soon. Not soon enuf, but soon. Let's hope he doesn't end up fooling everybody and reigning for 30 years!
+
Of course, he could fool us all in another way: he could make an about-face from the radical-right views that he expounded under JP II. Perhaps he was just a kiss-ass doing JPII's dirty work when he had no power to set policy himself, so once he does have the power to set the Church's course, he will steer for the future, first hoisting the anchor of the past that he himself set so firmly in the muck of prior error.
+
One report I saw on the day the Pope was selected, quoted a German priest who called the choice of the German reactionary Ratzinger a "catastrophe" for the Church. It may well turn out to be so.
+
The Church is losing in its competition with Protestant churches in its traditional base, and it may not make up for that loss in numbers – and wealth and power – thru missionary work in the Third World.
+
Latin America comprises about half the Catholic world (so should have been given the papacy this time), and Protestant churches are growing fast there, in large part because they allow pastors to marry, so have plenty of people to offer pastoral services to congregants. By unfortunate contrast, the Catholic Church's insistence on the insane rule of celibacy for (some) priests has produced a very steep drop (catastrophic? perhaps) in the number of priests able to minister to their parishioners' temporal needs. Whereas Protestant churches afford practical aid of many kinds (housing, employment, psychological and family counseling, legal assistance, and on, and on) to the members of their flock thru a robust contingent of ministers, the Roman Church has so few priests available that it can't even keep some churches open, despite importunate demand from would-be parishioners. Tho lay advisors might assist in some matters, there are some functions for which only a priest will do.
+
Modern Western societies, the fundament of historic Christendom, do not accept Ratzinger's view that all wisdom in all things comes from the most conservative reading of the Bible, and that no matter how many thousands of years go by, the Church must never change its teachings — except, of course, as regards the Jews. Church teachings regarding the role of the Jews in arresting, abusing, and killing Christ have been completely changed in recent decades, in arrant, heretical defiance of the express language of the Gospels.
+
Why? Because the last Pope was Polish, and Poland was a major center of Ashkenazi Jewry. Karol Wojtyla (Pope JPII) grew up with bunches of Jews, and his personal friendships from childhood induced him to change the Church's teachings, teachings that had existed for almost 2,000 years! This is what happens when a church's doctrines rest upon the personal history, judgments, and prejudices of a single man (no pun intended) at any given time. In like fashion, Cardinal Ratzinger bears in his personal resume compelled-membership in the Hitler Youth. He is both indignant and embarrassed about that, so may continue the heretical teachings of JPII regarding the Jews, exculpating today's Jews from the sins of early Jewish zealots in killing Jesus and uncounted other early Christians, even tho falsifying that history and neglecting the honor that Islam accords Jesus has produced pro-Zionist and anti-Moslem policies among many Western countries that are entirely at variance with any commonsense reading of Christian, Jewish, and Moslem texts.
+
Ancient, baseless bigotries, as against homosexuality, are to be clung to, no matter how society might change and no matter how large a proportion of the public might abandon the Church from distaste for its mistreatment of gay people (including friends, co-workers, and members of their own family). Never mind that Jesus Himself never once condemned homosexuality, nor even mentioned it, which he could easily have done to pander to prejudice in order to make his message more palatable. (Compare Republican posturing on homosexuality to divert public attention from the vicious mistreatment of the poor for the benefit of the rich that their program entails.)
+
Sexless, psychological castrati are to be trusted to give wise and helpful advice to normal people, people who appreciate their full, human, sexual nature.
+
Ordinarily, voluntary sexual continence of any significant duration is proof of a severe mental disorder, even psychosis. Yet when such lunacy is undertaken in the name of holiness, we're supposed to think that the deformed personalities who embark upon so mad a devotion are not insane, but are indeed to be listened to about things they know nothing about.
+
Shriveled-up old fools who have been miserable all their lives for not being able to enjoy their full, human nature, cannot possibly convey the joy of real human life nor understand in any degree the true nature of sexuality.
+
Celibacy is a crime against the priesthood, and a deeply subversive force working powerful harm to the modern church. People who refuse to have sex are deviates, and a Church that rests its future on deviates is a Church in deep trouble.
+
What most people don't know is that the Roman Catholic Church actually does permit some priests to marry! There are "uniate" churches, which were once separate but which later reunited with Rome to recognize the Pope as head of the universal church (that's what "catholic" means) — whose priests are allowed to marry! How can any Pope defend the logical absurdity that it's okay for uniate priests to marry, but not for non-uniate priests to marry? Conversely, if it is wrong as a matter of morality or practicality for priests to marry, then the new Pope must forbid all priests of Rome to marry – and thus drive the uniate churches away from Rome again!
+
Priestly celibacy is driving millions away from the central Church all around the world. Why not uniates?
+
Perhaps it's time for the conference of bishops of major countries all around the world to remind Rome that "the Church" is actually the body of believers worldwide, not the hierarchy in Vatican City, and demand that the out-of-touch, shriveled-up old fools of the Vatican end compelled priestly celibacy, while of course allowing priests who choose not to marry to continue to do that, even tho normal people will regard such a bizarre choice with suspicion — as well they should.
+
The U.S. Conference of Bishops and their equivalents in Brazil, Mexico, the Philippines, and every other major Catholic country should warn Rome that they will disown the Pope's teachings and break away as fully as the Church of England broke with Rome — and take all Church assets in their countries with them — unless, at the least, the Pope ends compelled priestly celibacy.
+
Celibacy is ravaging the Church. One way it has done so is in the multitudinous incidents of priestly sexual abuse. Continence is driving priests crazy, quite literally, and thus impelling them to nonconsensual sex. Celibacy has long been a cover for maladjusted homosexuals to escape questioning as to why they haven't married. So again, in another way, we have a priesthood that cannot relate to the bulk of parishioners, not just because they don't share their sexual orientation, but because they hate and feel shame for sexuality, whereas the bulk of parishioners love their sexuality, and have integrated it into their lives.
+
When, despite their best efforts, priests both homosexual and heterosexual can no longer stand the misery and loneliness that the Church, in its madness, has inflicted on them, and act out, they don't always leave the priesthood first, and don't always find fully consenting partners (or partners legally regarded as capable of consent by virtue of age, even if they actually do consent, and indeed enthusiastically embrace sex that lawmakers want them to refuse).
+
It's time for the Roman Catholic Church to permit all priests, uniate and non-, to marry. It's time, as well, for the Church to get over its insane condemnation of homosexuality, which finds no support in the very most important thing Jesus taught us, the Golden Rule: As you would have others do to you, so too do to them. (Matthew 7:12) Think about the literal meaning of that commandment for more than two seconds, and you will realize that homosexual men obey it as fully as it can be obeyed.
+
If Jesus is God, and He told us, in plain words, to do unto others as we would have them do unto us; and gay men obey that commandment literally, how can homosexuality be wrong? If it's not wrong according to Jesus's own teaching, it cannot be wrong for any Church faithful to His teachings. Amen.
+
(The current U.S. military death toll in Iraq, according to the website "Iraq Coalition Casualties", is 1,567.)
- posted by L. Craig Schoonmaker @ 6:56 AM