Ronald, Orpha, and John Paul II: Thoughts on Popes

BODY

I've deliberately waited awhile to comment on this, because I feel that I'm at a disadvantage from lack of perspective. Whatever that may gain me in terms of objectivity won't accomplish anything if I don't know what I'm talking about.

Growing up, I was only aware of the pope in an inconsequential, superficial way. I stumbled upon the term around the age of nine or ten while reading through an encyclopedia. I grasped that he had some religious function, but mainly remember being amused by the closeness of this supposedly revered term to "poop." Of course, during high school, the majority of my friends were Catholic, but we didn't talk about religion often, and when we did our discussions circled more around parishes and sacraments than cardinals and the Vatican. In this sense, my introduction to the subject was probably opposite to many others'.

I can credit Inquiry, the initial phase of my conversion in 2001, as my proper introduction to the Holy Father. I came to understand the pope's bearing on the church as similar to the president's on the U.S., with seemingly fewer checks-and-balances, and I came to understand John Paul II as unambigously conservative, but also a great traveler and pilgrim; a man of unambiguous sincerity. I knew that he was exceptional for the duration of his leadership, as well as for being the first Polish pope; the first non-Italian in centuries.

More recently I've been aware of sharp disagreements I've had with the Vatican, concerning the ordination of women, the opposition of gay marriage, and the condemnation of artificial contraceptives. I also respected the pope's reluctance to approve either war in Iraq, and his humanitarian efforts around the world. On the other hand, I was unaware of his high-handedness in reassigning or excommunicating contentious priests and bishops, nor did I know of his role in undermining communist rule in Eastern Europe.

So for about three years, I've had at least a working knowledge of the papacy and this particular pope.

But I was totally unprepared for the outpouring of attention upon his death this week. I didn't understand how exceptional he really was, in every way, with stress on the exception. We was an exception. Pope's aren't typically like this, I guess. They don't hail from Europe's equivalent of Nebraska, apparently, they don't retain their position for twenty-six years, they don't circle the world dozens of times, they don't wade into crowds embracing the masses, they don't pray in mosques and synagogues, they don't double the number of saints or appoint dozens of Cardinals each year, and they certainly don't apologize for the Holocaust or Inquisition.

John Paul did all of these things in a big way. He has already been known as "the Great." It's an title applied to only four popes in the history of the church. That's four out of 266. When the majority of defining characteristics of any leader are exceptions, than the word "exceptional" applies.

So what am I to make of this man, this "distant leader" who has just passed? Who, on the one hand, brought a sensibility and groundedness to an institution that had seemingly been adrift for some time, and who, on the other hand, had packed the deck with his ideologic clones, insuring that one billion Catholics are plugged into the beliefs of a man born in 1920 until at least 2020.

I can think of two comparisons, one ominous and one with more promise. The best I can do is to try and understand the pope as standing somewhere among them.

* * * * *

It was shortly after I heard the news of the pope's passing that an anchorperson referred to him as "the Great Communicator."

Now who had I heard called that before?

...

Ah, yes...

Reagan.

And then the parallels start rolling in.

Both had probably initially seemed to be unlikely candidates (a Pole and an actor).
Both had taken over in a time of fragment and malaise.
Both had distinctive, memorable personalities characterized by an irreverence and sponteneity.

And most importantly... they energized their base, but in a way that shifted the priorities of that base.

I'm neglecting a slew of other parallels. For example, even if a line drawn between the explosion of the deficit and the critical shortage of priests in the third world is merely symbolic, I still view such connections as symptoms of institutional imbalance, as an unyielding, uncompromising attempt to circumvent the Law of Thermodynamics.
These parallels, however, are rooted in my beliefs regarding conservatism in general: as defined as resistance to change, and particularly institutional change, conservatives place too much faith in the legitimacy and scope of authority.
But of course, anyone who does not agree with that assertion will likely disagree with most of the connections I might draw between Reagan and John Paul.

Returning to the concept of a shifting base.

Reagan reenergized conservatives, but he did it by recentering the Right. Specifically, he retained economic credibility among most of his supporters by exchanging a balanced budget for corporate deregulation. Throw in his famous burst of defense spending and the deepening roots of the Christian right, and conservatives' long-term orientation had shifted considerably. We now have a Republican party largely unconcerned with small government and or a balanced budget, but with a sharply defined religious perspective.

John Paul II essentially did the same thing with conservative Catholics. In the wake of Vatican II, both traditional and liberal Catholics were struggling to find the touchstones of a church that had been almost unchanged for centuries. By energetically promoting a catholic (lower case) agenda around the world while vigorously excising uncomfortable questions, he shifted conservatives in the Catholic church in such a way that they are much more firmly entrenched today. Not only simply opposing gay marriage or the ordination of women, John Paul declared that these issues were not open for discussion. Not only appointing bishops who'd agree with his positions (a formidible wall on its own, 26 years long), he expelled those who voiced dissent. And his embrace of the developing world complicates matters. I don't want to stumble into the minefield of my own cultural bias, but conservative Catholicism is much more resilient for having shed (at least in part) the albatross of "colonial neglect." Much of John Paul's most enthusiastic support came from the poorest Catholic countries.

I never much cared for Reagan, myself. We disagreed on a great many things. I don't consider him to be the devil. But he did set the stage for some very scary Republicans. And John Paul has set the stage for some very scary popes.

Will our next pope be a W?

* * * * *

There is one other person the pope has reminded me of this week.

In a way, my contact is much more intimate, and at the same time, it's more of a struggle to explain.

I do not have any specific memories of my Great Grandma Turner; she died when I was about three. She used to hold me on her lap and sing. According to family, she voraciously consumed the news. I'm almost certain she would've agreed with the pope on just about everything, excepting Catholicism. But where is this connection grounded?

When I hear my great grandmother described, a sort of animation is always implied. It can't be physical animation; I don't know that she was very active, physically, though she did live to be 89. Rather, her mind was sharp, and her comments made an indelible imprint on those who heard them.

My family can correct me if I'm wrong.

But there's a common element to the animation described in my great grandma and Pope John Paul; a similitude so evocative that I've never found such inexplicable likeness between two people I've never met or cannot remember.

And though my great grandmother, as pope, would've probably made the same decisions as John Paul, Orpha Turner also set the stage for my grandmother. She helped bring my parents into the frame. She anchored the Coynes as a family, even when the original namesake member had gone elsewhere. Today, my grandmother has admirably stepped into that role, and has embodied mercy, compassion, and loyalty to a degree that defines those traits for me. Her mother helped to create that in her through integrity and direction.

Pope John Paul had integrity and direction.

So will our next pope be a Eunice?

My God... that would be wonderful.

That would be a call to faith I almost cannot imagine.