The British like nothing more than the idea that the world is obsessed with our Royal
wedding. It is not entirely a delusion: Americans and Europeans, especially in the media, do seem quite captivated by William and Kate. It is what 24-hour news people call a ‘global talking point’.
In reality, though, most foreigners couldn’t care less about the big day tomorrow. Some of them have their own things to celebrate. The Poles, for instance, are getting very excited about the beatification of John Paul II this weekend.
On Sunday, in Rome, Pope Benedict XVI will elevate Karol Wojtyla, the most famous Pole ever to have lived, to the altars of the Church. Across the world, millions will watch; millions will rejoice; millions will wave flags. It will be like the Royal wedding, in fact – save that the protagonists will be single men, one of whom is dead. And rather than admiring Princess Kate’s hand-waving technique, the congregation in Rome will worship a vial of John Paul’s holy blood.
Among westerners, scepticism about the beatification prevails. Isn’t this the Pope who neglected to stop paedo priests? The dogged old reactionary who would not stand down even though he was incapacitated for more than a decade by Parkinson’s disease? The one who refused to reform the Church’s position on condoms and gays and women priests? How can he be on course to become a saint? Besides, aren’t saints and miracles out of date and silly?
Such an attitude is only to be expected from secular and liberal types. What’s more interesting, though, is that it is also quite fashionable among conservative Catholics to express objections to John Paul II’s elevation.
The traddie magazine The Remnant has expressed doubts as to whether John Paul II had expressed sufficient ‘heroic virtue in the exercise of his exalted office as Pope’ to justify his beatification,’ it said. ‘Given the condition of the Church as he left it, the pontificate of John Paul II objectively does not warrant any role for popular acclaim in his beatification, much less the immediate sainthood for which the large crowds have clamored.’
The Remnant’s article is not a mainstream view, to be sure, but it reveals the concerns that some loyal Catholics have about John Paul II. It is felt that he was not sufficiently interested in the traditional liturgy and that in other ways he changed the Church for the worse. During his pontificate, he ‘fast-tracked’ too many canonizations and thus undermined the importance of sainthood. Surely, the argument runs, his own cause should not be similarly rushed?
The traddies ought to put aside these quibbles, however. John Paul II, though he had faults, was a titan of Catholicism, a man who led the Church courageously through a dark time, who helped defeat godless Communism, and who inspired millions of young people to take up the faith.
It’s easy to scoff at his unwillingness to retire, but isn’t it a kind of ‘heroic virtue’ to carry serving as Universal Pontiff even as one’s body suffers the torments of a horrible disease?
I expect that what most bothers these sceptics is that John Paul II was loved, even by non-Catholics. In an age when Catholicism came to be seen as a sinister anachronism, he managed to be popular without compromising his principles. He did not suffer from the paranoia and bitterness that afflict so many Catholics in the modern world.
Make him a saint, I say, and sooner the better. And everybody should join in the celebrations.
Comments