Pope John Paul II and the Legacy of His Papacy
Interview with Dr. Srdja Trifkovic CKCU 93.1 FM April 2005 by Boba Borojevic Some suggested that Pope John Paul II was neither a politician, or a diplomat, or an international relations theorist, but rather a religious leader, yet he had a considerable impact on contemporary history. What was John Paul's international accomplishment- or what that accomplishment suggests about the world politics in the 21st century? I would disagree. Pope John Paul II was both a politician and a diplomat of the highest order. When he came to the pontificate in 1978 he infused a breath of fresh air into the Vatican way of doing things. He took a very active role both in presenting himself to the media as a completely new type of pontiff. Among the East Europeans, especially those of Roman-Catholic faith and primarily his countrymen in Poland, he spread the sense that the winds of change were blowing not only spiritually but also in the political sphere. It is possible to establish a direct line between the beginning of his pontificate and the series of workers' unrest in the Baltic ports and strikes at the Lenin shipyards that culminated in general Woiciech Jaruzielski's imposition of the material law - an unprecedented step for an East European member of the Soviet block. It is also important to emphasize his commitment to moral and dogmatic conservatism. After the period of fairly radical reform instituted by the Second Vatican Council of 1963 and the continuation of that spirit for the ensuing decade and a half under Paul VI, John Paul II tried to get back on the track of both dogmatic, moral and ecclesiastical orthodoxy that was more typical of John 23rd's predecessor Pius XII. This went hand in hand with the Pope expressing fairly liberal and sometimes even radical thoughts on social issues. He tried to reconcile the church in the third World - which is by the way the major area of its growth at the moment - and his social teaching, his concern for the poor and the issue of human rights, with a fairly rigid and one might say dogmatic stand on birth control, on the ordination of women, on priestly celibacy, ,on the magisterium, and on the decision making process in the Roman Curia. It is also noteworthy that the Pope was an outspoken critic of modernity and in particular of post-modernity. As far back as 1991 he warned his fellow Poles that they should not look forward to joining Europe after liberation from the Soviet block, if the price of that step was succumbing to the lure of materialism, of promiscuity, of secularization and the loss of faith. Two and a half years ago, while addressing Italian Parliament he spoke of the danger of democracy as it is practiced in contemporary Western World turning into a form of new totalitarianism. He was a man who had tried to combine the legacy of social concern of the church that was emphasized at Vatican Two, and which could be considered liberal, with the moral teaching that was eminently traditional - and in particular with his political views on contemporary developments in Europe that he disapproved of, that he regarded as both dangerous to one's salvation and opposed to the Roman Catholic teaching. In his preaching John Paul II argued for the effectiveness of non-violence in confronting injustice in the world, but at the same time the Holy Father also called for "humanitarian intervention" or peacekeeping in trouble spots like Bosnia, Central Africa, and East Timor, even if that meant using force to "disarm the aggressor." What impact did his doctrine of "humanitarian intervention" had on the Balkans? Frankly less than is commonly assumed. Those Serbs who ascribe to the Vatican a major role in the geo-political project aimed at diminishing Yugoslavia, breaking it up and than clobbering the Serbs, are not wholly right. As an East-European and a Roman Catholic it was to be assumed that the Pope would be more sympathetic to the Croats that to the other parties in the former Yugoslavia and that he would have a degree natural affinity with them. But when it came to formulating specific policies in the conclaves of Maastricht in December of 1991 and elsewhere, the voice of the Vatican was not particularly important. Indeed, in the period of the late 80's and particular in 1990 and 1991, it was German policy that pushed for the speedy recognition of the secessionist republics. In early 1992 it is the US that takes over - with a vengeance, one might say. That is the period of Eagelberger. That is the period of intervention of Zimmermann, the American ambassador in Belgrade who went to Sarajevo to encourage Izetbegovic to renege on the Lisbon deal that could have prevented the Bosnian war. I would say that the Pope's support for "humanitarian intervention" and peacekeeping was an auxiliary propagandistic tool that could play into the hands of those who willed the intervention. Those who were primarily responsible for that policy were to be found in Bonn, Brussels and Washington. Was Pope John Paul II aware of a threat that militant Islam poses to the Christian Europe? Not at all sufficiently, or at least not that we could tell. Even if he understood the magnitude of both the ongoing demographic deluge resulting from immigration and the overall long-term agenda of militant jihad, he did not act upon it. Quite the contrary. Even on his doorsteps, in Italy, may Roman Catholic priests succumbed to the temptation to be politically correct, to preach "tolerance," multiculturalism and multi-racialism and even open the doors of disused churches to the Muslims to be used as mosques. I would also recall the well known incident when a very outspoken Italian bishop, Giacomo Cardinal Biffi of Bologna, stated that Italy should favor Catholic immigrants over those of other beliefs, by which he meant primarily Muslims. There was a furor and Biffi was attacked not only from the Left but also from within the church. Even though his statement only expressed what most Italian think, Catholics and atheists alike, and even though his statement was morally and doctrinally correct. Had the Pope realized the magnitude of the threat facing Europe right now, he certainly could have made gesture or passed a hint that would indicate a degree of approval of Biffi's statement. But that did not happen. I would say that John Paul II, even if he grasped a magnitude of the current dark shadow over Europe, was no Pius V, the Pope who very boldly rallied Christian Europe to defend itself against militant Islam and his efforts were crowned with the victories during the siege of Malta and at Lepanto. What we need in the aftermath of Pope John Paul II is someone who will combine the social and moral teaching of Pius IX - someone who will place great emphasis on the preservation of the tradition and the Magisterium and the church's moral teaching - with the geopolitical astuteness of the Pius V, someone who believes the Europeans need to rally again and stand together, regardless of their doctrinal and jurisdictional differences and denominational divisions. If they do not hang together, they certainly will hang separately. Was Pope John Paul II one of the great liberators of the 20th century as some portray him to be? That is the sort of hyperbole that invariably accompanies the departure of a prominent public figure, weather he is a politician or an actor - and this Pope was both to some extent. It is far too early to tell. On the one hand there is no doubt that he had a major impact on his time. On the other hand he is leaving his flock in far worse shape than it was 27 years ago. In Europe in particular, churches are almost deserted, the Faith is moribund. The society is in the grip of a materialistic and hedonistic lifestyle and the demographic collapse - the lack of babies - and the rampant promiscuity are far more prevalent today than they were back in the late 1970s. It will be a mixed legacy, in that he is leaving behind a church that is facing even greater challenges that when he came to the pontificate in 1978. ~~~~~~~~~ � Dr Srdja Trifkovic, Director of the Institute For International Affairs at Rockford Institute, Rockford, Illinois and the author of the book : The Sword of the Prophet: Islam-History, Theology, Impact on the World . � http://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/cgi-bin/newsviews.cgi/Islam/CAIR/2005/04/0 6/Caving_In_to_Jihad_ Serbian News Network - SNN [email protected] http://www.antic.org/
