First, the practical politics. I think it unlikely the Pope’s successor will be less vocal in opposition to the War on Terror. It is likely, especially if the Pope is selected from the “Third World” group of Cardinals, whether Latin American or African, to find the foreign policy of the United States to be objectionable to Catholic teaching. This will make a lot of Catholics (including me) very uncomfortable even as president Bush’s policies are transforming the Middle East.
Counter to that is President Bush’s continuing outreach to Catholics. Bush will be the first President to attend the funeral of a pope, which will not go unnoticed by conservative Catholics. Lowering the White House flag and the flag at federal buildings was a nice touch. Perhaps Bush’s appearance at the funeral might help soften the Vatican’s opposition in the years to come.
Second, on a personal level, Pope John Paul II was the “only” pope I’ve known. I converted in 1992 after graduating college. Perhaps because of my cynical nature and rather unobservant upbringing, the pomp and circumstance of the Church has never been as important as the Faith, but I admit to being awestruck by the traditions even as I am saddened by the death. I’ll probably bawl like a baby on Friday.
Third, I have to say I’m a little disappointed by what I’ve seen and heard in the Milwaukee Archdiocese. The television has been showing the faithful gathering to mourn the death of John Paul II, yet Mass at my church yesterday paused momentarily for a moment of silence, the Lord’s Prayer and a Hail Mary; Fr. Leonard dedicated his homily to the late Pope; and then we were treated to a homily on Dostoevsky. Now, I like Russian novelists, but this was not the time or the place. I checked with my wife’s mom and the same thing at their church (I think, minus the Dostoyevsky), and a long time friend told me at her church (admittedly a very “progressive” Catholic church) the priest made a comment to the effect of “while I disagreed with the Holy Father on many issues, we will certainly miss him.” I’m gathering more tales as I go along, but Archbishop Dolan still has a lot of work to do.
Fourth, I’ve noticed how all the “progressives” have come out of the woodwork to say what the next pope should do, etc. Can I just say how presumptuous it sounds? What hubris it would take to say, “If I were Pope…” which is what they’re really saying. (I could suggest blasphemy, “If I was God…” but ironically this is usually reserved for atheists.) I heard one priest this weekend on NPR state all the new seminarians care about is learning “The Truth” and seeing the world in terms of good and evil, and he wondered how the new pope was going to deal with this.
Fifth, I’m curious that if the next Pope is chosen from “the third world” will the “progressives” be able to look past his likely conservative philosophy to see the color of his skin? Supposedly that’s a real issue of concern for them, multicultural diversity, etc. Or will the “progressives” resort to the epithets reserved for minority American conservatives? Can a pope be an “Uncle Tom?” And will the major media repeat a mantra of the new pope’s skin color “shocking” American conservative Catholics, as if they’re a bunch of KKK members.
