What's A Protestant To Do?

A few months ago, I came home from work and switched on the TV. On the screen were two men holding a photo opportunity, one Catholic, the other Protestant - His Holiness, Pope John Paul the Second and George Walker Bush, President of the United States. The Supreme Pontiff was trying to read a written statement to the press. I strained to listen to what the old man was saying. Was it Polish, Italian, Latin even? It was only after several moments that I realised that the leader of the world's Catholics was actually speaking in English. By that stage of his life, the ravages of Parkinson's disease had rendered his voice almost incomprehensible.

Looking at those two deeply conservative men, I knew instantly which one of them that I, as an Irish Protestant, had some respect for. And it wasn't my co-religionist from Texas, that's for sure. I had my differences with the Holy Father, but I never doubted that he acted from a strong sense of right and wrong, that he was morally consistent. So while he was "pro-life" on abortion, he was also "pro-life" when it came to opposing unnecessary wars.

Like many people, I am too young to remember any other Pope, and thus not old enough to recall any other Papal death. What is the non-Catholic etiquette in this situation? How much regret or sorrow is it appropriate to express? Speaking frankly, the Pope was not a hero figure for me. His death does not move me in the way that Nelson Mandela's passing (hopefully far off) most certainly will. But if my Catholic friends and family feel a sense of loss today, and some of them I suspect will not, then I'm sorry for their grief.

For me, as an Irish Protestant, there is also the problem of how frank one should be in assessing the Pope's life at the time of his passing. I have "issues" to put it mildly with some of the Holy Father's views, but is it really right for me to express these openly? I am supremely conscious that mine is the only country in the world where simply being a Catholic can, in some circumstances, be a death sentence. In such a context, one needs to tread very cautiously indeed when discussing religion.

My maternal grandfather, who died before I was born, liked to say "there's a difference between being anti-Catholic and being anti-Catholicism". Tommy, a fairly religious man, was against the concept of Catholicism, but not in any way against Catholics as people. It seems to me that he was correct to draw the distinction, that theological opposition to another denomination does not have to go hand in hand with sectarian hatred.

But still, I feel reticent about voicing my view of this Pope, lest my comments be misunderstood as promoting the type of bigotry which is still such a virulent cancer in Ireland. The wounds of the conflict in the North are still too raw to allow for a frank discussion of religious difference between Protestant and Catholic. I remember Greysteel and Loughinisland only too well. The sickness in my community which led to these barabaric acts is still present.

John Paul the Second's Papacy was one of the longest in the history of the Catholic church. If the next Pope serves as long as the man from Krakow then hopefully, at the time of his death, I will be able to say honestly what I thought of him.

But not this time round.

international

Locked Post

Advanced Search

Watch this post

Do not email me updates for this post Email me updates for this post

Successfully updated karma reason!

For me, as an Irish Protestant, there is also the problem of how frank one should be in assessing the Pope's life at the time of his passing. I have "issues" to put it mildly with some of the Holy Father's views, but is it really right for me to express these openly?

Get over your prejudice. I know the subject is especially sensitive to you, but for the rest of the world it is not, and in this forum, you can speak openly.

I am Catholic (not irish tho - dont think badly of me for that please!). I had many problems with the Pope as well. I disagree with many of his beleifs, but I can do that and still be a good Catholic.

He was many things, but what made him great was his tireless work for what he believed - peace, and in that the world is a much better place. that is why he is so great.

I understand your reluctance to voice your true beliefs in your homeland, but this is not your homeland and you can speak freely. Many will disagree, and many will agree. But ask yourself this before voicing your opinion:

1: are you willing to take heat for it?

2: Do you feel strongly about it?

3: Is it a belief or emotions?

I think you can see where those questions are going. And if you can answer them truthfully, then do it. I, as a Catholic, will not be offended, but willing to debate and probably agree with you on many points.

One final thought. Based upon the 'betting line' on the next Pope, I doubt he will be around for very long. All the front runners are over 70, and Pope John Paul II was but 58 when he ascended. In the long line of Popes, there are very few greats. I have known 4 Popes (and only JPII was great). You but one. Do not expect the next one to be anywhere near as great. Do not judge the office on the shoes that need to be filled. They are too big for almost any person.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Interesting piece OG. I have a great deal of respect for the Pope, but did not agree with him on a lot of church teachings. However, I consider him a humanitarian and diplomat who should be often emulated, especially with his stance on war. I was surprised to hear CNN's Christianne Amanpour talk about the Pope supporting "just wars" in Bosnia as though he had invented the term. =

Successfully updated karma reason!

I was surprised to hear CNN's Christianne Amanpour talk about the Pope supporting "just wars" in Bosnia as though he had invented the term.

That is more an indictment on her, than on the Pope.

Successfully updated karma reason!

I've mixed feelings about this - I didn't feel qualified to write a blog, so I'm glad you did.

I'm glad his suffering has ended, his pain has been awful to watch. However, the obituaries in the media make me feel like only one side of the story is being told. He was undoubtedly a champion for peace, and used the media to great effect in promoting his message; his visit to Jerusalem was laudable. But his refusal evolve the Catholic doctrine, especially in endorsing condoms, which could have saved so many lives, is being airbrushed from history. So many people are dying unnecessarily from AIDS, and he had the power to make a real difference - which he wouldn't do.

Successfully updated karma reason!

But his refusal evolve the Catholic doctrine, especially in endorsing condoms, which could have saved so many lives, is being airbrushed from history. So many people are dying unnecessarily from AIDS, and he had the power to make a real difference - which he wouldn't do.

They say you have to pick your fights, and he did pick his. His opposition to any kind of contraception was a bit too extreme even for me, but that is what they man believed in. It would be hypocritical to argue that he should have supported something that was clearly against his principals. For then he would not have been the great man he was.

Many first world Catholics disagree with a lot of his stands, and we hope that the next Pope will moderate the Church's position on those subjects. But the fact that I disagree with his views on the Priesthood and contraception in no way changes my view of the great man he was. And I would not have wanted him to compromise his views for popularity as that was not the an I admired.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Thanks for your comments everyone.

Just to clarify one point, Dr Guy, I don't consider myself to be prejudiced. It's more that I don't want my remarks to be misconstrued as being prejudiced. But you're right, many Catholics had their "issues" with the Pope as well.

Successfully updated karma reason!