This title is in Latin, meaning “Where
are you going, Mother Church?” I have never studied Latin, so if my grammar is
incorrect I hope to be pardoned. “Quo Vadis” is the name of a famous book and
movie, based on an encounter between St Peter, the first pope, and the risen
Christ. Peter asks Christ where he is going; to which Christ famously replies “Roam
Vado Iterum Crucifigi” “I am going to Rome to be crucified again”. Peter
who was trying to avoid walking the path to Calvary now repents and proceeds to
Rome, where he is crucified upside down. This exchange is recorded in the
apocryphal “Acts of St Peter” (Vercelli Acts XXXV).
But the query itself is not
apocryphal. Peter actually asks Jesus this during the latter’s farewell discourse,
when he says “Lord where are you going?” (Jn 13:36). To this Jesus replies,
“Now you cannot follow me where I am going, but later you shall follow me” (Jn
13:37). In the context of the resignation of Pope Benedict XVI my question is
not who will be the next pope, but “Quo Vadis Mater Ecclesia?” If the second
question can be answered then the first one will be easy.
To find an answer one needs to delve
deep into church history in the light of modern reality. If not, we are bound
to repeat the blunders of history. I begin with the resignation. The media has
used three words to express peoples’ reactions – SHOCK or SURPRISE at the act,
or SPECULATION at the consequences. Just one word expresses my feeling –
RELIEF.
This may sound cowardly now that the
incumbent is on his way out. But I have consistently and publicly held this
position. Before the last Papal Conclave in 2005 I had written to all the
Indian cardinals pleading with them not to choose the “panzer cardinal”, as
Benedict was then known; and to opt for Cardinal Francis Arinze of Nigeria or
the one in Sao Paolo, Brazil. On the occasion of 50 years of Vatican II in
November 2012, I had again written that the present pope lacked the virtues of
his three predecessors - the simplicity of John XXIII, the sagacity of Paul VI
and the dynamism (in his earlier years) of John Paul II. I also expressed these
thoughts in the chapter “If I Were Pope” in my book “An Unfinished Symphony”
published in 2011. So I have been clear with my own Quo Vadis.
If readers are still wondering at my
sense of relief, this is why. I do not find anything said or done by the
incumbent to commend him for posterity. On the contrary, he raked up enough
controversies to set half the world against the Catholic Church – the Muslims, Jews
and non-Christians by his insensitive utterances. Nor did he gain friends in
Africa or South America with his observations on AIDS, condoms or
ex-communication for abortion. While towing a hard-line on women’s ordination
and clerical celibacy, he was allegedly much too soft on clerical paedophilia,
even resulting in the recall of his Nuncio (ambassador) to staunchly Catholic
Ireland. He went to the extent of labelling dissenters as “betrayers like
Judas”. So why should I not be relieved?
Church history is replete with the
misdemeanours of various popes. I will leave that for another article. For now
all that I am averring is that a pope is not an indispensable commodity. He is
infact disposable. The second reason for being relieved is a more practical one;
what I saw of the latter half of John Paul II’s pontificate. I was a great
admirer of the first half. His pink catechism touched the world. His social
doctrine was loud and clear. He supported the Solidarity Movement in his native
Poland that ultimately saw the collapse of the authoritarian Eastern Bloc and
the Soviet Union. He had a world presence and impact. I was privileged to
receive communion from his hands during his first visit to New Delhi in 1986,
and even kissed his feet. But I was dismayed at his second visit where, as a
State guest, he proclaimed that the third millennium should see the conversion
of Asia. What horrified me was to see a mumbling and fumbling old man at the
beatification of Mother Teresa. What message did millions of TV viewers get? So
I am relieved that, like Nebuchanezar, Benedict saw the writing on the wall and
quit while there was still daylight.
So we are back to Quo Vadis. Where
does the Catholic Church want to go, if at all? Would it prefer to be an
ostrich burying its head in the sand? Is it ready to engage with the reality of
an information explosion, or an increasing religious redundancy? How will it
relate to, or reach out to, other religions, the natural and behavioural
sciences, sexual ethics, the aspirations of women and youth? Will it shirk its
duty, or, like Peter, walk the path of the crucifixion?
The Catholic Church is the single
largest entity in the world. Its impact, as we have seen in the case of John
Paul II, is not limited to itself. Hence the choice of the next pope cannot be
left to the deliberations of a handful of cardinals who will be in the Sistine
Chapel. Each and every one of us Catholics, Christians and citizens of the
world has a role to play and a voice to express in the election of the next
pope. It is encumbent on us to immediately mobilise public opinion and debate.
Just a thought. In Sunday sermons I
have often heard enthusiastic clergymen extol the virtues of modern martyrs
like Abp Romero and Dom Helder Camarra. These Latin Americans had boldly stood
for the rights of the poor and oppressed, and paid with their lives. Had they
been alive in 2005 would the then cardinal electors have chosen one of them
instead of Joseph Ratzinger? A sobering thought. Quo Vadis?
Having studied something of the
history of the papacy I can unhesitatingly state that for almost 15 centuries
it was mired in controversy, palace intrigues, invading armies, imperial
intervention, nepotism, hedonism and simony. It struggled against heresies and
schisms, while simultaneously fortifying itself from the buffeting storms
outside. The papacy and hierarchy cocooned itself against its own inadequacy.
In the process it became corpulent and opulent; a far cry from the carpenter of
Nazareth who had no place to lay his head.
Then in the 13th century
God called a young man, Francis of Assisi, with the message, “Go and repair my
church”. He never became a priest, but he had the courage to confront the pope
and the cardinals. His absolute poverty and simplicity shook the conscience of
the cocooned church. He once took a companion on a preaching mission. They
travelled the whole day without saying a word. At the end the puzzled companion
said that they had not preached anything. To that Francis replied, “Our life
and presence have spoken more than a multitude of words”. The companion no
longer needed to ask Francis “Quo Vadis”?
Francis was followed by a galaxy of
great saints, many of who were founders of religious orders; like Sts Dominic,
Alphonsus Ligouri, Ignatius of Loyola, Francis Xavier, Teresa of Avila, John of
the Cross etc. Their presence was a much needed course correction for the
church.
There were other factors that also
forced the Catholic Church out of its shell. The printing press was the first
knowledge revolution, even making the Bible accessible to the common man. This
was followed by the Protestant Reformation, the exposure to other religions
through colonial expansion, the French and Industrial Revolutions, the
challenges of Karl Marx and Charles Darwin, Women’s Suffragacy etc. All this
culminated in the refreshing renewal of the Second Vatican Council.
This ushered in inter-religious
dialogue, ecumenism, interaction with the sciences, a destructuring of an
institutionalised church, de-latinisation through inculturation, as also
liberation theology and the Charismatic Renewal. Unfortunately, over the last
25 years there has been a gradual regression into the old cocoon; being
satisfied with pious devotions like novenas, rosaries, pilgrimages etc. It was
afraid to answer the question that the world posed to it – “Quo Vadis”?
Today we are in the midst of an IT/
ITES revolution, a knowledge explosion and an unbridled social media. The
tweets on Pope Benedict’s resignation are far from flattering.
Church leaders, both cleric and lay,
must stand up and be counted. Do we need another Francis of Assisi? Do we need
John the Baptist, the voice of one crying in the wilderness, “Prepare a way for
the Lord, make his paths straight” (Lk 3:4). Do we need the Prophet Jeremiah to
whom the Lord said, “Look, today I have set you over the nations and kingdoms,
to uproot and to knock down, to destroy and to overthrow, to build and to
plant” (Jer 1:10).
Will we see any of such true
Christians elected as the 266th pope? The answer my friend is
blowing in the wind that reiterates “Quo Vadis Mater Ecclesia?” Each one of us
must find the answer in both prayer and enlightened debate. Only then can we
proclaim that we are Pro Ecclesia et Pontifice.
No comments:
Post a Comment