The Catholic Church, particularly under the present Pope, has not been an organisation noted for moving with the times. That is seen by some as a weakness. By others, however, it is seen as a great strength of the Church.
Two thousand years after the birth of Christ and, depending on whose view you take, between 1600 and 2000 years after the foundation of the Roman Catholic Church, the present Pope, John Paul II, is in poor health, frail and probably finding the tasks of the papacy pushing the limits of his endurance.
The Pope, aged 79, is suffering from Parkinson’s disease. He also suffers from the after effects of an assassination attempt earlier in his pontificate. At times he is visibly unsteady on his feet.
His condition led to Bishop Karl Lehmann of Mainz, who serves as the chairman of Germany’s Bishops Conference, to say at the weekend, “”I personally trust that the Pope, if he were to have the feeling that he was simply no longer capable enough to lead the church, I believe he would have the strength and the courage to say, “I can no longer fulfil that which needs to be done.’ “”
Bishop Mainz was probably expressing what many have thought privately. Since his comments Bishop Mainz has denied that he was calling for the Pope to resign. Rather, the bishop said, he said he was saying it was open for the Pope to resign.
One of the difficulties of having an organisation led by one men with absolute authority is that there is no separation of power or system of checks and balances. There is no-one to determine if the one in absolute authority should step aside for whatever reason. There is no one but the Pope himself to say if the Pope should step down. So Bishop Mainz’s statement that it is open for the Pope to resign is tautology.
This Pope is in an invidious situation. He is perhaps the first to reach old age in the age of modern medicine with its capability of prolonging the life of people in quite frail condition. The previous two Popes, John Paul I and Paul VI died quickly. Before that Popes were not in the age when medicine could engage in long life-prolonging treatments. If they had been at the end of the assassination attempt or had Parkinson’s disease, they would have passed away by now.
The Church, however, will not change theology and practice to meet changing circumstances, whether it is in response to the pill, calls for euthanasia or calls for equality of the sexes.
The precedent for resignation is not a good one.
It is more likely that modern developments which keep the Pope alive will also enable him to do his tasks in a way not possible in an earlier age. A few days after Christmas, for example, he used an electric cart to glide down the nave of St Peter’s.
The precedent for resignation is not a good one. The last pope to voluntarily resign was Celestine V in 1294. He was 85 at the time. But he had been Pope for only five months after the papacy had been vacant for two years. He took on the job feeling he would save the church, but he was not up to the administrative tasks. Apparently he was pressured to resign. After his resignation some declared it illegal and questioned the authority of the new Pope. Dante expressed his disapproval of the resignation by placing Celestine at the gate of hell. But the Church itself must have been less concerned because he was canonised.
For now, however, there is no suggestion the Pope’s mind is any less acute than it was a decade ago. There is no reason why he should not serve out his term like every Pope for the past 800 years.