There are some observers who might regard the heading of this essay as a provocative statement.  However, to Pope watchers such as myself, the statement is justified by a sharp drop in the Pope’s voltage which may be due to a short circuit.  Two particular statements have led me to conclude that this octogenarian Pope has reached his dotage.
The Vatican publishes a daily newspaper which is called L’Osservatore Romano.  Last August the Pope summoned a reporter from that newspaper to his summer residence, which is called Castel Gandolfo.  When the Pope is ready to make a statement, there is no give and take as would be the case when an American President, for example, is interviewed.  The Pope simply reads his statement from his paper and then the paper is given to the reporter, who is responsible for reproducing it in type.  There are no follow-up questions, nor are other questions permitted.  In the statement last summer, the Pope said that he wanted to take his Church back to the second century in the current era.
Why he selected the second century is a great mystery which the Vatican newspaper did not explore.  If he had mentioned the first century, he could have met Jesus himself.  He could also have met Peter, upon whose rock his Church is founded.  He could also have met Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John and the rest of the Jewish disciples.  In the first century he may also have met Judas and perhaps even Satan.  But why the Pope picked the second century as opposed to the first century is a matter of great puzzlement.
Then last week, there was a development involving the Archdiocese of New York City.  You may recall that seven or eight years ago there was a priestly scandal in Boston involving altar boys.  That case was settled by the Boston Diocese paying enormous sums to the litigants that brought the diocese to the brink of bankruptcy.  One of the priests involved in that affair was named Edward Egan.  One way or another, he was transferred to the Archdiocese in New York City where his performance over the years has been quite colorless.
But now Egan is retiring and is being replaced by the Archbishop of Milwaukee, who is named Timothy Michael Dolan.  On one hand, Archbishop Dolan shows signs of promise in that he went to the curb in front of St. Patrick’s Cathedral and ordered a hot dog from the vendor there.  The vendor instructed the Archbishop in how to eat the hot dog because he saw that Archbishop Dolan was not accomplished in such culinary delights as the vendor’s hot dog.  The fact that Dolan made friends with a hot dog vendor in front of St. Patrick’s Cathedral tells me that he has lots of promise.
On the other hand, it appears that Dolan’s appointment was used by the Pope to tighten the right-wing bonds that govern the conduct of the faithful in the New York City diocese.  For example, the headline in the New York Times said that under Dolan there would be strict adherence to the rule against all forms of birth control.  Secondly, Dolan is obliged to observe that there will be no abortions during his term in office.  Even if a young virgin is raped by a lunatic from the insane asylum with a venereal disease, Dolan is obliged to tell that young woman that she must carry the fetus to term.  Divorce is prohibited.  Beyond that, the Pope told Dolan to be vigilant against divorce, same-sex marriages, and especially any cracks in the wall on priestly celibacy.  The facts are that Dolan would not have gotten the New York City job unless he agreed to the Pope’s ultra-right-wing agenda.  Whether Dolan agrees with all these restrictions is of no consequence because he has agreed to carry out the Pope’s agenda.
There was a great puzzlement about the Pope wanting to return to the second century in the current era which was never answered.  In the case of the right-wing restrictions, it is obvious that events on the ground make the Pope’s views fairly obsolete.  Consider the ban on all birth control devices.  In this case, the Church specifies that every act of sexual intercourse must be open to the transmission of life.
Aside from the strain that this would put on population increases, there are individual considerations that must be observed.  Let us say that there is a young 28-year-old married couple who reside in a two-bedroom apartment in New York City.  When the husband suggests sexual intercourse, the wife may readily agree provided that the husband bear some things in mind.  In the second bedroom, there is a crib with a six-month-old child in it who shares that lodging with his brother, who is now 19 months of age.  The wife may point out that the transmission of life doctrine might cause them to have another pregnancy, resulting in their having to look for a larger apartment.  She may also show the amorous husband their checkbook which details the payments for pre-natal care as well as for the hospital delivery.  Beyond that, she may remind the husband that the public schools in New York City are more than inept in some cases, which means that whatever children occur in this marriage must be privately schooled.  The cost for private schooling now runs more than $20,000 per year.  At the grade school and high school levels, the cost may well approach $25,000 per year or even more.
A Catholic university such as Boston College is now flirting with the $50,000 a year cost for tuition, board, and lodging.  Even Hofstra, a local college which is not Catholic, is now charging a bit more than $50,000 a year to educate its pupils.
By this time the husband gets the message that it is “not tonight, dear.”
There are many other drawbacks in the line that poor old Dolan will be charged with enforcing.  When a man and a woman in a marriage dislike each other intensely, are they to be expected to live together until the end of their lives because the Church refuses to recognize divorce?
There are other interesting aspects to the Pope’s line that Dolan will be involved in enforcing.  I have been led to believe that those who embrace religious thought say that we are all created in God’s image.  For purposes of argument, I am willing to accept that premise.  That is all well and good as long as we are talking about heterosexual couples.  Whether we like it or not, there are people who love others of the same sex.  I cannot find it in my heart to say to a homosexual couple that their love is not as great as the love that exists between a heterosexual couple.  Are we to contend that when God made homosexual men and women, there was a terrible mistake committed?  May I say that when the Church discriminates against homosexual men and women, it is being ungenerous and not in keeping with Christian ethics?  Gay people have as much need for love as do any of the rest of us.
In the Pope’s directive to Archbishop Dolan, we also find an admonition against any crack in the wall of priestly celibacy.  This rule strikes me as being particularly insane.  Why is the Catholic clergy shut off from intimate contact with more than half of the earth’s population?  Married clergy in the Catholic faith are not unknown.  It could well have existed in the second century of the current era.  Beyond that, there are scholars who offer convincing proof that Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene.  I cannot understand why the Church, at its highest levels, forbids marriage and restricts women who serve the hierarchy to cooking the meals, making the beds, and emptying wastebaskets.  I am firmly convinced that if the current Pope were married, his wife would tell him that the ban on all birth control devices was totally silly.  But he is not married, and he associates himself primarily with other celibates.  From the Church’s standpoint, this is a recipe for disaster.
Bristol Palin, the 18-year-old daughter of the Governor of Alaska, recently produced a love child.  Miss Palin has enunciated a doctrine that ought to be of considerable use to the Pope in his endeavors.  Bristol Palin has said, “Abstinence is not realistic.”  This Bristol Palin shows great promise as a philosopher.  I would urge Dolan and the Pope to put her to work on such things as the ban on birth control and priestly celibacy.  Also, I would argue that the Pope’s insistence on taking his Church back to the second century may indicate that his dotage is upon us.  When it is followed by the rigid restrictions that he has asked Archbishop Dolan to perform in New York City, it becomes clear that, as the British say, he may have “gone around the bend.”
I have taken this opportunity to offer my thoughts on the German Pope because the Pope insists that his is the universal Church.  If it is universal, that means that it covers me regardless of my untoward views of religion in general.  But if I am covered by the universal Church idea, it would be too much to expect that an Irish essayist would have nothing to say.  Beyond that, my last essay had very kind words for three Catholics.  They were John XXIII, Bishop Fulton Sheen, and Mother Angelica, who formerly headed a group of nuns in Alabama.  So you see my remarks are not anti-Catholic at all.
The Pope and I are veterans of the Second World War.  As the war drew to a close, the Pope was drafted to serve his nation.  His nation, of course, was Germany.  During his period of service, the Pope, whose maiden name is Joseph Ratzinger, joined the National Socialist Party, which is commonly called the Nazi Party.  If we were ever to meet, say in a Munich beer hall, it would lift my spirit of puzzlement to hear the Pope’s explanation for taking his Church back to the second century.  I would also be greatly interested in why he insists that Bishop Dolan impose restrictions on Catholics that come from that era.  And I would like for the Pope to tell me that joining the Nazi Party was a foolish mistake which he made prior to his seventeenth birthday.
I would find it incumbent upon me to tell the Pope that he had lost his virginity by interfering in the American presidential elections of 2000 and 2004.  When the current Pope headed the Office of the Inquisition as a Cardinal, he was visited by George W. Bush.  Later on when he became the Pope, in the election of 2004, George W. Bush visited him again.  As a consequence, the Pope instructed American bishops that any candidate who did not grow livid in his denunciation of abortion could be denied the sacrament of communion.  For example, one wire service in the U.S. reported that a woman who had voted for John Kerry, went immediately to the confessional booth to be relieved of her great sin.  The bishops of Newark, St. Louis, Scranton and Denver were quick to announce that John Kerry would be denied the sacrament in their diocese.
Was there a quid-pro-quo in this arrangement?  We will never know, but when Bush assumed the presidency, he banned stem cell research and the over-the-counter morning-after pill.  The juxtaposition of the two events is very interesting.
The number of World War II veterans is growing slimmer by the day.  So I invite my readers, Catholic, Protestant, heathen, Jew or otherwise, to be prepared for the outcome of my meeting with the Pope.  It may be historic, but in the final analysis, who knows?
E. E. CARR
February 28, 2009
Essay 371~~~
Kevin’s commentary: How very odd. I don’t really get the 2nd century thing at all. Though I guess that’s round about when the bible started actually being put together, unless I’m mistaken. So maybe he wanted to get in on that? Who knows. In any event I can say with confidence that the current Pope is way, way better than ol’ Ratty.
It’s also funny that Palin and the love child are mentioned here because they are back in the news again four years later; the father is suing for half custody. Sarah called him a deadbeat.
Finally, especially considering the essay mentions the war, I’d like to wish Pop a happy veteran’s day. I’m publishing this of course on 11/11/13 even though the date that you may see on the top of this post is somewhat behind schedule.