March 23, 2017

February 13, 2013

PMS 2: Why Can’t the Pope Be More Like Us

OK, the Washington Post editorial board didn’t actually say that the Pope should be more like a collection of journalists. It did say, however, that the successor to Benedict XVI should sound a lot more like an American liberal:

The hallmark of Pope Benedict’s tenure, for better or for worse, was fierce resistance to those changes. He rejected calls by Catholic progressives for reconsideration of doctrines such as celibacy and the ban on women in the priesthood; at a time when acceptance of the rights of gays and lesbians is rapidly spreading across the world, he was outspoken in condemning homosexuality as “unnatural” and unacceptable. With sectarian tension growing in Europe as well as the Middle East, he eschewed dialogue with Muslims and infuriated many by quoting a condemnation of Islamic theology as “evil and inhuman.”

1) Celibacy is not a doctrine, it’s a discipline, and is not universal among Roman Catholic clergy. 2) The Vatican under John Paul II closed the door on discussion of male priesthood, and those who continue to demand that it “reconsider” the question might as well demand that it repudiate the doctrine of the Trinity. 3) Acceptance of gay rights is “rapidly spreading” across the Western  world. Most of the world still regards homosexual behavior as wrong. 4) The Regensburg lecture is hardly the only thing Benedict had to say about Islam during the course of his tenure. And and as far as it goes, what he said in that lecture was a classic gaffe—factually correct, and problematic because solely because of external circumstances (in this case, the sensitivity of many Muslims to any form of criticism, no matter how constructive or benignly intended.)

Pope Benedict will leave behind a church facing the same debilitating problems that loomed after the death of Pope John Paul II — above all, how to remain relevant to an increasingly secular world and to its own changing membership. This pope’s response was to insist that only uncompromising adherence to past doctrine could preserve the faith. Catholics who seek a different answer will have to hope that a college of cardinals dominated by the pope’s appointees will choose a more progressive successor.

In other words, American and European Catholics (and the Post editorial board) who want the Roman Catholic Church to become the U.S. Episcopal Church must hope that cardinals appointed by two great champions of Catholic orthodoxy will elect a pseudo-Catholic as Pope. Hope they aren’t holding their collective breath. They clearly aren’t getting quite enough oxygen to the brain as it is.

Share this story:

Recent Related Posts



Of course TEo, PCUSA, ELCA, UCC, etc. have all followed the WaPo’s advice about “relevance” and become completely irrelevant.

But don’t let facts get in the way of a theory that makes you feel good.

[1] Posted by Bill2 on 2-13-2013 at 04:00 PM · [top]

Precisely!!! And the Washington Post submits +KJS for the position of Bishop of Rome and successor to the Petrine ministry.  It is necessary have a leader that places relevance to the increasingly secular world as the main priority.  Nobody wants to feel badly about themselves, for heaven’s sake.

[2] Posted by aacswfl1 on 2-13-2013 at 04:02 PM · [top]

What a hoot! Was that in the Comics section of the Washington Post (I refuse to click on the link) ?

[3] Posted by Undergroundpewster on 2-13-2013 at 04:20 PM · [top]

Considering at least one member of the editorial board, Jonathan Capehart, is openly homosexual and recently condemned Rev. Louis Giglio as an “unrepentant bigot,” I can’t say the Post’s editorial is entirely surprising. However, it demonstrates what little understanding the Post’s editorial board has of basic Christian doctrine in general and the Catholic Church in particular.

[4] Posted by the virginian on 2-13-2013 at 04:54 PM · [top]

So American and European exceptionalism is out unless we are talking about the Catholic Church and her teaching on faith and morals.  Liberal logic strikes again.

[5] Posted by Paula Loughlin on 2-13-2013 at 05:27 PM · [top]

WaPo editorial board contemplates idea that next Pope may be Catholic, too.  The horror!

[6] Posted by Katherine on 2-13-2013 at 07:04 PM · [top]


[7] Posted by David Fischler on 2-13-2013 at 09:30 PM · [top]

Great article David, couldn’t put it better.

[8] Posted by MichaelA on 2-14-2013 at 01:58 AM · [top]

David Fischler,

You wrote [of American and European Catholics (and the Post editorial board)] :

They clearly aren’t getting quite enough oxygen to the brain as it is.

Perhaps unsurprisingly to you and others, this prompts me to inquire why you think it might be beneficial for them to increase the oxygen flow to an organ they (at least the liberal ones) quite obviously seldom use?

Pax et bonum,
Keith Töpfer

[9] Posted by Militaris Artifex on 2-17-2013 at 04:32 PM · [top]

Registered members are welcome to leave comments. Log in here, or register here.

Comment Policy: We pride ourselves on having some of the most open, honest debate anywhere. However, we do have a few rules that we enforce strictly. They are: No over-the-top profanity, no racial or ethnic slurs, and no threats real or implied of physical violence. Please see this post for more explanation, and the posts here, here, and here for advice on becoming a valued commenter as opposed to an ex-commenter. Although we rarely do so, we reserve the right to remove or edit comments, as well as suspend users' accounts, solely at the discretion of site administrators. Since we try to err on the side of open debate, you may sometimes see comments which you believe strain the boundaries of our rules. Comments are the opinions of visitors, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of Stand Firm site administrators or Gri5th Media, LLC.