Analysis of Gary Wills Papacy Dissection
It is said that to be a good Catholic is to recognize the sanctity and purity of the Papacy over the duration of its rule. Wills argues that this blind acceptance should not be the only option of good Catholic faith. Popes have committed many crimes. Some are induced by evil times in which society as a whole has been contaminated by corruption, in which case the Pope becomes a reflection of his own culture. Others have been evil men tempted by the lure of power and personal spiritual superiority. Whether driven by external or internal motives, it is fact that the Papacy has experienced hard times. It is these flaws that Wills wants to recognize without becoming “unfaithful”.
Catholic faith also bases itself on the idea that there was a “Golden Age” at the apostolic time. This is untrue; some Apostles competed amongst each other for favor, and the eternal praise from being portrayed as a pivotal asset of the Catholic foundation. This is a further denial of Catholicism that is an attempt to protect the intentions of its initial followers. All of this denial prevents the Papacy from acknowledging the broad views presented by its many Popes. History shows that the Papacy has supported numerous issues that, at another time, it has also denounced. Among these are Capitalism, Communism, and its stance on Jews. A broad contrast in views by different people representing a supposedly uniform and stable Papacy will inevitable lead to the dissention of its faithful. It should not be expected that one should blindly support an office that contradicts itself, but denies having changed in the first place.
It is the evolution of the church and Papacy that is ignored by Catholic faith, and Wills believes it should not only be regarded but embraced. The Papacy may be as close to God that a living human can get, but that does not exclude him from the laws and inevitabilities of life. People change; as we mature and progress through life we constantly shift from one existence to another. To deny the changes in the Papacy is to ignore the evolution of an important influence on mankind. Present Catholic faith says it is wrong to doubt the enduring stability of the Papacy. Wills says that realizing the error of the Papacy is not bad, that a Catholic should still be able to maintain a strong Catholic faith and understand our own human vulnerability.
Wills argument is strong, as the facts of history provide ample evidence in his favor. One of the strongest threads of Catholicism is that we change, and evolution is fundamental for our salvation and personal comfort. To deny the humanistic aspect of the Papacy is to deny his God given fallacies. Wills takes a much more moderate and unorthodox approach to religion. Orthodox practices in most world religions adhere strictly to the interpretations of older times. Wills is of the other mindset that his religion must change with the people who practice it. We are not condemning the entire Catholic faith when we admit that evil has been practiced in its place, we condemn the people who would rape such a sacred position. I am of Catholic faith, but I also refuse to accept something as being pure when it isn’t. Especially when that same position will condemn people for their faults, while denying its own. Faith in religion is similar to faith in one’s country in many ways. If the Papacy is going to deny its own faults while boldly challenging everyone else with theirs, then it is going to be hard to maintain sturdy faith. The same goes for nationalism. Countries people will not rally behind a cause without good reason and much emotional investment. So as time flows onward and Catholicism grows more and more ancient, it will rely heavier and heavier on the faith of its people. And as time goes onward, it also becomes harder and harder to deny the sanctity of an impure Papacy. If they keep on denying their rough times, it will surely spell the end of Catholicism’s credibility, and a rise to more and more skepticism.
