5-12-25<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The Roman Catholics have elected a new pope. It is interesting to see the adulation of that election, or selection, or elevation, even from corners of the denomination who recently regretted \u2013 and in some cases despised and rejected \u2013 the late pope, Francis.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Pope Leo XIV could have taken the name of Pope Hope because, at least in these first days, many people are grafting their own views onto the largely unknown pontiff.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
I think it is fair to say that Leo\u2019s relative obscurity is somewhat responsible for the cardinals\u2019 choice. In a sense, \u201ccentral casting\u201d would have presaged a pope from South of the Equator \u2013 not a transplanted European or American \u2013 and perhaps, finally, from Africa or Asia, where the Church\u2019s center of gravity has shifted. But worldly concerns perhaps dominated as an American cardinal was chosen at a time when the Vatican is facing economic distress; someone who has been posted south of the Equator; a recently appointed cardinal whose main identification was as administrative arm of Francis.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
(During the College of Cardinals\u2019 conclave I was reminded of the 1963 novel Shoes Of the Fisherman<\/em>, about the death of a pope and intrigue surrounding the choice of a Ukrainian as successor. Suddenly plausible in the year of our Lord, 2025\u2026)<\/p>\n\n\n\n Oddly, because the Order has many friars, Leo might be the first Augustinian, just as Francis was the first Jesuit, pope. After all these years. But popes have been elevated from many places. Adrian IV, for instance, was born in England. During the Western Schism, there were two popes, Urban V and Clement VII. At times popes dictated their successors, often their relatives. Speaking of relatives, some popes had mistresses and illegitimate children. Because the Vatican was nearly bankrupt, Leo X devised a scheme whereby people were told they could buy their way out of hell \u2013 their dead relatives too.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Self-evidently, tradition counts for much in the Catholic hierarchy. By doctrine it is sometimes held virtually as sacred as Revealed Truth from Scripture. When God is seen as speaking through the church and councils, this is reasonable. As a Pentecostal, I believe that God can and does speak to us today. Whether as canonicity or edification is a point we debate. Luther even doubted whether certain books, for instance James, were appropriate canonical books.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Such debates will go on. Especially with the advent of Protestantism\u2019s hundreds of branches, we need modern-day Councils, and need to be wary of heresies. But \u2013 to return to the \u201celevation\u201d of Robert Prevost \u2013 it was interesting to hear commentators after the death of Francis talk about Christ being the \u201chead of the Church\u201d and \u201cthe Holy Spirit guiding the cardinals,\u201d but after the White Smoke, the same people discussed factions and internal politics and ideological horse-trading.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Who guides us? The Holy Spirit, or our informed intellects, or a mystical combination?<\/p>\n\n\n\n I suggest that we can\u2019t have it three ways. Or, we shouldn\u2019t. I attended a church in Connecticut years ago that operated on the basis of the Holy Spirit\u2019s guidance: all decisions that were addressed by councils, committees, and boards agreed to agree on all matters unanimously.<\/em> It was on this basis \u2013 the Lord had intentions for the church; the Holy Spirit works in our lives, as God\u2019s agent of sorts; and Heaven does not operate according to democratic votes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n If God Almighty created the universe as He desired, He surely would have intentions about how His children should reach the community with His message. And everything in between. Like choosing the CEO of a large church organization. The \u201cHoly\u201d \u201cFather.\u201d As I said, repeated votes for factional favorites seems contrary to \u201cbeing led by the Spirit.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n I recall in the days after the Resurrection of Jesus, history that comports with my feelings here. The \u201cTwelve,\u201d the Apostles, were down to 11 in number after the disgrace and suicide of Judas, betrayer of Christ. Despite the fact that the Lord had instructed them to remain in Jerusalem and \u201cwait,\u201d<\/em> they felt the need, as a virtual church committee, to choose a new member. They debated, cast lots and drew straws, and recruited a certain Matthias.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The \u201cround number\u201d of 12 was restored, but nothing at all is known in Scripture or without, about Matthias.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Democracy was superfluous. The disciples should have waited, obeyed Jesus, and had their guidance. Paul<\/em> was the missing piece of the Apostolic movement, the founding of the Church.<\/p>\n\n\n\n No fancy costumes\u2026 no extended votes\u2026 no black and white smoke signals. Just yielding to the Holy Spirit. What a concept.<\/p>\n\n\n\n + + +<\/p>\n\n\n\n