THREE WORLDS DIARY
What's Behind the The Pope's Resignation?
NOTE: (This post is not intended to insult the Roman Catholic Church, but to analyze where the church now stands in light of Pope Benedict XVI's Resignation, and what a possible way forward could look like).
The evening that Pope Benedict XVI announced his resignation as the Pontiff, the Bishop of Rome, the head of the Roman Catholic Church--lightening struck St. Peter's Cathedral in Rome. Is this a coincidence or an ominous sign? While the Vatican has always been a place of political intrigue and complexity, the Holy See's current situation is not so difficult to figure out: The church is facing a severe global public relations problem that is spiraling out of control during Pope Benedict's tenure.
WHAT HAPPENED UNDER BENEDICT?
When Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger became Pope Benedict XVI in 2006, he was following in the footsteps of the most charismatic, global, and popular Pope in the history of the Roman Catholic Church: John Paul II. The Polish Pope was electrifying for a number of reasons:
1) After decades of Italian Popes, the Cardinals chose an obscure Cardinal from the Eastern Bloc nation of Poland.
2) John Paul II spoke nine languages fluently and managed to visit nearly 200 countries around the world. Prior to him, Pope's rarely traveled--and certainly not to that extent.
3) JPII used the power of the Papacy to pressure the Soviet Union and Eastern Nations' Communist regimes. He is often credited along with Gorbachev and Reagan as being a key to the end of the Cold War.
4) John Paul II was only in his 50's when he became Pope which gave him that title for a whole generation. Enough time for him to truly take full control of the Vatican and create a full deck of Conservative Cardinals from which future Pope's would be chosen.
There were two things, however, about John Paul II's reign that were often not discussed, but are now looming large. The first is that it was clear that John Paul II believed a Pope should govern for life. Despite having numerous health problems beginning in 1992, JPII remained the Pope even as the world saw him age dramatically, hunch over, lose his ability to speak, and even his ability to control saliva from coming out of his mouth in public. For John Paul II, his physical suffering was a public sign to all that human life was precious and should never be ended prematurely. The same held true for the Papacy. You are Pope until you die. Now Pope Benedict XVI is contradicting that and turning the Papacy into an institutional position in front of being Christ's chosen Priest on Earth.
The second issue that was not fully exposed or discussed under the John Paul II papacy was the extent to which the Vatican had spent literally decades shielding priests around the world from charges of child molestation. There were scandals in the United States and other countries, but the full extent of the Vatican's involvement was not yet public knowledge. This was a tidal wave that would not fully break until Ratzinger became Pope.
All cases of child molestation by priests were directed to Joseph Ratzinger's desk from 2001 onwards. Very little was done. In fact Ratzinger as Archbishop of Munich had allowed a priest to avoid any legal punishment after raping a number of children. The priest secretly completed therapy and then went on to molest more children. It can be said that Ratzinger was aware of every sex scandal involving child molestation for 4 years prior to becoming Pope and nothing happened. Actually, something did happen. The Vatican started a pattern of ignoring legal inquiries from various countries, ignoring protesting Catholics that showed up at events, or even acknowledging a problem. Upon becoming Pope, Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict XVI, began to slowly deal with the situation. However, by then, it was far too late. New molestation cases became public from Australia to Holland--and often the details were horrifying. Schools for the disabled that were run by molesting priests, the story of Marcial Maciel--the Mexican priest who raised nearly $650 million dollars for the Vatican and was allowed to retire in peace despite raping seminarians, fathering numerous children, and doing drugs' and many other incidents. Even in his most recent visit to Marcial's home country of Mexico only a few weeks ago, Pope Benedict XVI refused to discuss the issue offending many and continued showing a pattern of denial that is truly global.
When Ratzinger succeeded John Paul II, it was believed that he was chosen because he was deeply conservative, a very close friend and preferred choice of JPII, and finally because he would have a short-tenure. But even though Benedict has only been Pope for less than 8 years, it's proven to be too long. In addition to the sex scandals and offending numerous nations, he provoked murderous riots after offending Muslims, lifted the ex-communication of a bishop who denied the Holocaust, and attempted to open the church to Anglicans without conferring with the Archbishop of Canterbury. Furthermore, it became clear that many of the sexual molestation cases and characters (like Marcial) had been hidden by John Paul II, yet Benedict put his friend John Paul II on the fast-track to Sainthood. Some of this could be mismanagement. Regardless, the cost has been high.
With the selection of Ratzinger, a German as Pope, there was great hope that this would revive Catholicism in Europe. It has had the exact opposite effect, however. Nowhere is that more clear than in Germany where Roman Catholicism is falling completely off the map. In the span of 15 years, the strongholds of Ireland and Poland have abandoned Roman Catholicism en masse. Everywhere throughout Europe, the church is embroiled in some scandal, often refusing to be transparent with governments, failing to truly put priests under local law; preferring to deal with scandals in-house.
Most recently, the Pope's own butler exposed many confidential documents to the world in what became known as the Vatileaks scandal. These documents showed a high level of intrigue and financial corruption occurring within the Vatican's walls, including a failure to cooperate with global money laundering laws.
WHY THE ENABLING?
Why did John Paul II allow so many cases of abuse to take place under his watch? The generous answer is that as a humble priest from rural Poland who saw and took part in the rescuing of Jews from the Nazis by Catholic priests, he was not able to see priests as being capable of that kind of evil. For Ratzinger, at least since 2003, there seemed to be a more sincere effort to deal with sexual predators. But the truth is that both John Paul II and Benedict XVI send contradictory messages. Committees are named and in-house action is taken, but there is a constant failure of acknowledgment of how horrid these crimes have been. In fact, there have been attempts by the Vatican to blame the American media for blowing it out of proportion. Whenever the choice is between vocally speaking up for the victims or for the institution, the Vatican always chooses the institution and people notice.
The trail of these crimes goes back to the 1930's and in this globally interconnected world, it is easy to go on Youtube and watch a documentary about Marcial or see Mea Maxima Culpa on HBO. Often decaying institutions don't realize how quickly the world can move on without them. They make adjustments far too late, and they allow weak leaders to govern too long. Ratzinger was known as a theologian and as the "Pope's Rottweiler." It was his job to keep the Vatican and the Roman Catholic Church full of conservative leaders. He admitted he was not a good organizer. Now we know for a fact that he is not a good organizer, or communicator, or a good advocate for victims. The hope has been that small quiet measures would be enough to stop the bleeding. Dying Institutions often make the minimal amount of change possible in hopes of somehow regaining control without having to completely reform. But those small quiet measures are usually viewed as "institution before people or mission" by the world-at-large. The failure to admit that a major reformation is needed is only making the church and Benedict XVI lose credibility.
WHY THE RESIGNATION?
The Pope has had 2 serious injuries and a pacemaker put in over the past year or so. The Vatican, once again, has not been transparent--this time in regards to the Pope's health. Some say he is being blackmailed--perhaps by those who want to stop the investigations into sex crimes. Another possibility is that he realizes that he is simply not up to the job of reform anymore and he does not want to end up like John Paul II; being Pope but yet pretty incapacitated. One odd thing stands out: Benedict's desire to retire within the Vatican walls while a new Pope is governing down the hall. Why is this significant? Because enough hiding of sex crimes can be traced back to Ratzinger/Benedict for him to be tried for Crimes Against Humanity. He cannot, however, be arrested within the Vatican's walls.
We may never know the full truth of why Benedict resigned. Or there may be a scandal brewing or a leaked document that will reveal all soon. Regardless, the Roman Catholic Church now faces a moment that will either be a Public Relations Success or a P.R. disaster. If the new Pope can usher in new reforms and transparency laws, speak candidly about the Vatican's involvement in protecting priests around the world, and make it clear that people (especially innocent children) come before the institution--there is a chance for a re-set. It won't mean dramatic growth. It's too late for that. It will only staunch the bleeding in the West and outside of the West the church will grow in it's own non-Western way.
But if the deeply entrenched powers elect another Vatican insider or another incompetent organizer, the effects will further devastate the church. The pool of healthy reformers is very small. Many of the top names under consideration for the Papacy have had their own fights with authorities in their countries as they attempted to protect abusive priests.
When the church seeks self-protection to such an extent that it cannot stand up for an abused child, it quite obviously ceases to reflect Jesus. Benedict is not the man to lead this church away from this period of dark history. Can anybody do it, and will they be able to do it from a de-mystified bully pulpit know that Ratzinger has made it clear that the Pope is just a man holding an institutional title that can be resigned from at any time? That remains to be seen. Benedict may have opened Pandora's Box in his effort to get out of his bind.
In a time when Institutional Christianity is on the ropes, how the largest Christian Institution of all handles these next few years will have an impact on all of the Christian world.
WHAT COULD THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH DO?
1) New Bridge Pope: Do not elect a European or an Italian. Elect-a-Pope not tainted by scandal. That rules out the U.S. candidates. Elect a bridge Pope that paves the way for a future non-Western Pope, but re-calibrate for the Post-Christendom West one more time. The Cardinal from Canada would be a bridge figure (not European, but from a Post-Christendom Society).
2) Tour Soon but Strategically: The new Pope should make his first visits those countries that have been hit hardest by scandals: Ireland, Mexico, the United States-to name a few. There has to be recognition of the massive efforts to cover up church scandal at the cost of silencing and further hurting victims. There's no need to try to re-enact Pope John Paul II's excessive traveling. The Pope has now been relegated to an administrative position after Ratzinger's move and that's probably for the best. The new Pope should be seen in public with the survivors of the abuse--as opposed to shielding themselves from the protestors.
3) Sell off unused Catholic Properties: As the largest property owner in the World, the Catholic Church has many properties that are not used or are under-used as the church is in decline in the West. Sell these properties off and give them to local charities. Show that it's not about the money, empire, or Christendom. This forces the church into re-evangelization mode as opposed to resting on its wealth, laurels and land already "claimed for Catholicism."
4) Announce a major Human Development Goal: Like the Gates foundation, the new Pope should mobilize the church to tackle a crucial global problem like bringing pure water to every village around the world. Show that it's about the mission, not about bringing money back to Rome.
5) Allow Priests to Marry: It's difficult to not think that the inability for priests to marry has not created a culture of sexual abuse throughout its history. This would be a radical move, probably unacceptable to the current crew of Conservative Cardinals, but a major shift in a major policy would show that it is a new day.
6) De-Frock Abusive Priests and Allow Law Enforcement to Deal With Them: Most importantly, priests that abuse should be de-frocked and not protected from local authorities. Change the way this is dealt with and make the new process public.
The Vatican is always a place filled with intrigue and interest groups. Without a strong, charismatic leader like John Paul II who had the benefit of nearly 30 years of centralizing and aligning things his way, it's unlikely that today's Vatican is very pliable. The new Pope is probably facing the most divided church in a generation, if not a century.
To Russia with Love But...
It's been an honor and a pleasure to be hosted here in Russia as usual by Alexei and Katya. The specially cooked food, the late-night talk sessions, and the hospitality is wonderful. And their 1 1/2 year old daughter Carolina is an adorable sweetie. Unfortunately for me, Alexei and Katya are also hostage-takers. They are demanding that someone (anyone) deposit $1.25 cents into the Three Worlds NextGen Fund. I knew Russia could be dangerous but this is ridiculous.
What is a Third Culture Kid?
What is a Third-Culture Kid? It's a very important concept to understand. At Three Worlds, we take the kids very seriously, and their unique experiences create the need for unique responses. We have hired Audrey Langford to develop a program that will help churches strategically help our Three Worlds' TCKs. Both Jamie and I are TCK's as is Audrey, so it's a burden we share and we hope that this next generation of TCK's is raised with great support. See video here.
I'm in Russia, and a Meteor has hit this place.
I arrived on Friday for our annual External Board of Elders meeting in Chelyabinsk, Russia. 3W Teammate Kelley Philips was already here and Pastor Jim Lyon arrived shortly after I did. After I arrived, I met my buddies Alexei and Kelley at the airport and they told me a meteor had exploded over Chelyabinsk with damage hitting all around. The airport had cracked windows. Sure enough it made global news and there is quite a bit of damage and even deaths. Luckily the new church building here sustained very little damage. The building actually looks fantastic, and our first day of meetings was wonderful. Kelley Philips passed on to me this video: Jim and our good friend Andrei were interviewed by a local news station.
Why Excalibur Remains My Favorite Movie After 32 Years
In 1981, I went to the movie theatre with my sister to see a movie my older cousin had raved about. It was the story of King Arthur and the Knights of the Roundtable--but a hardcore Rated R version with violence, sex, and adult themes. It’s hard to remember, but back in the early 1980’s, R rated movies were far more violent and sexual than they are now. In fact, before PG-13 was created in the mid-1980’s, even PG movies often had things in them that we would find completely inappropriate today for PG-13 movies. How I got into that movie theatre, I don’t know. And how I managed to see it three more times within the span of two weeks in 1981 at the age of 10 is also a mystery. I would never let my own son see a movie as graphic as Excalibur at that age, yet this movie, which my parents allowed me to watch, became probably the greatest artistic treasure of my life. For more than 30 years, Excalibur is a film I watch every two years. It is one of the few movies that makes me forget I’m on Planet Earth. When I watch it, I become completely enveloped in this film set in the Middle Ages.
Based on Malory’s “Le Morte D’Arthur," Excalibur tells the story of King Arthur, the rise of Camelot, the chivalrous knighthood of Lancelot, and the power of the sword Excalibur brought forth by the Lady of the Lake and the necromancer ways of Merlin the Magician. But this is no children’s tale. Instead it is an intense 2 1/2 hour drama that resembles Shakespeare more than a Disney cartoon or Lerner and Loewe's Camelot musical.
Throughout different decades of my life, "Excalibur" has meant different things to me. As a child, I could not get over the shining, gleaming Knights and those fantastic battlescenes. How cool to have been a knight like that! I rode an imaginary horse and played in the woods against imaginary foes trying to mimic scenes from Excalibur.
Directed by John Boorman, the film is set in early medieval England but was in fact filmed in Kerry, Tipperrary, and Wicklow, Ireland. I didn’t learn the word cinematography until I saw "Excalibur" as a 10 year old. The scenes in the film are so lush and pristine, that Ireland’s green forrests take on an unearthly quality. To this day, it is still considered one of the most beautifully shot films ever made. I spent years fascinated with the battles and the scenery. The movie which starred many people who went on to become famous: Helen Mirren, Gabriel Byrne, Liam Neeson, and Patrick Stewart just to name a few, was also exciting to me as a child because of their intensity and their memorable dialogue. The classically trained actors chose a style of acting that makes every line poetic and highly dramatic.
In my 20’s, my interest in "Excalibur" began to change. I began to become fascinated by "Excalibur’s" many parallels to the Bible. There is the story of King Luther who like Saul in Ancient Israel is a gifted, chosen leader who does not have the character to usher in a righteous kingdom. There is the sword itself, Excalibur, which in the movie serves as the annointing of God. When Arthur pulls the sword from the stone, he is granted God’s favor and a Kingdom to rule. And much like King David, Arthur holds a lowly position and is elevated to king because of his heart, not his brawn or his seniority. There is also the clear impact of sin which brings curses to that which was blessed. Snakes slither around in the background and one particular key scene very much looks like Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden—at first naked without shame before committing an act that has far reaching consequences. As with Ancient Israel, “the land and the king are one,” and only when King Arthur is acting righteously and the Kingdom is focused does Camelot prosper. The parallels with the Bible as well as the theme of man needing some form of link to divinity was one that kept me coming back to "Excalibur" in my 20’s.
In my late 30’s, however, Excalibur took on yet another new meaning. I could see much more clearly that the film is broken into three Acts: 1) the introduction of Excalibur and the rise of Arthur 2) The spectacular rise and tragic fall of Camelot and 3) The search for forgiveness, redemption, and restoration. As an older adult, I noticed that the movie—which is quite fast paced, is enveloped in a dark cloud over the final 50 minutes or so. There is a tangible heaviness that covers those final scenes. One could chalk it up to editing or inconsistency from the director, but instead, I see it as a very realistic story arc. Much like life, or the Bible, there is no complete restoration or resolution in this life. Instead, the darkness that settles in can be overcome, but only to a certain extent. There are consequences and there is death. Yet the movie does not end without hope. That heaviness that settles in fascinates me.
A further theme in Excalibur is the passing from one age to another. “This is a time for men” Merlin responds when asked by King Arthur why he is no longer around. The medieval era is ending and magic and faith will soon be relegated to quaint ideas as science and technology engulf the world. The Renaissance and the Enlightenment are not far away. This is the last great drama in a world of spirits, magic, and faith.
"Excalibur" has become a cult classic. Many movies attempted to copy it in the early 80’s and all of them failed spectacularly. Boorman never made a better movie. The movie introduced people to Carl Orff’s “Carmina Burana" which has since been used in many other movies and car commercials. And the use of Wagner’s “Siegried’s Funeral March” from "Götterdämmerung" makes it impossible to use that music for any other movie. I’m not sure anyone has ever tried. And the particular recording that was made of Wagner’s classic specifically for the movie is unmatched. I’ver never found a better recording, including George Solti’s direction of "Götterdämmerung"
This piece of secular art which my parents let me watch, ended up being one of the most spiritually inspiring events in my life. One that has had spiritual meaning for me in multiple ways over decades. Early on, I learned the power of secular art and still prefer it to this day over Christian art which often avoids nuance and ambiguousness. I hope that in my effort to be a good parent that monitors what my son watches and does, I don't prevent him from finding unexpected treasures of his own from the secular world. There are not neat and tidy endings in life. There aren’t too many in the Bible either for that matter. As I watched "Excalibur" yet again a few days ago I marveled at the power of myth to know us more deeply than we often know ourselves.
Note: The movie may not be for all. If you do see it, I highly recommend watching it on a big screen with a good sound system. This movie was made for cinema, NOT for small TV screens or laptops.
For a review of Excalibur. See my friend Greg Dorr's excellent review for the DVD Journal here.
Time To Laugh
As you read this, I will have already taken a lovely 747-400 British Airways across the pond to the Pacific Northwest and to Wyoming. I will be in the US for about 2 weeks. I'll be speaking in a number of places including Mt. Scott Church of God on Thursday January 31st at 7PM about "Europe's Past, America's Future?" as well as giving a talk at Hoodview Church of God in Woodburn, Oregon Saturday February 2nd from 10AM to 2PM on "Missions for the 21st Century." See the diary below for more details. In light of my post on What Churches and MTV have in common, there is the other side of the equation which is when churches try hard to be so relevant that they lose focus and become no different than MTV at its worst. This is always the danger and the tension. So here's a funny video sent to me by 3W Ken Oldham that captures that dynamic. Have a good laugh:
What MTV and Churches Have in Common
For those of us who grew up in the 1980's, MTV became our lodestar giving us the latest music, telling us what is cool, and connecting our generation. The VJ's were like big brothers and sisters that you felt you knew well. And of course, the music was awesome. It started in 1981 and very few people had the cable system to get it. It was always a special treat to go to someone's house who actually had cable (and MTV). In 1985, I begged my mother for MTV. She was against it and said "no." But in the end, she caved and gave in in 1985---and I'm glad she did. The music of the 1980's has been one of the great joys of my life. I loved my bands: the Police, The Cure, U2, Michael Jackson, Madonna, Prince, and more obscure groups like Kids in the Kitchen or Big Country. It was a short-run though. By 1989 MTV completely changed its programming. Gone were the constant videos and video shows, and all of a sudden there were game shows, lifestyle shows, and a new thing called Reality TV exemplified by the ground-breaking series "the Real World" whose editing style is still imitated on every reality show today--down to the exact kind of camera shots. MTV became a regular channel--not a music channel.
I can't tell you how disillusioning this was for me. No longer could I see my regular bands on a regular basis. The videos weren't very good either. And soul and rock were getting completely replaced by gangster rap and its monotonous tones and uninspired lyrics. I was vexed!
But it got even worse. The bands I loved where breaking up! The Police broke up in 1985, Duran Duran lost 2 of its members and never made a great album again. One of my favorite bands only made 2 albums and called it quits. And other bands that I liked started to make really bad music. What happened?
I was not prepared at all for the fact that things change. I thought music and my bands would stay exactly the same forever. But that's not true. The average life-cycle of a band is 7 years. That's how long the Beatles lasted with their famous line-up. Furthermore, it's hard to keep producing great music year after year, and people's tastes and interest change.
For MTV, they reached a point in 1989 where they realized the younger generation behind me, was not interested in watching videos 24 hours a day. The novelty had worn off. They would rather watch real people even if that meant less music. And they did not want old fogies like Bruce Springsteen and Bob Dylan on their channel. So those guys were sent packing to VH-1, which eventually abandoned videos as well.
The same thing happens to us in churches. We are absolutely convinced we will sing songs the same way. We will hear sermons the same way. And how people understand and hear the Gospel will stay the same way. But it doesn't and it never has in the history of Christianity. Throughout Christian history the church has had to change and embrace diversity to survive. This is certainly the case as it's been transported to cultures far beyond the Near East. Yet for many of us, it's an absolute shock when our favorite pastor moves on, or new musicians lead the church, or a new generation doesn't find our favorite programs interesting or challenging.
One of the things we remind people of in our 3W Seminars is the wise words of Dietrich Bonhoeffer: "The church you were born in, is not the one you will die in." How true. My own home church has changed so much demographically and in other ways. Never did I think it would change, and truth be told, I didn't want it to change. But it did and it will.
One of the most important things for churches to internalize is that change is a natural part of life and we need to embrace it. It doesn't need to mean that our core message and core identity needs to change, but it does mean that how it all looks and is presented may have to be up for discussion. And this is normal and healthy.
The following video from the show Portlandia captures so very well how 80's kids like me feel about MTV. If we could, we would stage a revolution and kick these young people out of our MTV and bring back the good old days (really I wish we could). But it's not right. Life moves on, yet the Gospel message stays unchanged. We need not live in fear.