Why the Papacy is Probably One of the Most Misunderstood Institutions of our Times
As a Catholic, I am often struck by the fact that the papacy is one of the most misunderstood institutions of our times. Much of the commentary I have heard about the papacy, whether concerning John Paul II, Benedict XVI, Francis or Leo XIV, seems to insinuate that the Pope is equivalent to a the leader of a political party or the CEO of a global franchise.
On this view, the Pope can steer the Church in a more “liberal” or “progressive” or “conservative” direction, depending on his personal opinion and preferred political ideology. For example, one pope might be in favour of women priests, another against; one might want to take a more lenient view of homosexual relations, while another might condemn them; one might soften the Church’s stance on abortion, while another might take a “harder line.”
I will be co-teaching a 6 week online workshop on “the thinking society” that starts this Thursday, 22nd May at 7:30-9:00PM UK time. Click here to learn more or sign up.
If this were true, the Catholic Church, its teachings, and its moral requirements would be like putty in the hands of the sitting Pope. Fundamental church teachings could be revised or abrogated via a papal “executive order.” Faithful Catholics would have to revise their political opinions to row in behind whatever the Pope happened to opine on climate change, vaccines, economic policy, or the welfare State.
Were all of this to be true, the Catholic Church would no longer be a remotely credible religious institution. Rather, it would be a despotic human institution, in which the opinions of one man could ride roughshod over millennia of well established teachings, and Catholics would be obliged to slavishly parrot whatever political opinions came out of the mouth of the Pope, no matter how problematic or contestable they happen to be.
If the Pope actually had the power or authority to fundamentally alter or abrogate well established Church teachings, or impose a duty on Catholics to accept his personal views on complex political questions such as the most effective way to express solidarity toward the poor within our political institutions, then the Catholic Church would crumble under the weight of its own contradictions, and ordinary Catholics would be compelled to choose between rationality and remaining devout members of the body of the Church.
Thankfully, Catholics are not compelled to choose between rationality and devout participation in the life of the Church, because the Pope is not equivalent to the head of a political party or the CEO of a global franchise, even if certain pundits might claim otherwise. The Pope is not a political leader as we typically understand it, but a spiritual leader. His job is to be the vicar of Christ and to safeguard the treasures of a two-thousand-year-old institution, above all the treasure of faith in Christ and the most essential truths of that faith.
Nowhere in his job description is the idea that he should instruct Catholics on the findings of climate science, or the pros and cons of market-based versus State-based solutions to poverty, or the medical merits of this or that vaccine. Nor is it in his job description to fundamentally redefine Church teachings to make them fit “modern times.” Rather, he is a temporary guardian of a rich moral and spiritual tradition whose ultimate guarantor is Christ Himself.
From the outside, the election of the Pope might seem like a competition between competing political ideologies. But from the inside - from the perspective of Catholics who care deeply about their Church and view it as an instrument of salvation - the election of the Pope is the election of the successor of St. Peter, a man entrusted, by the grace of God, with protecting the spiritual and salvific mission of the Church, and being “the servant of the servants of God.”