Saturday, March 2, 2013

Two infallible popes at once?


News Flash: “Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI scheduled to hold press conference to denounce current Pope’s most recent encyclical, saying, ‘I heard the voice of God tell me, in no uncertain terms, that I must voice my opposition.’”

Wow! Suppose Benedict was to do such a thing, while claiming he was acting upon the very spoken command of the Lord. How would the sitting Pope take that? Would he say, “Oh, yeah? Well, the Lord in His own voice told me otherwise.” More importantly, how would the world’s Catholics respond? That future response should wait until a response is forthcoming to this from the present:


QUOTE:

In an emotional goodbye to 100,000 supporters, the Pope revealed that he is stepping aside because God told him to.

… Benedict XVI [said] that he was resigning because God had called on him to devote himself to prayer. He said God had told him 'to climb the mountain'.

:UNQUOTE: Source: see NOTE 1.



The Voice vs. the Lord’s Will

The response I’m looking for is in the form of answers to some questions: “Pray tell, Benedict, what was the voice of the Lord like? Was it high or low? Tenor or baritone? Male, female, androgynous?" I’ve heard stories of people claiming to have heard the voice of the Lord, but I’ve never heard anyone actually describe it.

I suspect this Pope Emeritus did not hear the actual voice of the Lord or he would have described this voice. Or even if we should grant that he felt disinclined to describe, much can be made of the media not even bothering to ask this question: “What did this voice sound like?”

What most likely happened is that Benedict prayed, or perhaps more accurately “meditated,” on whether or not to resign. The resulting sense of what he should do ended up simply being referred to as “God had called on him to devote himself to prayer.” Apparently, God can “call” without using His actual voice - the idea being, the man doing the praying simply interprets his own personal sense of the Lord’s will as being the Lord’s will.


Benedict’s infallibility: Current status

The following quote, especially the part I highlight in yellow, makes clear that Benedict is no longer infallible:


QUOTE:

Papal infallibility is a dogma of the Catholic Church which states that, in virtue of the promise of Jesus to Peter, the Pope is preserved from the possibility of error[1] "when, in the exercise of his office as shepherd and teacher of all Christians, in virtue of his supreme apostolic authority, he defines a doctrine concerning faith or morals to be held by the whole Church".[2]

:UNQUOTE: Source: Wikipedia article, “Papal infallibility.”


This quote should put the matter to rest. However, there are complications, the first of which takes this form: Can a currently reigning Pope when, in the exercise of his office “[define] a doctrine concerning faith or morals” which is in opposition to a doctrine offered by another Pope, (say) centuries earlier (also when, in the exercise of his office)? Can both Popes, even though at variance with each other, be said to be infallible?


“Unconditional reverence and obedience”

Another complication: Even when a Pope resigns, could an influential number of lay (and clerical) Catholics come to feel that he still has authority, especially were he to claim he’d heard the voice of God telling him to rise in opposition to the current Pope? Keep that question in mind while you ponder this:


QUOTE:

[On 2/28/13, Benedict XVI said] "Among you there is the future pope, to whom I today declare my unconditional reverence and obedience."

:UNQUOTE: source: see NOTE 2.


More amazing than Benedict saying such a thing is why he would say such a thing. The Pope Emeritus shouldn’t have had to find it necessary to so “declare” - his silence on the matter being more sensible. I mean, how can anyone declare “unconditional reverence and obedience” to a man not-yet-elected? Is Benedict saying that he could accept anyone elected by the College of Cardinals, a body which (by the way) is not infallible? Even though Benedict’s words seem to trap him into supporting the new Pope, he could simply reverse himself later by declaring that God told him to. And that possibility should be of grave concern to the College.

What Benedict seems to be saying - a message I’m sure is not lost upon the College - is, “Yes, you’d better believe it makes a difference that I would make such a declaration at all.” It seems that the man known as “God’s Rottweiler” - the author of 66 books, a former university theologian, and former head of the Inquisition (yes, I’ll use the old term for that office) - is serving notice that the College can’t elect any but a staunch conservative as the next Pope.

In spite of his words to the contrary, Benedict XVI has no intention of simply fading away to live a life steeped in prayer while removed from worldly concerns. He will wear the white dress of the Popes, not the black of an ordinary clergyman. He will be called His Holiness and Pope Emeritus, and not something more humble. Of course, the new Pope will not be entirely without resources should Benedict show any signs of opposition. I’ll come right out and say it: The new Pope could see to it that Benedict dies an untimely death.

It might be better for the new Pope not to wait until Benedict shows any such signs. Even though Benedict might not be of a mind to oppose the new Pope now, it’s not certain how he’ll come to feel in the future. For it is written, “Sometimes people get strange in their old age.” Too much is at stake to allow for the existence of a potential loose cannon, which is a doctrine I’m sure even Benedict would appreciate.


The Holy Father


QUOTE:
In February 2013, the Vatican announced that Pope Benedict XVI will retain the style "His Holiness" after resigning and becoming Pope Emeritus.

[and]

The Pope may be alternatively called The Holy Father.

:UNQUOTE: source: Wikipedia article entitled “His Holiness.”

I have a problem when men try to make humans into gods - even in the case of Jesus Christ Himself. How do we tolerate calling mere men by such titles as “Reverend,” “His Holiness,” and (worst of all) “the Holy Father?” To my way of thinking (even though I’m a Buddhist, not a Catholic), there should be only one Holy Father as far as Catholics are concerned - the Lord God sitting in heaven above.

Unfortunately, we humans seem possessed of a need to think someone should be in charge. In the workplace, this is considered ideal; but even in the realm of the spirit, many think likewise. However, I draw great comfort from an odd source, the Gohonzon of the Nichiren sects. I say “odd” simply because, though once a member of such a sect, I can appreciate many of the lessons I’d learned under their influence.

When I chanted Nam-myoho-renge-kyo as a member of the Soka Gakkai International, I would stare at a scroll of paper upon which were printed Chinese characters. That scroll, called a Gohonzon, was supposed to be my Object of Worship or, perhaps more palatably, my Object of Devotion. Or, as some would offer: "It's simply something to look at while I chant." The most important characters were prominently displayed vertically down the center of this scroll:  “Nam-myoho-renge-kyo” under which appeared the name “Nichiren.” This was supposed to indicate the “oneness of the Person and the Law.”

At first I thought that was rather strange that the Person wasn’t even a Buddha - for it is well known that Nichiren, never once in his life, declared himself to be a Buddha - while the characters representing the buddhas Shakyamuni  and Many Treasures appear in smaller size “outside the Law (of Nam-myoho-renge-kyo),” as it were, appearing near the top of the Gohonzon to the left and right, respectively, of N-M-R-K.

This link shows the relationship clearly in the form of a diagram:


However, it helps to remember that Nichiren, the son of a fisherman, lived in 13th century Japan as a monk who founded a sect that had relatively little influence in the halls of power or among the general population. In short, Nichiren was a nobody. But with a distinction: he (and, later, his followers) were the only people at the time who taught the supremacy of the Lotus Sutra. This Sutra taught that all people have the capacity to become fully-enlightened buddhas.

I think Nichiren was trying to say, by means of listing himself as the Person referred to in the concept of “oneness of the Person and the Law,” that the task of propagating the Law is up to the common man (in other words, nobodies like Nichiren) since there are no longer any Buddhas in the world - at least, there aren’t any who have stepped forward.

The importance of nobodies can be appreciated in this quote from Burton Watson’s English-language translation of the Lotus Sutra, declared by the Buddha as his highest teaching:


QUOTE:

Medicine King, if there should be an evil person who, his mind destitute of goodness, should for the space of a kalpa [a period of billions of years] appear in the presence of the Buddha and constantly curse and revile the Buddha, that person's offense would still be rather light. But if there were a person who spoke only one evil word to curse or defame the lay persons or monks or nuns who read and recite the Lotus Sutra, then his offense would be very grave.

:UNQUOTE.


It’s refreshing to see a Buddha pay such homage to “lay persons” and to see Nichiren, the leader of a religious movement, use himself as an example of a relative nobody with whom laymen could easily identify.

Nichiren never had a temple to call his own and was, for most of his life, a homeless monk living (barely) off the donations of others. For my money, though, Nichiren stands far superior to Pope Emeritus Benedict who is so worldly-attached to the honors and trappings of his (former?) office.


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

NOTES

NOTE 1:  Article by Hannah Roberts & Sam Webb published on 2/24/13 in the UK’s Daily Mail.

NOTE 2: “Pope Benedict quits Vatican with promise to obey successor,” an article by Phillip Pullella (Reuters, 2/28/13).


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *


Steven Searle, former candidate for US President (2008 and 2012)
Founder of the Independent Contractors’ Party

“As for who should be in charge, look no further than the reflection offered by your bathroom mirror.”

Contact me at bpa_cinc@yahoo.com

No comments:

Post a Comment